|
|
| Re: ''Oldest subway cars not being replaced afterall'' (1133201) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
Page 3 of 3 |
||
|
| (1134066) | |
Re: ''Oldest subway cars not being replaced afterall'' |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Sun Jan 22 02:43:34 2012, in response to Re: ''Oldest subway cars not being replaced afterall'', posted by Edwards! on Sat Jan 21 22:46:22 2012. Well, neither Washington nor Atlanta had or have sloped front cars and neither system was operational when the R-40s were designed. |
|
|
| (1134091) | |
Re: ''Oldest subway cars not being replaced afterall'' |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Sun Jan 22 11:10:34 2012, in response to Re: ''Oldest subway cars not being replaced afterall'', posted by randyo on Sun Jan 22 02:43:34 2012. What about BART ? I forgot when they started. |
|
|
| (1134093) | |
Re: ''Oldest subway cars not being replaced afterall'' |
|
|
Posted by chud1 on Sun Jan 22 11:21:37 2012, in response to Re: ''Oldest subway cars not being replaced afterall'', posted by Joe V on Sun Jan 22 11:10:34 2012. BART was formed in 1957.chud1 |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (1134141) | |
Re: ''Oldest subway cars not being replaced afterall'' |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Sun Jan 22 15:46:09 2012, in response to Re: ''Oldest subway cars not being replaced afterall'', posted by chud1 on Sun Jan 22 11:21:37 2012. But when did its trains start running ? |
|
|
| (1134169) | |
Re: ''Oldest subway cars not being replaced afterall'' |
|
|
Posted by chud1 on Sun Jan 22 17:57:10 2012, in response to Re: ''Oldest subway cars not being replaced afterall'', posted by Joe V on Sun Jan 22 15:46:09 2012. BART started running on Sept 11, 1972.chud1 |
|
|
| (1134174) | |
Re: ''Oldest subway cars not being replaced afterall'' |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Sun Jan 22 18:27:42 2012, in response to Re: ''Oldest subway cars not being replaced afterall'', posted by chud1 on Sun Jan 22 17:57:10 2012. Well after the R-40s were designed! |
|
|
| (1134188) | |
Re: ''Oldest subway cars not being replaced afterall'' |
|
|
Posted by Andrew Saucci on Sun Jan 22 18:48:43 2012, in response to Re: ''Oldest subway cars not being replaced afterall'', posted by Wado MP73 on Sat Jan 21 00:06:51 2012. "And pretty much everything except the shell."Two questions, then. 1) What is the shell of a subway car, particularly the R-32, worth? 2) How long can the shell last without being subject to severe metal fatigue? |
|
|
| (1134198) | |
Re: ''Oldest subway cars not being replaced afterall'' |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Sun Jan 22 19:26:49 2012, in response to Re: ''Oldest subway cars not being replaced afterall'', posted by randyo on Sun Jan 22 02:43:34 2012. well DUH...of course they weren't "operational" then!We know that..they were being designed and built during the time. And its not like it was some sort of secret. Bart did,however draw up a car much like the R40 design..the way it would have looked IF the TA jerks didnt get their hands on it and make some changes to the specs. Nor did I say that DC AND ATL had or have sloped ended cars..I SAID The MAYOR of NYC at that time wanted subways cars to match THEIR new cars..stating our cars were BOXY..DULL..NON AIR CONDITIONED. |
|
|
| (1134200) | |
Re: ''Oldest subway cars not being replaced afterall'' |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Sun Jan 22 19:32:03 2012, in response to Re: ''Oldest subway cars not being replaced afterall'', posted by randyo on Sun Jan 22 18:27:42 2012. true..but your forgetting on thing..Bart had built a mock up of it A units on a site across the Bay way back during the mid 60's..WAY AFTER the 40 were designed by Lowey's firm.. |
|
|
| (1134273) | |
Re: ''Oldest subway cars not being replaced afterall'' |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Mon Jan 23 02:32:31 2012, in response to Re: ''Oldest subway cars not being replaced afterall'', posted by Joe V on Fri Jan 20 11:37:57 2012. Yes, but the point was, the R-32s may very well outlive four classes of subway cars that came after it. |
|
|
| (1134337) | |
Re: ''Oldest subway cars not being replaced afterall'' |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Mon Jan 23 13:22:05 2012, in response to Re: ''Oldest subway cars not being replaced afterall'', posted by Edwards! on Sun Jan 22 19:26:49 2012. Yet the first of the R-40s were NOT air conditioned as delivered. |
|
|
| (1134356) | |
Re: ''Oldest subway cars not being replaced afterall'' |
