|
|
| [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New (1437481) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
|
Page 1 of 5 |
|
|
|
| (1437498) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by Jersey Mike on Sat May 27 22:19:53 2017, in response to [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by Bill Newkirk on Sat May 27 19:46:43 2017. Wow |
|
|
| (1437502) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by Catfish 44 on Sun May 28 00:19:16 2017, in response to [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by Bill Newkirk on Sat May 27 19:46:43 2017. The dichotomy is profound. |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (1437561) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Sun May 28 14:49:27 2017, in response to [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by Bill Newkirk on Sat May 27 19:46:43 2017. Check out that weathered look on those BMT standards. Looks as if they hadn't had a bath in years! |
|
|
| (1437575) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by ChicagoMotorman on Sun May 28 15:59:51 2017, in response to [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by Bill Newkirk on Sat May 27 19:46:43 2017. Nice! |
|
|
| (1437600) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by Bill Newkirk on Sun May 28 19:27:22 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Sun May 28 14:49:27 2017. Check out that weathered look on those BMT standards. Looks as if they hadn't had a bath in years!Those AB's were wearing the steel dust look. From what I heard, steel dust on the car bodies protected them from rust. Bill Newkirk |
|
|
| (1437608) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by Fisk Ave Jim on Sun May 28 20:00:05 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Sun May 28 14:49:27 2017. At least the windows were nice & clean. The colors on the pax shirts show nice. |
|
|
| (1437623) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Sun May 28 21:13:02 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by Bill Newkirk on Sun May 28 19:27:22 2017. That's what I heard, too. |
|
|
| (1437633) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by Lou From Middletown NY on Sun May 28 21:43:00 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Sun May 28 14:49:27 2017. If ever.... |
|
|
| (1437634) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Sun May 28 21:48:13 2017, in response to [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by Bill Newkirk on Sat May 27 19:46:43 2017. Must be that one lone six car set that was sent there to give the East AC cars. |
|
|
| (1437636) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by Lou From Middletown NY on Sun May 28 21:50:19 2017, in response to [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by Bill Newkirk on Sat May 27 19:46:43 2017. Note the front sign on the 40M is an N, but it has a GG route/line side sign...one of the units that was meant to be on the IND, but got reassigned to 'spread the wealth' of AC, perhaps?Also - perhaps the Standards were a fan trip? |
|
|
| (1437639) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by Bill from Maspeth on Sun May 28 21:56:48 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by Edwards! on Sun May 28 21:48:13 2017. There were 2 on the LL most times. |
|
|
| (1437640) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by Bill from Maspeth on Sun May 28 21:58:16 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by Lou From Middletown NY on Sun May 28 21:50:19 2017. Maybe it just got transfered to Canarsie, not yet used for service and the signs were yet to be changed. |
|
|
| (1437647) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by Transportation Hub on Sun May 28 22:34:42 2017, in response to [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by Bill Newkirk on Sat May 27 19:46:43 2017. That R40M is giving me that nostalgic vibes. |
|
|
| (1437653) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by LuchAAA on Sun May 28 23:10:17 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by Catfish 44 on Sun May 28 00:19:16 2017. it is.Today's new trains don't make the R46's and R62's look so old. |
|
|
| (1437657) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by Catfish 44 on Sun May 28 23:30:05 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by LuchAAA on Sun May 28 23:10:17 2017. precisely |
|
|
| (1437671) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by Bill Newkirk on Mon May 29 06:02:50 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by Lou From Middletown NY on Sun May 28 21:50:19 2017. Also - perhaps the Standards were a fan trip?The A-B's were in regular service. They turned their last wheels on the (M) on August 4, 1969. Bill Newkirk |
|
|
| (1437685) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by zac on Mon May 29 09:57:39 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by Bill Newkirk on Mon May 29 06:02:50 2017. Yes, I rode the standards to Stuy. By the time I graduated it was mostly R9, with some R42s thrown in. I don't remember R40M on the line. |
|
|
| (1437688) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by zac on Mon May 29 10:02:41 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by Bill from Maspeth on Sun May 28 21:58:16 2017. That was the problem with the R40/R42/R44/R46. The signs were put on specific cars for specific lines. When those cars ran on other lines they were left blank. A/AA/B, CC/D, E/F, GG/N/RR, QB/QJ/M, LL/JJ/KK. I believe those were the combos, although I could be mistaken. I think the EE was on signs, maybe with the N? It's been a while and I'm sure someone here has the real list. |
|
|
