|
|
| Tuscarora Almanac for October 10 (1451656) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
| (1451656) | |
Tuscarora Almanac for October 10 |
|
|
Posted by IRTRedbirdR33 on Tue Oct 10 08:34:39 2017 Tuscarora Almanac – October 10, 1918 – The Book of Last Runs Manhattan, New York Third Avenue Railways Third Avenue Railways discontinues service on the Canal Street & Grand Street trolley line. Source: New York Division Bulletin /August 2001 article by Mr. Bernard Linder Tuscarora Almanac - October 10, 1920 - The Book of First Runs Brooklyn, New York Interborough Rapid Transit Company New stations on the IRT Eastern Parkway Line are opened at Bergen Street, Grand Army Plaza and Eastern Parkway - Brooklyn Museum. The stations were not completed when the line was extended to Utica Avenue the previous August. Source: New York Division Bulletin / July 1991, article, “The IRT Eastern Parkway Line” by Mr. Bernard Linder Tuscarora Almanac - October 10, 1955 - The Book of First Runs The Bronx, New York New York City Transit Authority – IRT Division The first train of R-17's enters service today on the IRT No 6 Lexington Avenue Local. The R-17 Fleet will eventually number four hundred cars with road numbers 6500 to 6899. They will remain in service until 1988. Source: New York Division Bulletin / December 1964 Tuscarora Almanac – October 10, 1957 – The Book of First Runs New York City Transit Authority BMT Division Q-Types are tested in service on the No.7 Franklin Avenue Shuttle. The do not perform well and are withdrawn after one day. Source: New York Division Bulletin /October 1966, article by Mr. Bernard Linder Tuscarora Almanac – October 10, 1962 – The Book of Wrecks Manhattan, New York IRT Division Two trains collided in the Lenox Avenue Yard. R-22’s 7429 and 7709 were badly damaged. This necessitated a brief return to the use of old cars while the yard tracks were repaired. Source: New York Division Bulletin / October 1962 Tuscarora Almanac – October 10, 1972 – The Book of First Runs Manhattan, New York Department of Marine & Aviation The Staten Island Ferry now collects a ten cent fair at the Whitehall Street Terminal. No fare is collected at Saint George. Nevertheless the fare remains at five cents each way. Source: New York Division Bulletin /October 1972 Tuscarora Almanac – October 10, 1984 – The Book of First Runs Buffalo, New York Niagara Falls Transit Light rail service returns to New York State for the first time since 1957. Niagara Falls Transit opens the first section of the Buffalo Metro between Auditorium and Theatre Stations. Source: New York Division Bulletin /October 2004 Larry, RedbirdR33 |
|
|
| (1451663) | |
Re: Tuscarora Almanac for October 10 |
|
|
Posted by Q4 on Tue Oct 10 12:07:01 2017, in response to Tuscarora Almanac for October 10, posted by IRTRedbirdR33 on Tue Oct 10 08:34:39 2017. What were the problems that were encountered with the Q-Types on the Franklin Avenue Shuttle? |
|
|
| (1451668) | |
Re: Tuscarora Almanac for October 10 |
|
|
Posted by Bill from Maspeth on Tue Oct 10 13:40:09 2017, in response to Re: Tuscarora Almanac for October 10, posted by Q4 on Tue Oct 10 12:07:01 2017. I would suggest that since only 2 of the 3 cars had motors, Franklin bound it is a big hill to Botanic Garden. If one motor dropped out, I doubt if it would make it up that grade.I worked the line for 18 months with R68's. I've had situations with a dead motor. Barely made it up that grade and thru the trip. Leaving Franklin, there is a less of aheavy grade. |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (1451675) | |
Re: Tuscarora Almanac for October 10 |
|
|
Posted by Elkeeper on Tue Oct 10 15:18:33 2017, in response to Re: Tuscarora Almanac for October 10, posted by Bill from Maspeth on Tue Oct 10 13:40:09 2017. So, did they also test the "C" cars? |
|
|
| (1451681) | |
Re: Tuscarora Almanac for October 10 |
|
|
Posted by IRTRedbirdR33 on Tue Oct 10 15:51:00 2017, in response to Re: Tuscarora Almanac for October 10, posted by Q4 on Tue Oct 10 12:07:01 2017. What were the problems that were encountered with the Q-Types on the Franklin Avenue Shuttle? I believe that they had trouble making the grade up to the el structures. Also I don't believe that the door sill extensions had been added at that time so there was a large gap at the stations. Larry, RedbirdR33 |
|
|
| (1451690) | |