|
|
Posted by 3-9 on Mon Jan 23 15:04:02 2012, in response to Re: ''Oldest subway cars not being replaced afterall'', posted by Joe V on Fri Jan 20 18:00:44 2012. since an MP75 could MU with an 1908 MP54Wow, that beats linking an R10 with an R42! they are by definition technologically obsolete, and have performance levels to match (which is crap). Even after the LIRR upped the voltage of the 3rd rail, supposedly for the benefit of the M1's? |
|
|
| (1134379) | |
Re: ''Oldest subway cars not being replaced afterall'' |
|
|
Posted by Bill West on Mon Jan 23 16:27:06 2012, in response to Re: ''Oldest subway cars not being replaced afterall'', posted by 3-9 on Mon Jan 23 15:04:02 2012. The M1’s were designed from the start for a higher acceleration rate. It needed more power than the existing 3rd rail system could supply so the voltage was increased to get closer to the needs. For the old cars however that didn’t change their designed current steps and thus acceleration rate.The designer’s chosen acceleration rate is measured by the motor current, and keeping up that current as the car accelerates determines the steps needed in the car’s control equipment. The voltage just changes the mph at which each resistor is cut out of the circuit. Changing the rate to match the new cars would require different taps on the accelerating resistors, maybe more contactors and possibly more current capacity in the wiring and parts. Complete replacement is often cheaper than modifying everything in place. You might even have to put bigger motors on. Bill |
|
|
| (1134395) | |
Re: ''Oldest subway cars not being replaced afterall'' |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Mon Jan 23 18:01:19 2012, in response to Re: ''Oldest subway cars not being replaced afterall'', posted by 3-9 on Mon Jan 23 15:04:02 2012. I am just quoting Doctor Ronan-speak.He wanted the 19 year old MP70T (3500) cars gone too, and they were in 1972. They had 97% availability. Their only sin is that they had no A/C. With a forced air system and axi-flow fans like the postwar R units, that was remedial. They also had facing seats cemented to the floors. At the same, the farewell ceremony of the MP70 double-decker #1301 on Mar 1, 1972, he said it was a "most unreliable car". Per usual, he lied to carry out his wishes. The car had other problems like electrolysis corrosion between the aluminum body and steal frame, the car cleaners hated them, the passengers didn't like facing seat well. But they were an engineers car - aluminum is lightweight, even if they looked heavy and styled like a round roof P70. The final trip had 1301, 5 3500's, and MP72 2501, the only car to survive. LIRR mgmt wanted to keep the 3500's, and the 10 double-deckers that got a rebuild. They were to be ultimately converted to push pull. MTA would hear none of it. Also heard rumors on a fan trip 20 years ago that someone in LIRR mgmt was getting a kickback from Naparona for all copper as those cars went off to scrap immediately before anyone could stop it. |
|
|
| (1134396) | |
Re: ''Oldest subway cars not being replaced afterall'' |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Mon Jan 23 18:04:07 2012, in response to Re: ''Oldest subway cars not being replaced afterall'', posted by Bill West on Mon Jan 23 16:27:06 2012. The 1100's did just fine with the increase in voltage from 650v to 750v on MN. |
|
|
| (1134494) | |
Re: ''Oldest subway cars not being replaced afterall'' |
|
|
Posted by Wado MP73 on Tue Jan 24 08:14:25 2012, in response to Re: ''Oldest subway cars not being replaced afterall'', posted by Joe V on Mon Jan 23 18:04:07 2012. AFAIK, MNR is still 660v DC. If not, when did they raise the voltage? |
|
|
| (1134543) | |
Re: ''Oldest subway cars not being replaced afterall'' |
|
|
Posted by 3-9 on Tue Jan 24 13:28:41 2012, in response to Re: ''Oldest subway cars not being replaced afterall'', posted by Bill West on Mon Jan 23 16:27:06 2012. Thanks for the info! Would it still be possible to have LIRR trains running at 650 VDC? |
|
|
| (1134545) | |
Re: ''Oldest subway cars not being replaced afterall'' |
|
|
Posted by 3-9 on Tue Jan 24 13:31:41 2012, in response to Re: ''Oldest subway cars not being replaced afterall'', posted by Joe V on Mon Jan 23 18:01:19 2012. Thanks for the history lesson! The books I have on the LIRR say almost nothing about recent MUs. |
|
|
| (1134561) | |
Re: ''Oldest subway cars not being replaced afterall'' |
|
|
