|
|
| R211a sets (1633686) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
|
| (1633687) | |
Re: R211a sets |
|
|
Posted by Stephen Bauman on Thu Jul 4 18:46:11 2024, in response to R211a sets, posted by Edwards! on Thu Jul 4 16:19:21 2024. Obviously because of CBTC service on the two particular lines, and minor increases in service to the Jamaica line,(which sees rush hour levels of passenger crowds during the evenings on 10 minute headways).CBTC does not increase service level capacity - the maximum number of trains per hour or minimum headway that trains can travel safely, without collisions. A new subway GTFS schedule was published by the MTA on 28 June. The same number of E and F trains are being scheduled for the day as in the previous schedule. |
|
|
| (1633690) | |
Re: R211a sets |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Fri Jul 5 00:21:53 2024, in response to Re: R211a sets, posted by Stephen Bauman on Thu Jul 4 18:46:11 2024. Again,if you read my post, you would have understood that I said "the East would receive modest service increases" because of the additional car sets.I also said that the R211a cars would Test its CBTC systems in Queens, because 8th Avenue, and Culver isn't fully operational as of yet. And, service increases for Queens Blvd were not mentioned,as Did say that even if that was the case,it wouldn't happen until all options were executed. Please stop trying to "correct me". I know what I wrote(rumors abound). |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (1633692) | |
Re: R211a sets |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Fri Jul 5 00:46:52 2024, in response to Re: R211a sets, posted by Stephen Bauman on Thu Jul 4 18:46:11 2024. The way it was presented was that CBTC IS supposed to increase capacity. otherwise, it was a waste of money to go to the expense of installing such a system when an upgraded version of the existing signal system would have sufficed. |
|
|
| (1633694) | |
Re: R211a sets |
|
|
Posted by LuchAAA on Fri Jul 5 01:20:49 2024, in response to Re: R211a sets, posted by randyo on Fri Jul 5 00:46:52 2024. Exactly. More TPH was one of the promised benefits. |
|
|
| (1633696) | |
Re: R211a sets |
|
|
Posted by Train Dude on Fri Jul 5 08:22:26 2024, in response to Re: R211a sets, posted by randyo on Fri Jul 5 00:46:52 2024. "The Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) is using communications-based train control (CBTC) technology to modernize and automate the New York City Subway. CBTC is a type of Automatic Train Operation (ATO) that can improve the subway system in several ways, including:Faster and more frequent service Trains can run closer together, allowing for more frequent service, shorter waits, and less crowding. More reliable service CBTC can reduce issues and speed up recovery when problems do occur. For example, the first lines converted to CBTC have on-time performance that's consistently near or above 90%. Smoother ride CBTC allows trains to travel at higher speeds without compromising safety. Better information CBTC can provide more information about train location and performance, which can help with troubleshooting and problem resolution. " |
|
|
| (1633697) | |
Re: R211a sets |
|
|
Posted by Stephen Bauman on Fri Jul 5 08:34:52 2024, in response to Re: R211a sets, posted by randyo on Fri Jul 5 00:46:52 2024. The way it was presented was that CBTC IS supposed to increase capacity...There were numerous discussions on SubTalk, when CBTC was proposed and being installed on the "Canary Sea" line. (There had been a translation from a Japanese technical article that translated Canarsie to "Canary Sea.") For the record: service level capacity is determined by: rolling stock operating characteristics (length, acceleration, service braking and emergency braking); station dwell time; and reaction time (the interval between when a dangerous situation exists to when emergency brakes are applied). The reaction time component includes the signal system. This is the smallest component of minimum headway. The reaction times for conventional block systems (basically the uncertainty due to block lengths) and CBTC (permitted communication delay before emergency brakes are applied ~ design is 2 seconds) are about the same. There is also an optimum operating speed to minimize headway, based on emergency braking rate and train length. If I remember correctly, it's about 30 mph for NYCT's 600 ft trains and 3.0 mph/sec emergency braking rate. The idea that CBTC would permit faster operation is also a myth. it was a waste of money to go to the expense of installing such a system It is a much bigger waste, when NYCT's retrofit per track-mile cost is compared to that of London and Paris. an upgraded version of the existing signal system would have sufficed. That depends on NYCT's definition of upgraded. Railway signaling had the misfortune of coming before digital circuit theory and