|
|
| R46 Electric portion question (1238956) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
|
| (1238958) | |
Re: R46 Electric portion question |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Fri Aug 2 00:47:15 2013, in response to R46 Electric portion question, posted by gbs on Fri Aug 2 00:42:49 2013. Yep ... the old design functioned poorly. Play this one in your head. Pins on either side of the couplers on a CURVE where the electrical contacts got "iffy" due to those forces.They had a lot of problems with the pins over on the sides not making very good contact and finally realized why electric portions were ALWAYS under the coupler which didn't flex to the sides like that. Like P-wire, fabulous idea until it collided with the real world. :) |
|
|
| (1238966) | |
Re: R46 Electric portion question |
|
|
Posted by Wayne-MrSlantR40 on Fri Aug 2 01:57:17 2013, in response to R46 Electric portion question, posted by gbs on Fri Aug 2 00:42:49 2013. Why was the design changed?Yes, WHY were the red metal strips and station nameplates removed from Lex-53? We KNOW the ceiling work didn't last more than a few months; but why did they paint the red strip over in silver? It looks so much worse now than it did when it was red. wayne |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (1238987) | |
Re: R46 Electric portion question |
|
|
Posted by Lou from Brooklyn on Fri Aug 2 08:04:57 2013, in response to R46 Electric portion question, posted by gbs on Fri Aug 2 00:42:49 2013. Wasn't there some infamous pull a parts or breakaways train separation? |
|
|
| (1238990) | |
Re: R46 Electric portion question |
|
|
Posted by Jersey Mike on Fri Aug 2 08:10:20 2013, in response to Re: R46 Electric portion question, posted by SelkirkTMO on Fri Aug 2 00:47:15 2013. DC Metro made it work. |
|
|
| (1238991) | |
Re: R46 Electric portion question |
|
|
Posted by Jersey Mike on Fri Aug 2 08:12:22 2013, in response to R46 Electric portion question, posted by gbs on Fri Aug 2 00:42:49 2013. Were the R46's the first NYCTA cars to make use of the Tomlinson coupler? |
|
|
| (1238993) | |
Re: R46 Electric portion question |
|
|
Posted by merrick1 on Fri Aug 2 08:44:49 2013, in response to R46 Electric portion question, posted by gbs on Fri Aug 2 00:42:49 2013. Weren't the chains inside that little door to the side of the storm door? The springs on the outside were added later. |
|
|
| (1239010) | |
Re: R46 Electric portion question |
|
|
Posted by Far Rockaway A Train on Fri Aug 2 10:39:13 2013, in response to R46 Electric portion question, posted by gbs on Fri Aug 2 00:42:49 2013. I agree about the classy look. I forgot how beautiful the R44/46s were. Even the original rollsigns on both car classes were nice. |
|
|
| (1239024) | |
Re: R46 Electric portion question |
|
|
Posted by rbseabeach on Fri Aug 2 12:32:05 2013, in response to Re: R46 Electric portion question, posted by Far Rockaway A Train on Fri Aug 2 10:39:13 2013. INMO, the original r-44 / 46 were the classiest looking subway cars next to the GOH IRT Redbirds |
|
|
| (1239033) | |
Re: R46 Electric portion question |
|
|
Posted by Train Dude on Fri Aug 2 14:05:21 2013, in response to R46 Electric portion question, posted by gbs on Fri Aug 2 00:42:49 2013. The side slung electric portions on the R-44 & R-46 were replaced with the more traditional electric portion during the GOH in 1990 to 1993. The so called "experts" would claim that the side slung EPs were problematic, especially on curves. Of course this is an oversimplification because it's easy for some to grasp. The real problem was never truly the electric portions.This particular coupler is designed to have "zero" movement between the opposing coupler faces when coupled. The mating is accomplished by the hooks holding the coupler faces flush against the opposing face. Unfortunately, the hook is mounted on a vertical pin which passes through