Posted by Jace on Tue Jan 24 14:24:31 2012, in response to Re: ''Oldest subway cars not being replaced afterall'', posted by Fisk ave Jim on Fri Jan 20 17:56:14 2012. The brakes on the 62's are very 'grippy' to begin with, combine that with a rookie TO and excessive grade timers (to protect the crossover in the Steinway tubes?) and you get a rough ride. Make the best out of that rough ride: count the number of brake applications going to Queens. So far 10 is the most I've seen - almost got motion sickness on that ride. The good TOs will do the same run with 3 or 4 applications. |
|
|
| (1134586) | |
Re: ''Oldest subway cars not being replaced afterall'' |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Tue Jan 24 16:32:19 2012, in response to Re: ''Oldest subway cars not being replaced afterall'', posted by Wado MP73 on Tue Jan 24 08:14:25 2012. According to an engineer friend of mine back in the pre MTA NY Central days, the NYC 3rd rail voltage was 720V at the feeders and that was back in the early 1960s. |
|
|
| (1134642) | |
Re: ''Oldest subway cars not being replaced afterall'' |
|
|
Posted by Fisk ave Jim on Tue Jan 24 19:56:43 2012, in response to Re: ''Oldest subway cars not being replaced afterall'', posted by Jace on Tue Jan 24 14:24:31 2012. Agreed. Those timers in the Steinway tunnel make for what is probably the most uncomfortable ride in the system. It takes a certain amount of skill, expierience & familiarity of the equiptment and territory to provide a smooth ride up & down those steep hills.Ive been on rides between Vernon Jackson & Grand Central where an expierienced T/O would know how to work the timers & give a smoothe ride v/s a rookee extra list T/O that would wrap it around, fly thru the yellow ball & slam for the waiting red, bring his train almost to a dead stop & just miss getting tripped. Almost as comfortable as riding in those New Look GM busses in the early 60's with those IRT style longitudinal seats. No T/O consistancy over there on the #7 IMO of course |
|
|
| (1134664) | |
Re: ''Oldest subway cars not being replaced afterall'' |
|
|
Posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Tue Jan 24 21:39:53 2012, in response to Re: ''Oldest subway cars not being replaced afterall'', posted by randyo on Tue Jan 24 16:32:19 2012. Those R-32s on that inaugural special must have REALLY sprinted like jackrabbits. |
|
|
| (1134682) | |
Re: ''Oldest subway cars not being replaced afterall'' |
|
|
Posted by Lou From Middletown NY on Tue Jan 24 22:16:56 2012, in response to Re: ''Oldest subway cars not being replaced afterall'', posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Tue Jan 24 21:39:53 2012. Ya know, there very few pictures from that around... |
|
|
| (1134691) | |
Re: ''Oldest subway cars not being replaced afterall'' |
|
|
Posted by Wado MP73 on Tue Jan 24 22:35:35 2012, in response to Re: ''Oldest subway cars not being replaced afterall'', posted by randyo on Tue Jan 24 16:32:19 2012. Well, that's where it is the highest. I heard that that could go down as low as 600v in between substations. |
|
|
| (1134696) | |
Re: ''Oldest subway cars not being replaced afterall'' |
|
|
Posted by Wado MP73 on Tue Jan 24 22:53:08 2012, in response to Re: ''Oldest subway cars not being replaced afterall'', posted by Andrew Saucci on Sun Jan 22 18:48:43 2012. 1)No idea. The fact that it can't have full-width cabs without relocating the passenger doors may lower its price. (Unlike say, R62/A or R68/A)2)It depends on how it was used so it's not a matter of time, I think. In the case of the 7000 series, it was used on both local and express service above ground and local service in the subway on a very busy line for about 25 years before being relocated to less busy lines and later overhauled and rebuilt in several steps. So far, I've never heard anything metal fatigue related about their shells. The earlier ones will turn 50 this year. Although more than half of them are already retired, the remaining ones, with all the investments made in them, I wouldn't be surprised if they run another ten years. |
|
|
| (1134815) | |
Re: ''Oldest subway cars not being replaced afterall'' |
|
|
Posted by Avid Reader on Wed Jan 25 14:43:31 2012, in response to Re: ''Oldest subway cars not being replaced afterall'', posted by Wado MP73 on Tue Jan 24 22:53:08 2012. Those PATCO Budd cars are holding up quite well. |
|
|
| (1134818) | |
Re: ''Oldest subway cars not being replaced afterall'' |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Wed Jan 25 14:50:40 2012, in response to Re: ''Oldest subway cars not being replaced afterall'', posted by Wado MP73 on Tue Jan 24 22:35:35 2012. I believe that the voltage was "nominally" 600V which means it could vary depending on the distance from the feeders. Although most NYCTS voltage is nominally 600V, for years the BMT was down at 550V. As good as the Multis were when they ran, I can only imagine how they would have operated if the BMT had been up to the full 600V at the time. |