design was understood. The railroad industry never upgraded their standards to make use of the technical and analytical advances in the second half of the 20th century. The FRA has cast the early 20th century digital circuit design techniques in stone. Railroad signaling may be the only application left for digital circuitry implemented with relays. It certainly is the only application for vital relays. The result is that signal system replacement is prohibitively expensive, if existing designs are followed. Digital circuitry is used in factories. Factory floor digital circuitry is implemented by special purpose computers called Programmable Logic Controllers (PLC). Their programming language is the ladder logic diagrams for the relay circuits they replace. PLC's are rugged, reliable, commodities and inexpensive. They require no (or minimal) programming because they use the existing circuit diagrams for the relay networks. Because they can be a 1-to-1 replacement for a relay network, they could be replaced piecemeal - as needed. At one of Andy Byford's early public meetings to sell CBTC, I asked him, "how much CBTC would increase existing service level capacity". He dodged the question. |
|
|
| (1633698) | |
Re: R211a sets |
|
|
Posted by Stephen Bauman on Fri Jul 5 09:21:01 2024, in response to Re: R211a sets, posted by Train Dude on Fri Jul 5 08:22:26 2024. For example, the first lines converted to CBTC have on-time performance that's consistently near or above 90%.From the BOT's 1949 Report - OTP BMT: 1945 - 95.86%; 1946 - 98.39%; 1947 - 98.35%; 1948 - 98.77%; 1st half 1949 - 99.19% IND: 1945 - 99.06%; 1946 - 99.20%; 1948 - 99.68%; 1948 - 99.22%; 1st half 1949 - 99.24% IRT: 1945 - 67.50%; 1946 - 74.86%; 1948 - 77.73%; 1948 - 86.30%; 1st half 1949 - 87.47% There's a very easy way to increase OTP: increase scheduled travel time. |
|
|
| (1633700) | |
Re: R211a sets |
|
|
Posted by Catfish 44 on Fri Jul 5 09:30:04 2024, in response to Re: R211a sets, posted by Stephen Bauman on Fri Jul 5 09:21:01 2024. There were smarter people running the system in those years. |
|
|
| (1633703) | |
Re: R211a sets |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Fri Jul 5 13:01:54 2024, in response to Re: R211a sets, posted by randyo on Fri Jul 5 00:46:52 2024. The way it was "presented",did Not specifically state that CBTC was the reason why I said what I said.The R211 cars was the topic,while CBTC on certain lines WAS the sub topic, (cause and effect). Also, the "Jamaica line" IS the Eastern Division, NOT THE QUEENS BLVD route (even though both terminate in Jamaica Queens). I Said the new cars will see some service on QUEENS BLVD routes, to test CBTC SYSTEMS car borne, and wayside. I mentioned the passenger crowds on the late evening J and M services, giving the fact that some R211 cars Will see services there, and they would help slightly increase said services BECAUSE OF THE ADDITIONAL EQUIPMENT. I NEVER MENTIONED SERVICE INCREASES FOR QUEENS BLVD, EVEN THOUGH WITH CBTC,TRAINS CAN BE OPERATED CLOSER TOGETHER, DECREASED HEADWAYS, PERHAPS ENOUGH TO INCREASE TPH. What's ridiculous is the fact that you and Steven cherry picked, and still got it wrong. I "presented" my post as stated. It is You, and that other fella who didn't understand What I wrote,and attempted to attach your "lacking" to me. |
|
|
| (1633704) | |
Re: R211a sets |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Fri Jul 5 13:09:04 2024, in response to Re: R211a sets, posted by Stephen Bauman on Fri Jul 5 08:34:52 2024. All of that, and you Still didn't "get it".Wasting too much time trying to be "Jimmy Neutron", trying to create "the narrative" within someone else's post. Whatever you intent, you were WRONG. YOU misidentified my statement intentionally. Choice words would be fitting here, and well deserved.. |
|
|
| (1633705) | |
Re: R211a sets |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Sat Jul 6 01:09:00 2024, in response to Re: R211a sets, posted by Stephen Bauman on Fri Jul 5 09:21:01 2024. I agree with that one but sometimes the suits who are in charge are trying to prove something different. back when I was still in the schedule office, another sched mgr and I did running time checks on the IRT between Nevins St and Fkln Ave and frond that most of the trains too 7 1/2 min. Out of all the trains we timed one made it in only 6 1/2 so the director of schedules whose initials are AEF decided to make the timetable runtime 6 1/2 min meaning all the trains would be late. Relying on the performance of one reckless T/O is not an intelligent way to operate and thank goodness, he is no longer around to infect the transit system with his incompetence. |
|
|
| (1633706) | |
Re: R211a sets |
|
|
Posted by LuchAAA on Sat Jul 6 01:29:11 2024, in response to Re: R211a sets, posted by randyo on Sat Jul 6 01:09:00 2024. So the manager took the fastest time and applied it. How military of him.He probably didn't know how to calculate an average. |
