|
|
| Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New (1437481) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
Page 5 of 5 |
||
|
| (1438468) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by FormerVanWyckBlvdUser on Mon Jun 5 21:43:25 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Mon Jun 5 19:44:56 2017. Kind of off topic, but where did the timers start? |
|
|
| (1438469) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by FormerVanWyckBlvdUser on Mon Jun 5 21:58:53 2017, in response to [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by Bill Newkirk on Sat May 27 19:46:43 2017. The higher numbered units (4330-4349 in the original numbering scheme) had longer windows in the storm doors (and I also think the front window in the M/M cab was longer too). Was this to match the windows on the passenger doors? Why the difference? |
|
|
| (1438484) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Tue Jun 6 01:19:13 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by FormerVanWyckBlvdUser on Mon Jun 5 21:58:53 2017. The #2 ends of the 40Ms had the same storm door window as the slants. A few of the early 40Ms had storm door windows and cab door windows that were slightly shorter than the later 40Ms and 42s. At some point some enterprising person from Car Equipment who had nothing better to do noticed that the windows didn’t quite match the profiles of the side windows on the cars and so the bottom few inches on the end windows were painted black in an attempt to make the “window line” uniform. Eventually, during various repaintings then black area was eliminated and the fronts just painted silver above the blue band. |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (1438493) | |
Re: [2 PHOTOS] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by Bill Newkirk on Tue Jun 6 07:18:52 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by randyo on Tue Jun 6 01:19:13 2017.  Line: IND Crosstown Line...Location: Church Avenue... Route: F Car: R-40M (St. Louis, 1969) 4277... Photo by: Doug Grotjahn Collection of: Joe Testagrose...Date: 9/12/1968...from nycsubway.org Eventually, during various repaintings then black area was eliminated and the fronts just painted silver above the blue band. ">  Location: Coney Island Yard...Car: R-40M (St. Louis, 1969) 4455 (ex-4255)...Photo by: Steve Zabel...Collection of: Joe Testagrose...Date: 4/18/1978...from nycsubway.org |
|
|
| (1438505) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Tue Jun 6 10:26:48 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by randyo on Tue Jun 6 01:19:13 2017. The 40 modifieds were designed with the borders around the windows and stormdoor.It also included the lcl/exp sign above the door,but didn't show up on the finish product. The change came about during the R42 assembly. Both R40m and R42s were basically being assembled at the same time...so 42 bonnets were used on the remaining cars getting rid of the racoon mask. |
|
|
| (1438530) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by MainR3664 on Tue Jun 6 14:50:42 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by Catfish 44 on Mon Jun 5 15:13:55 2017. I don't remember them on the A and C (and R/V) until 2008-early 2010 or so. But I definitely remember seeing them on the N when the Williamsburg Bridge was closed to trains in 1999 (I guess they moved them over literally just before the closure, because I don't remember them on the N even one day before)I started seeing 40 Slants, 40Ms and 42s on the N and Q-Diamond during the Manhattan Bridge work in 2001-2004, and then, once the IND tracks re-opened and the W became a local, the Q and N were R68/68As, then R160s starting in 2007-ish. The W (after it became a weekday local) was 40-slants from 2004-early 2009. |
|
|
| (1438531) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by MainR3664 on Tue Jun 6 14:53:49 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by Far Rockaway A Train on Mon Jun 5 15:04:15 2017. In early 2010, at least one full train of R32s ran on the B. I was taking it to 167th in the Bronx at the time.I remember it caused a LOT of confusion at 59th Street, as many folks took it for a C. |
|
|
| (1438532) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by MainR3664 on Tue Jun 6 14:54:55 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by Joe V on Mon Jun 5 17:41:35 2017. I remember them on the A, C, F, R and V in those days- but not the E... |
|
|
| (1438535) | |
Re: [2 PHOTOS] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Tue Jun 6 15:07:19 2017, in response to Re: [2 PHOTOS] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by Bill Newkirk on Tue Jun 6 07:18:52 2017. Thanks. Those photos illustrate exactly what I was referring to. |