the coupler head, top to bottom. This pin has a brass bushing where the pin passes through the hook. After several years, those bushings began to wear, introducing slack into the hooks. This allowed for just enough movement between the couplers that on curves the opposing electric portion pins could separate. This was exacerbated by the lack of pushback on the portion pins but the true culprit was the coupler hook pin bushing. The reason the electric portion was changed was two-fold. First because some still believed that it was a problematic component. More importantly, the new Electric Portion and brake system on the R-46 was sold to NYCT by a company called New York Air Brake. The new portion works better because during GOH and during all heavy SMS those pesky bushings are inspected and replaced. In reality, I found this new portion is more labor intensive during routine maintenance and especially when it requires replacement. |
|
|
| (1239052) | |
Re: R46 Electric portion question |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Fri Aug 2 15:43:23 2013, in response to Re: R46 Electric portion question, posted by Jersey Mike on Fri Aug 2 08:10:20 2013. MTA didn't. So out they went. |
|
|
| (1239087) | |
Re: R46 Electric portion question |
|
|
Posted by Newkirk Images on Fri Aug 2 18:59:23 2013, in response to Re: R46 Electric portion question, posted by Lou from Brooklyn on Fri Aug 2 08:04:57 2013. Wasn't there some infamous pull a parts or breakaways train separation?I think that was the pre-GOH R-44's with those problems. Bill Newkirk |
|
|
| (1239137) | |
Re: R46 Electric portion question |
|
|
Posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Fri Aug 2 21:29:51 2013, in response to Re: R46 Electric portion question, posted by Wayne-MrSlantR40 on Fri Aug 2 01:57:17 2013. Yeah, who's the wise guy? |
|
|
| (1239138) | |
Re: R46 Electric portion question |
|
|
Posted by renee gil on Fri Aug 2 21:32:31 2013, in response to Re: R46 Electric portion question, posted by Far Rockaway A Train on Fri Aug 2 10:39:13 2013. iawtp. |
|
|
| (1239140) | |
Re: R46 Electric portion question |
|
|
Posted by grimace1169 on Fri Aug 2 21:36:58 2013, in response to Re: R46 Electric portion question, posted by Wayne-MrSlantR40 on Fri Aug 2 01:57:17 2013. Signal work, conduits? Just a guess. |
|
|
| (1239184) | |
Re: R46 Electric portion question |
|
|
Posted by gbs on Sat Aug 3 00:24:41 2013, in response to Re: R46 Electric portion question, posted by Train Dude on Fri Aug 2 14:05:21 2013. Thanks for the comprehensive and understandable answer.It looks like the current portion can contain fewer connections than the old dual style. Is that the case, and if so, is that because when the fancier controls were removed, fewer electrical connections between cars were necessary? |
|
|
| (1239193) | |
Re: R46 Electric portion question |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Sat Aug 3 01:06:13 2013, in response to Re: R46 Electric portion question, posted by Jersey Mike on Fri Aug 2 08:12:22 2013. No, the R-44s. The official name of that type of coupler was called "Ohio Brass." |
|
|
| (1239364) | |
Re: R46 Electric portion question |
|
|
Posted by Jersey Mike on Sat Aug 3 17:02:37 2013, in response to Re: R46 Electric portion question, posted by randyo on Sat Aug 3 01:06:13 2013. That's was the Manufacturer and since Wabco bought the Ohio Brass designs its best to use Tomlinson now. |
|
|
| (1239381) | |
Re: R46 Electric portion question |
|
|
Posted by Train Dude on Sat Aug 3 18:53:28 2013, in response to Re: R46 Electric portion question, posted by Jersey Mike on Fri Aug 2 08:12:22 2013. On the original R-44 coupler was an Ohio Brass form 70 coupler. On the R-46 it was basically the same coupler manufactured Waugh but they had completely different draft gear assemblies. I only recall Tomlinson couplers being used on some pre-war El cars. |
|
|