|
|
| (1134820) | |
Re: ''Oldest subway cars not being replaced afterall'' |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Wed Jan 25 14:53:00 2012, in response to Re: ''Oldest subway cars not being replaced afterall'', posted by Wado MP73 on Tue Jan 24 22:53:08 2012. If a system uses closed circuit TV like the SEPTA M/F cars, there is no need for full width cabs. |
|
|
| (1134822) | |
Re: ''Oldest subway cars not being replaced afterall'' |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Wed Jan 25 14:53:15 2012, in response to Re: ''Oldest subway cars not being replaced afterall'', posted by Wado MP73 on Tue Jan 24 22:35:35 2012. I believe that the voltage was "nominally" 600V which means it could vary depending on the distance from the feeders. Although most NYCTS voltage is nominally 600V, for years the BMT was down at 550V. As good as the Multis were when they ran, I can only imagine how they would have operated if the BMT had been up to the full 600V at the time. |
|
|
| (1134831) | |
Re: ''Oldest subway cars not being replaced afterall'' |
|
|
Posted by Lou From Middletown NY on Wed Jan 25 15:58:22 2012, in response to Re: ''Oldest subway cars not being replaced afterall'', posted by randyo on Wed Jan 25 14:50:40 2012. Artificial gravity, just like on the USS Enterprise |
|
|
| (1134837) | |
Re: ''Oldest subway cars not being replaced afterall'' |
|
|
Posted by Lou From Middletown NY on Wed Jan 25 16:52:39 2012, in response to Re: ''Oldest subway cars not being replaced afterall'', posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Fri Jan 20 12:04:06 2012. Weren't they pretty much done by the time of the Babylon and Kew Gardens disasters? |
|
|
| (1134838) | |
Re: ''Oldest subway cars not being replaced afterall'' |
|
|
Posted by Joe Saitta on Wed Jan 25 16:55:56 2012, in response to Re: ''Oldest subway cars not being replaced afterall'', posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Fri Jan 20 12:04:06 2012. Sorry, don't agree - they were not unreliable and slow. Used them every day until the M-1s completed the changeover and I was never on any of the old stock that broke down, and, on the ones I rode, their speed was always good. |
|
|
| (1134849) | |
Re: ''Oldest subway cars not being replaced afterall'' |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Wed Jan 25 17:22:09 2012, in response to Re: ''Oldest subway cars not being replaced afterall'', posted by Lou From Middletown NY on Wed Jan 25 16:52:39 2012. What cars are you talking aboyt that were done by the early 1950's ? |
|
|
| (1134850) | |
Re: ''Oldest subway cars not being replaced afterall'' |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Wed Jan 25 17:23:00 2012, in response to Re: ''Oldest subway cars not being replaced afterall'', posted by Joe Saitta on Wed Jan 25 16:55:56 2012. The schedule with M-7's between NYPS and Babylon are slower than with the MP54. |
|
|
| (1134851) | |
Re: ''Oldest subway cars not being replaced afterall'' |
|
|
Posted by Newkirk Images on Wed Jan 25 17:33:20 2012, in response to Re: ''Oldest subway cars not being replaced afterall'', posted by Joe Saitta on Wed Jan 25 16:55:56 2012. I was never on any of the old stock that broke down, and, on the ones I rode, their speed was always good.And they made all the right sounds ! I rode the MP-54 at CT. Trolley Museum (Warehouse Point) some years ago. If I closed my eyes and ignored the brake release sounds, the gear meshing sound was almost identical to an R1-9. Agree with this ? Bill Newkirk |
|
|
| (1134853) | |
Re: ''Oldest subway cars not being replaced afterall'' |
|
|
Posted by Joe Saitta on Wed Jan 25 17:36:51 2012, in response to Re: ''Oldest subway cars not being replaced afterall'', posted by Newkirk Images on Wed Jan 25 17:33:20 2012. Yes. It would be so nice to bring that unit back and operate it behind museum row in Garden City on the Garden City secondary. Just think - another museum and tourist attraction at probably a reasonable cost for Nassau County's Museum Row - and one already in place, you'd just have to string some overhead wire! And it might be possible to acquire the MP-54 up at Seashore..... |
|
|
| (1134891) | |