| (1437698) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Mon May 29 10:53:07 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by zac on Mon May 29 10:02:41 2017. I think QB and RR were duplicated in 2 different groups.All of the Eastern Division with QB and RR were also a group. I don't think RR and N were with GG. There was still an EE. Neither the RR nor N ran on the Queens IND in 1969 -1970. . Ironic that I believe the surviving R42's of today were originally the A/AA/B batch. |
|
|
| (1437734) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Mon May 29 15:36:44 2017, in response to [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by Bill Newkirk on Sat May 27 19:46:43 2017. And a rare photo of an R-40M with a BMT Standard, then the oldest cars still in service. |
|
|
| (1437745) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by Bill Newkirk on Mon May 29 15:57:05 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by zac on Mon May 29 09:57:39 2017. Maybe the folks wanted cars with A/C.  Line: BMT Canarsie Line...Location: Broadway Junction... Route: LL Car: R-40M (St. Louis, 1969)... Collection of: George Conrad Collection...Date: 6/21/1969...from nycsubway.org |
|
|
| (1437748) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by Bill Newkirk on Mon May 29 16:00:43 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by zac on Mon May 29 10:02:41 2017.  Line: IND Rockaway...Location: Rockaway Park/Beach 116th Street... Car: R-40 (St. Louis, 1968)... Collection of: George Conrad Collection Date: 8/9/1969...Notes: With R9 train in yard...from nycsubway.org |
|
|
| (1437753) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Mon May 29 16:13:19 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Sun May 28 14:49:27 2017. Until circa 1960, it was never NYCTS policy to wash cars despite the fact that some of the early SMEEs like the R-10s through 15s had some rather attractive paint schemes. When the TA first attempted to wash its prewar cars, the R-1/9s, the paint did not hold up well against the detergent solution used. One description of such a car wash was that 4 R-9s went in to the wash and 4 pieces of rust came out. |
|
|
| (1437755) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Mon May 29 16:17:55 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by Bill from Maspeth on Sun May 28 21:56:48 2017. In 1969, 3 6 car trains of R-40Ms were sent to ENY Yd for use on the LL. The BMT Eastern riders had been promised A/C but the Eastern Div R-42s were having acceptance problems so the 3 trains of R-40Ms were sent to the BMT East and equipped with the proper signs to satisfy the LL Line riders. If I recall correctly, the first run of an SA/C train on the 14 St line was Friday morning June 20, 1969 at 511AM and I was the M/M. |
|
|
| (1437756) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Mon May 29 16:24:05 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by Joe V on Mon May 29 10:53:07 2017. The group of R-40Ms and also R-42s intended for the N had EE, GG and N signs. The rest of the Qns group of R-40 Ms and 42s had signs for the E and the F as well as signs for the A that were intended for use on the Rockaway shuttles. and only had Rockaway shuttle readings with A bullets. The reason for the N being grouped with the EE and GG was the even as early as the R-40Ms, the TA had plans afoot to replace the EE with the N which didn’t take place until 1976. |
|
|
| (1437757) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Mon May 29 16:25:28 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by Bill Newkirk on Mon May 29 15:57:05 2017. See my post about it. |
|
|
| (1437758) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Mon May 29 16:29:04 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by randyo on Mon May 29 16:17:55 2017. Looking back on that day, it just occurred to me that I actually operated both the oldest and the newest car in service on the BMT at the time, since on my second trip returning from 8 Ave that same day, I operated the last remaining train of steels back to Canarsie. |
|
|
| (1437775) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by Far Rockaway A Train on Mon May 29 18:22:34 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by Joe V on Mon May 29 10:53:07 2017. The A/AA/B R42 batch were approximately 4590-4699. |
|
|
| (1437778) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Mon May 29 18:34:04 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by randyo on Mon May 29 16:29:04 2017. You are Living History.Why dont you compile your stuff into a book? Im sure you will have buyers lined up. Think about it. |
|
|
| (1437785) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by Bill from Maspeth on Mon May 29 19:22:34 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by Edwards! on Mon May 29 18:34:04 2017. That was to placate C riders who were making a lot of noise.The R179's are coming in one of these years, uh months, to get those relics outta there. |
|
|
| (1437791) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by TransitChuckG on Mon May 29 20:13:06 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by randyo on Mon May 29 16:13:19 2017. Oy!!!! |
|
|
| (1437803) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by jimmymc25 on Tue May 30 00:52:20 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by randyo on Mon May 29 16:13:19 2017. Oh that doesn't sound good.Jimmymc25 |
|
|
| (1437804) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Tue May 30 01:12:48 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by Bill from Maspeth on Mon May 29 19:22:34 2017. If anything, those new cars should go right to the J line,so the C can keep whatever it already has from the east.Move the remaining Eastern division R160As over to the C line..no muss no fuss...keep the car moves to a bare minimum. |
|
|
| (1437809) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Tue May 30 04:47:50 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by randyo on Mon May 29 16:13:19 2017. I'll bet the riding public was surprised to see the "City of New York" lettering on the sides of the cars. |