|
|
| (1438537) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Tue Jun 6 15:12:25 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by Edwards! on Tue Jun 6 10:26:48 2017. s far as I heard, the original design did not call for the black borders around the windows, but they were only added after the inconsistency of the window design was discovered. I suspect that if the discrepancy had not been discovered, the R-42 bonnets would have been the same. |
|
|
| (1438542) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Tue Jun 6 15:34:16 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by MainR3664 on Tue Jun 6 14:53:49 2017. Not only that, but I don’t think R-32s have proper B side signs for the route as it currently exists. |
|
|
| (1438548) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by Far Rockaway A Train on Tue Jun 6 16:38:19 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by MainR3664 on Tue Jun 6 14:54:55 2017. Wow. The E was the first Queens Blvd. route to get the R42s-which was caused by the Phase II R32s being retired. |
|
|
| (1438551) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by Far Rockaway A Train on Tue Jun 6 16:55:43 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by MainR3664 on Tue Jun 6 14:50:42 2017. The R40ms as well as 50 R40s were sent to Coney Island (N, Q,) when the R143s arrived on the L. |
|
|
| (1438552) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by Far Rockaway A Train on Tue Jun 6 16:56:56 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by Far Rockaway A Train on Tue Jun 6 16:55:43 2017. The R40ms as well as 50 R40s were sent to Coney Island (N, Q, diamond Q) when the R143s arrived on the L. |
|
|
| (1438565) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Tue Jun 6 18:35:09 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by Jackson Park B Train on Mon Jun 5 21:09:21 2017. I looked for those Redbirds two years ago and didn't see them. Maybe I looked in the wrong barn - they weren't outdoors. |
|
|
| (1438566) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Tue Jun 6 18:36:29 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by FormerVanWyckBlvdUser on Mon Jun 5 21:43:25 2017. Most likely after that tragic accident on the Williamsburg Bridge 22 years ago today. |
|
|
| (1438586) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by FormerVanWyckBlvdUser on Tue Jun 6 21:35:51 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Tue Jun 6 18:36:29 2017. Sorry, not when, but where? As in location. Recent videos show them starting around 86th St. I'm sure they had them starting further north in the past. |
|
|
| (1438602) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Wed Jun 7 00:51:51 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by FormerVanWyckBlvdUser on Mon Jun 5 21:43:25 2017. There have ALWAYS been "timers" around the system at various points from Day One.After the Willy B thing,and the toll it cost..those GT signals started popping up everywhere. It was more or.less a message to operators that " we trust your judgement, but just in case SOMETHING gets in the way of that.." Safety first on the Leisure Railroad. |
|
|
| (1438603) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by Catfish 44 on Wed Jun 7 01:12:27 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by Edwards! on Wed Jun 7 00:51:51 2017. Robert Ray was no help either. |
|
|
| (1438609) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by MainR3664 on Wed Jun 7 06:50:23 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by Far Rockaway A Train on Tue Jun 6 16:56:56 2017. Yeah, I guess that makes sense- it was 2001-ish- the same time period I mentioned... |
|
|
| (1438610) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by MainR3664 on Wed Jun 7 06:54:00 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by Bill from Maspeth on Tue May 30 10:58:47 2017. I remember R40Ms and R42s (not sure which) on the RR when I was a kid. I also remember dark cars, and cars with multiple doors that would not open. Usually it was just one half, but sometimes it was a complete pair of doors that.You could be in a B-Division car where only one half of two sets of doors opened. I suppose they'd never operate a car where no doors, or only one half of one, would open- that would be very dangerous ... Right? |
|
|
| (1438618) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by Bill from Maspeth on Wed Jun 7 07:37:57 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by MainR3664 on Wed Jun 7 06:54:00 2017. The R42's were the ones with the dark cars thanks to their unreliable convertors. The R40 has the much more reliable motor generator set. |