Re: Tuscarora Almanac for October 10 |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Tue Oct 10 17:56:37 2017, in response to Re: Tuscarora Almanac for October 10, posted by Elkeeper on Tue Oct 10 15:18:33 2017. I’m not sure of that, but the Cs were better performers than the Qs after the Qs had their original trucks replaced with trucks removed from the composites. Maximum traction trucks do not perform well with trailers in the consist which is why with the steels, only one BX unit was allowed per train, BXs were banned from the Manny B and single BX units were not allowed to be operated in passenger service. For about a week in the mid 1950s, Multis were tried on the Fkln Shuttle but I don’t know why they didn’t last there. |
|
|
| (1451707) | |
Re: Tuscarora Almanac for October 10 |
|
|
Posted by W.B. on Tue Oct 10 22:06:19 2017, in response to Re: Tuscarora Almanac for October 10, posted by IRTRedbirdR33 on Tue Oct 10 15:51:00 2017. In the past, there were auctions on online auction sites for copies of contract drawings for the Fourth Avenue subway, and on one of them they specified a platform edge width of 4' 7¼" from track center to the face of the wooden rubbing board. I guess it was that spec for which the Q's were originally built. (What was the BRT elevated cars' width over the "face" of the door sill edges, anyway?) The drawings were also dated 1908 - before it was decided that wider cars would run on the line (and the platform edge width to face of rubbing board settled at 5' 2" which is today B Division standard - except for contract drawings of the Coney Island/Stillwell Avenue terminus where such distance was listed at 5' 3"). |
|
|
| (1451753) | |
Re: Tuscarora Almanac for October 10 |
|
|
Posted by Elkeeper on Wed Oct 11 15:53:12 2017, in response to Re: Tuscarora Almanac for October 10, posted by W.B. on Tue Oct 10 22:06:19 2017. Are you certain that these 1908 drawings were for the BRT? The IRT also had plans for a 4th Ave Brooklyn subway, back before the 1913 Dual Contracts. |
|
|
| (1451755) | |
Re: Tuscarora Almanac for October 10 |
|
|
Posted by Elkeeper on Wed Oct 11 16:02:16 2017, in response to Re: Tuscarora Almanac for October 10, posted by randyo on Tue Oct 10 17:56:37 2017. Randy, when the Composites were converted to Manhattan Elevated service, weren't these trucks also geared lower? Perhaps that may have been a factor, given the topography of the Frankin Shuttle. |
|
|
| (1451761) | |
Re: Tuscarora Almanac for October 10 |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Wed Oct 11 17:03:04 2017, in response to Re: Tuscarora Almanac for October 10, posted by W.B. on Tue Oct 10 22:06:19 2017. What happened with the 4 Av Subway as well as the Lex Av IRT and the Pelham and Jerome extensions was that the PSC decided to construct all new subways to accommodate the larger RR commuter coaches which were becoming state of the art at the time. While all the lines that eventually became BRT/BMT lines were constructed that way during construction, the PSC realized that it would be of no use to have the new IRT lines constructed that way since they would be connected to the “first subway” with its more restrictive clearances where only the smaller IRT sized cars could be operated. As a result, while the 7 Av IRT was built slightly larger than the original subway, it wasn’t built to the larger clearances of the Lex which had been started earlier. I’m not sure what clearances the Bkln IRT was built to, although I suspect it might be to BMT dimensions as well. In any case, once BRT management became aware of the clearances its new lines were being built to, they designed the largest subway car that could be practicably operated there and so came up with the 67 X 10 ft design. |
|
|
| (1451762) | |
Re: Tuscarora Almanac for October 10 |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Wed Oct 11 17:15:49 2017, in response to Re: Tuscarora Almanac for October 10, posted by Elkeeper on Wed Oct 11 16:02:16 2017. I hadn’t heard about any gearing change but with only one motor per truck, the weight was spread out making it easier on the manhattan el structures. Even with the, The composites were still too heavy for regular service on the 6 and 9 Av els except for 155 St station itself which had been reenforced for the NYCRR trains which terminated there years earlier. As operated on the Manhattan els, the Composites were all motors with no trailers which presented no problem, however when the Composite trucks were installed on the Qs with trailers in the consist, their performance was worse that the Composites. I didn’t realize that the Qs went to the Fkln shuttle around the same time they were being prepared for service on Myrtle, but it does make sense that they would operate poorly going upgrade most of the way from PPk to Fkln. An upgrade trip on Myrtle between Washington Av and Bway was equally demanding on the Qs as well. |
|
|
| (1451764) | |
Re: Tuscarora Almanac for October 10 |
|
|