|
|
| (1437810) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Tue May 30 04:49:42 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by randyo on Mon May 29 16:29:04 2017. I wonder how many operable trainsets of BMT standards were left on the Moe by then. |
|
|
| (1437813) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Tue May 30 04:57:37 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by zac on Mon May 29 10:02:41 2017. That's why 4572-73 had N signs showing even though they were operating on the then-B line during the chase sequence in The French Connection. The producers wanted clean cars for the film shoot and none were available from the A/AA/B pool. |
|
|
| (1437817) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by Q Brightliner Harry on Tue May 30 07:08:31 2017, in response to [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by Bill Newkirk on Sat May 27 19:46:43 2017. Interesting that it is 4303-4302 at the end.It was 4301-4300 that malfunctioned when only a year old and caused the QB accident that killed two passengers. |
|
|
| (1437822) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by MainR3664 on Tue May 30 07:32:11 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by Jersey Mike on Sat May 27 22:19:53 2017. I had the identical reaction... |
|
|
| (1437824) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by MainR3664 on Tue May 30 07:33:49 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by LuchAAA on Sun May 28 23:10:17 2017. Exactly. The difference (in appearance) between today's trains and those of 40 years earlier is less obvious. I'd bet a lot of non-railfans might even think that R46s are newer than R68s - becuase of the electronic side-signs. |
|
|
| (1437829) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by Stephen Bauman on Tue May 30 09:00:15 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by Wallyhorse on Mon May 29 15:36:44 2017. And a rare photo of an R-40M with a BMT Standard, then the oldest cars still in service...Date: 4/9/1969Not by a long shot. |
|
|
| (1437831) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by William A. Padron on Tue May 30 09:37:22 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by Stephen Bauman on Tue May 30 09:00:15 2017. The Q-type cars on Myrtle were still running, even those 1938 rebuilds were originally constructed 1903-1907.-William A. Padron ["MJ"] |
|
|
| (1437835) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by Jackson Park B Train on Tue May 30 10:37:25 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Tue May 30 04:47:50 2017. Yes I was. It was up on the elevated section between Carroll and Smith-Ninth in bright winter late afternoon sun. I had not known the cars were lettered before. |
|
|
| (1437838) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by Bill from Maspeth on Tue May 30 10:48:11 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by Edwards! on Tue May 30 01:12:48 2017. I would agree with that. |
|
|
| (1437842) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by Bill from Maspeth on Tue May 30 10:58:47 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Tue May 30 04:57:37 2017. And by the time I got hired at the end of 1979, there were 2 cars (could have been those 2) that had all 4 side signs stuck on RR. It was a lot of fun when we had them at the c/r position bon the D.So were the hot cars. Did I mention the dark cars too? Trains with 5 cars in a row on the D(og). And some cars with very few, if any emergency lights. |
|
|
| (1437845) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by SUBWAYMAN on Tue May 30 11:06:03 2017, in response to [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by Bill Newkirk on Sat May 27 19:46:43 2017. Cool picture.I always thought the R40Ms were underrated cars never being as well liked as the R40 Slants despite paving the way for the R42s. |
|
|
| (1437852) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Tue May 30 13:08:03 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by Bill from Maspeth on Tue May 30 10:48:11 2017. It makes sense.Why enact some mass exodus from one yard to another,when it can be kept simple. As the 179 come in,move the 160s to 207,and the 32s to whatever heaven there is for retired railcars. |
|
|
| (1437855) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by Bill from Maspeth on Tue May 30 14:19:31 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by SUBWAYMAN on Tue May 30 11:06:03 2017. I like them! |
|
|
| (1437859) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by FYBklyn1959 on Tue May 30 14:54:07 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by SUBWAYMAN on Tue May 30 11:06:03 2017. When I was a kid, before I knew about R-numbers, I thought that the Modifieds and the R-42s were one and the same (the difference are subtle, especially to a 9-10 year old). To me 4450-4949 was one class of car I referred to as "A/C" (for obvious reasons) (Back then, I didn't know about the last 100 Slants having air-conditioning, that was a pleasant surprise for me in the summer of 1973 when I was railfanning out to 179th St and got an A/C slant on the trip back). Of course, there were the 10 experimental air-conditioned R-38s (4140-4149?), but I'm not sure that I ever rode an R-38 at all, A/C or not. I certainly didn't post-GOH and I can't remember if I did pre-GOH (would have been before I moved to L.A. in 1976). |
|
|
| (1437871) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Tue May 30 16:34:48 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by Jackson Park B Train on Tue May 30 10:37:25 2017. I’m not sure if all the R-1/9s had “City of New York” or whether it was just the R-1s and R-4s. |
|
|
|
|
Page 1 of 5 |
|