Re: ''Oldest subway cars not being replaced afterall'' |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Wed Jan 25 19:18:47 2012, in response to Re: ''Oldest subway cars not being replaced afterall'', posted by Joe Saitta on Wed Jan 25 17:36:51 2012. I don't think Seashore ever operated it.The CNY chapter NRHS has another one at Syracuse Fair grounds. I have no idea if the arch roof Watermill car still exists. |
|
|
| (1134938) | |
Re: ''Oldest subway cars not being replaced afterall'' |
|
|
Posted by Joe Saitta on Wed Jan 25 21:42:52 2012, in response to Re: ''Oldest subway cars not being replaced afterall'', posted by Joe V on Wed Jan 25 19:18:47 2012. Is the one at Syracuse an electric MU or trailer coach? Watermill - would you be kind enough to explain this one please. |
|
|
| (1134952) | |
Re: ''Oldest subway cars not being replaced afterall'' |
|
|
Posted by Wayne-MrSlantR40 on Wed Jan 25 23:00:04 2012, in response to Re: ''Oldest subway cars not being replaced afterall'', posted by Lou From Middletown NY on Wed Jan 25 16:52:39 2012. Both cars that were wrecked in '50 at Kew Gardens were of 1910 build.The RVC (Babylon) pair were of 1910 (54A) and 1927 (54C) vintage - that would make the oldest 40 years at the time and the newest a mere 23. |
|
|
| (1134988) | |
Re: ''Oldest subway cars not being replaced afterall'' |
|
|
Posted by Wado MP73 on Thu Jan 26 09:05:22 2012, in response to Re: ''Oldest subway cars not being replaced afterall'', posted by randyo on Wed Jan 25 14:53:15 2012. On DC powered lines, whether overhead or third rail fed, the voltage will never be the same at every point, there will always be "drop-outs".If the voltage at the feeders is 720V and at the lowest point is 600V, it could be the reason MNR chooses the mid-point of 660V as its nominal voltage (on some docs they say 650V). And now with many of its trains using regenerative brakes, the highest voltage could be higher than the feeder voltage at points. |
|
|
| (1134989) | |
Re: ''Oldest subway cars not being replaced afterall'' |
|
|
Posted by Wado MP73 on Thu Jan 26 09:08:18 2012, in response to Re: ''Oldest subway cars not being replaced afterall'', posted by randyo on Wed Jan 25 14:53:00 2012. Right, but the industry seems to be going with the trend of full width cabs. The M/F line is more of an exception for a recent equipment design. |
|
|
| (1134990) | |
Re: ''Oldest subway cars not being replaced afterall'' |
|
|
Posted by Wado MP73 on Thu Jan 26 09:08:48 2012, in response to Re: ''Oldest subway cars not being replaced afterall'', posted by Avid Reader on Wed Jan 25 14:43:31 2012. And they too, are going to be rebuilt. |
|
|
| (1135044) | |
Re: ''Oldest subway cars not being replaced afterall'' |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Thu Jan 26 14:08:18 2012, in response to Re: ''Oldest subway cars not being replaced afterall'', posted by Wado MP73 on Thu Jan 26 09:08:18 2012. Most of the existing OPTO systems were developed before a reliable state of the art TV system was developed and they probably don't want to invest in a closed circuit TV system for their respective properties thus they will continue to order equipment with transverse cabs as the cheaper alternative. |
|
|
| (1135075) | |
Re: ''Oldest subway cars not being replaced afterall'' |
|
|
Posted by Wado MP73 on Thu Jan 26 17:05:21 2012, in response to Re: ''Oldest subway cars not being replaced afterall'', posted by randyo on Thu Jan 26 14:08:18 2012. Most of the European OPTO systems have been using on-board or wayside CCTVs and mirrors so the driver doesn't have to move to operate the doors, for decades. NYCT just cheaped out on this. |
|
|
| (1135101) | |
Re: ''Oldest subway cars not being replaced afterall'' |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Thu Jan 26 18:15:04 2012, in response to Re: ''Oldest subway cars not being replaced afterall'', posted by Joe Saitta on Wed Jan 25 21:42:52 2012. Syracuse, like Warehosue Point and Seashore are MP54A1: 1930, ALtoona, 12" colision posts. Prior clerestory roof cars from 1908-1917 had 5", and telescoped upon impact. Most were scrapped with the Pullman-Standard onslaught. The few that survived, most had cabs removed, except for the combines.The Watermill car is an MP54C, arch roof from 1927, #4900, the last in existance. It has been a restaurant adjacent to the old Watermill station. |
|
|
| (1135178) | |
Re: ''Oldest subway cars not being replaced afterall'' |
|
|
Posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Fri Jan 27 08:02:22 2012, in response to Re: ''Oldest subway cars not being replaced afterall'', posted by randyo on Wed Jan 25 14:53:15 2012. 65-70 mph, perhaps? |
|
|
|
Page 3 of 3 |
||