|
|
| (1438657) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Wed Jun 7 15:24:26 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by Catfish 44 on Wed Jun 7 01:12:27 2017. The problem with the Robert Ray incident is that the GT signals which were set to function only when the switch is set for the diverging route didn’t extend far enough ahead of the homeball to slow the train down sufficiently to prevent such an accident. They have since been changed so that the train will be slowed down sooner in such a case. A similar situation existed on the S/B exp tk N/O 72/Bway and I’m sure that situation has been changed as well. The problem with the MTA is that it puts GT signals where they are not needed and fails to put proper GT signals where they are needed. |
|
|
| (1438675) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by Far Rockaway A Train on Wed Jun 7 18:05:52 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by FormerVanWyckBlvdUser on Tue Jun 6 21:35:51 2017. The first timer was just before the dip at 103rd st. The second was the S curve between 116th Street and 125th Street. After that the A train (the D train had a timer within 135th Street if it was a Concourse Exp or just past 135th Street if it was a Concourse Lcl) hauled ass until north of 168th Street. There were no timers on the locals.Southbound, there were no timers from north of 145th Street until 81th Street. Again, there were no timers on the locals. Those were the days-no timers, no field shunting. |
|
|
| (1438683) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Wed Jun 7 18:47:54 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by Far Rockaway A Train on Wed Jun 7 18:05:52 2017. As I remember it,there were no timers at all for the D train. It was clear all the way to the home balls that took you to the Concourse. |
|
|
| (1438696) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by Catfish 44 on Wed Jun 7 20:28:12 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by randyo on Wed Jun 7 15:24:26 2017. Be that as it may it was a certain distrust of humans overall that led to the great slowdown of the present day.Yes or no |
|
|
| (1438703) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Wed Jun 7 20:42:37 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by Far Rockaway A Train on Wed Jun 7 18:05:52 2017. Field shunting is still there. Only the last step that increased the balancing speed has been disabled. |
|
|
| (1438704) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Wed Jun 7 20:45:08 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by Edwards! on Wed Jun 7 00:51:51 2017. You'll get there - eventually. |
|
|
| (1438718) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by Fisk Ave Jim on Wed Jun 7 21:54:36 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by randyo on Wed Jun 7 15:24:26 2017. "The problem with the MTA is that it puts GT signals where they are not needed and fails to put proper GT signals where they are needed."Correct. Case in point: on the #7 Flushing bound train before QBP, there is a 90' curve right before the station. NO GT timer there. The nearest GT signal is about 3 carlengths into the station. To this day, T/O s can come into that curve wrapped around, @60 ft above Queens Plaza South, then slam on the brakes when they come upon the signal. I'd be on that train & many times an uneasy feeling would come over me as the train would whip into the station feeling the G forces push me against the seat or the nearest door panel if I'm standing. Point being, if any trackage in the system could use a timer & has none, there would be the case. |
|
|
| (1438729) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by Far Rockaway A Train on Wed Jun 7 22:31:45 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Wed Jun 7 20:42:37 2017. Thanks. Whatever it is the trains were not slowed down like today. I don't recognize the R46s today. They were one of the fastest cars we had. |
|
|
| (1438865) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Thu Jun 8 20:06:03 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by Far Rockaway A Train on Wed Jun 7 22:31:45 2017. They were capable of 70 mph as delivered. |
|
|
| (1438870) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Thu Jun 8 20:33:50 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by Far Rockaway A Train on Wed Jun 7 22:31:45 2017. Its sad to see them neutered like that.Those heavyweights had speed as DNA. |
|
|
| (1438875) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by Catfish 44 on Thu Jun 8 20:57:52 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Thu Jun 8 20:06:03 2017. That's no R-44 though. |
|
|
|
Page 5 of 5 |
||