Posted by Elkeeper on Wed Oct 11 17:56:33 2017, in response to Re: Tuscarora Almanac for October 10, posted by randyo on Wed Oct 11 17:15:49 2017. Thanks, Randy. Just one more question about the Composites. Why weren't the end doors converted to MUDC, like the Vestibuled cars? |
|
|
| (1451768) | |
Re: Tuscarora Almanac for October 10 |
|
|
Posted by Lou From Middletown NY on Wed Oct 11 18:40:04 2017, in response to Re: Tuscarora Almanac for October 10, posted by Elkeeper on Wed Oct 11 15:53:12 2017. Remember that the Fourth Ave subway was originally planned by, and construction started by the Triborough System before the dual system was fully planned, there was probably very little chance for the Interborough to get it. Pretty safe to say even that early date, everyone from the State on down was getting fairly fed up with the IRT... |
|
|
| (1451770) | |
Re: Tuscarora Almanac for October 10 |
|
|
Posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Wed Oct 11 18:54:59 2017, in response to Re: Tuscarora Almanac for October 10, posted by randyo on Wed Oct 11 17:03:04 2017. The 4th Ave. line has a taller roof over most of its length than other lines. Even the BMT Broadway line's roof isn't as tall. |
|
|
| (1451784) | |
Re: Tuscarora Almanac for October 10 |
|
|
Posted by zac on Wed Oct 11 20:29:04 2017, in response to Re: Tuscarora Almanac for October 10, posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Wed Oct 11 18:54:59 2017. Double deckers? |
|
|
| (1451803) | |
Re: Tuscarora Almanac for October 10 |
|
|
Posted by Q4 on Thu Oct 12 08:10:32 2017, in response to Re: Tuscarora Almanac for October 10, posted by Elkeeper on Wed Oct 11 17:56:33 2017. Thanks guys. |
|
|
| (1451831) | |
Re: Tuscarora Almanac for October 10 |
|
|
Posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Thu Oct 12 18:59:51 2017, in response to Re: Tuscarora Almanac for October 10, posted by Bill from Maspeth on Tue Oct 10 13:40:09 2017. Everybody out and push!:) |
|
|
| (1451860) | |
Re: Tuscarora Almanac for October 10 |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Fri Oct 13 15:14:12 2017, in response to Re: Tuscarora Almanac for October 10, posted by Elkeeper on Wed Oct 11 17:56:33 2017. The reason that the Composites had the trucks changed was to keep the weight down. I suspect that was also the same consideration that kept the IRT from making them MUDC. It was probably feared that the additional pneumatic door engine would add too much weight to the cars so I imagine it wasn’t done for that reason. Also the copper sheathing that was over the wood siding when the cars operated in the subway was removed also to reduce weight although I have seen a photo of a composite on the 2 Av El which shows the sheathing still in place. I also assume that the reason that the original Hi-V controls were removed from the Composites and replaced with new Lo-V parts was due to the lighter weight of the Lo-V components. The Hi-V components removed from the Composites were reworked and installed in the new steel car bodies which became the Flivvers. |
|
|
| (1451861) | |
Re: Tuscarora Almanac for October 10 |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Fri Oct 13 15:30:35 2017, in response to Re: Tuscarora Almanac for October 10, posted by Lou From Middletown NY on Wed Oct 11 18:40:04 2017. That was one of the reasons that a subway under Lex Av between 23 St and G/Cent to connect with the then under construction Lex Av Line N/O G/Cent was started. The IRT was displeased with the PSC assigning the 4 Av subway to the BRT that it withdrew from dual contract participation. With the prospect of the IRT not connecting the Lex Av Line to the original subway, the PSC started construction of the lower Lex. Additionally, the new lines in the Bronx that would not be directly connected to the existing lines, the Pelham and Jerome, would also go to the BRT instead of the IRT as extensions of a BRT operated Lex line. When the IRT realized that it would be more important for it to have the additional Bronx lines than an additional Bkln line, it reentered the negotiations and plans were again modified to set up the Lex and the new Bronx lines as they exist today and construction of the Lex line S/O G/Cent was stopped and the partially constructed tunnels filled in. |
|
|
| (1453332) | |
Re: Tuscarora Almanac for October 10 |
|
|
Posted by W.B. on Tue Oct 31 07:56:17 2017, in response to Re: Tuscarora Almanac for October 10, posted by zac on Wed Oct 11 20:29:04 2017. 15' from the bottom of the roof to the base of the rail. Whereas other BRT/BMT, Dual Contracts-era IRT, and IND is 13' 2". (That would make up to 14' 6-23/64" from the bottom of the roof to the top of the rail, as originally built, on the former, and 12' 8-23/64" on the latter.) |
|
|