|
|
| (1633708) | |
Re: R211a sets |
|
|
Posted by Andrew Saucci on Sat Jul 6 11:27:14 2024, in response to Re: R211a sets, posted by randyo on Sat Jul 6 01:09:00 2024. Of course, the other side is that if the concept of increasing scheduled travel time is applied too liberally, and trains are constantly held for time, or mozy along at low speeds so as not to be early, it slows everyone down needlessly just to increase OTP statistics. The suits are good at that sort of thing too, unfortunately. But if the scheduled run time is unrealistically low, obviously it should be increased. |
|
|
| (1633709) | |
Re: R211a sets |
|
|
Posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Sat Jul 6 11:30:23 2024, in response to Re: R211a sets, posted by Andrew Saucci on Sat Jul 6 11:27:14 2024. It could be a contributing factor to the, "You'll get there - eventually," mindset. |
|
|
| (1633710) | |
Re: R211a sets |
|
|
Posted by New Flyer #857 on Sat Jul 6 12:15:11 2024, in response to R211a sets, posted by Edwards! on Thu Jul 4 16:19:21 2024. What's going on with the doors-open side indicators and exit/transfer screens? Most R211s don't seem to have them. |
|
|
| (1633711) | |
Re: R211a sets |
|
|
Posted by Stephen Bauman on Sat Jul 6 13:10:54 2024, in response to Re: R211a sets, posted by randyo on Sat Jul 6 01:09:00 2024. Out of all the trains we timed one made it in only 6 1/2 so the director of schedules whose initials are AEF decided to make the timetable runtime 6 1/2 min meaning all the trains would be late. Relying on the performance of one reckless T/O is not an intelligent way to operate and thank goodness, he is no longer around to infect the transit system with his incompetence.Here's a 40 year old anecdote from a friend who was a train operator and TWU shop steward. There was an R38 that always finished its route about 5 minutes ahead of schedule. It made no difference when it ran nor who the operator was. The TA eventually broke the train apart and exchanged cars with other trainsets. "Problem solved". Trains have been known to come out of the yard with a few non-functioning motors. Such trains will have lower balancing speeds and lower service braking rates. They will not be able to operate at the same speed as a trainset with all motors functioning, even with identical movements of the brake and throttle handles. It may well be that the 6 1/2 minute train was operating on all its motors, whereas the rest of the fleet wasn't. If the fast operation between Nevins and Franklin were repeated between other stations, it's likely 1 or more trainsets would be required to operate a rush hour schedule. This is a considerable cost savings. A thorough investigation of why a large percentage of trips cannot maintain a schedule might properly reveal the cause as poorly maintained equipment, rather than placing the blame of train operators or schedule makers. That investigation would not take place, if the schedule were padded to hide the equipment fault. |
|
|
| (1633712) | |
Re: R211a sets |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Sat Jul 6 14:24:02 2024, in response to Re: R211a sets, posted by Catfish 44 on Fri Jul 5 09:30:04 2024. Point taken.. however, the system was very different back Then, compared to Today. |
|
|
| (1633732) | |
Re: R211a sets |
|
|
Posted by 3-9 on Sun Jul 7 16:14:25 2024, in response to Re: R211a sets, posted by Stephen Bauman on Sat Jul 6 13:10:54 2024. What generally causes a motor to cut out like that? And would that be a frequent issue today, when maintenance is supposedly so much better? |
|
|
| (1633736) | |
Re: R211a sets |
|
|
Posted by Stephen Bauman on Sun Jul 7 17:14:10 2024, in response to Re: R211a sets, posted by 3-9 on Sun Jul 7 16:14:25 2024. What generally causes a motor to cut out like that?Somebody acquainted with maintenance and repair would be better equipped to answer. Here are two suspects. 1. Steel dust. The motors run hot. They have forced air ventilation to keep the wires cool. Steel dust could cut or short the wires or block the ventilation paths. This would cause motor wires to overheat and melt. 2. The brake fails to release. Traction voltage is applied. This means the motor which presents both an ohmic and reactive load. The reactive load is greatly reduced, if the rotor winding cannot turn. The motor's ohmic load alone cannot handle the applied current. The windings melt, causing a dead motor, before the brake might release. |
|
|
| (1633737) | |
Re: R211a sets |
|
|
Posted by Railman718 on Sun Jul 7 17:50:58 2024, in response to R211a sets, posted by Edwards! on Thu Jul 4 16:19:21 2024. You are correct ill just add this..Yes they are qualifying Queens Blvd Crews for the R211s.. If im correct every switch person at CTL, 179 Parsons E are R211 qualified along with 95th street. Swap with Some R160 Sets going to the A Line.. They are doing R211 testing for CTBC during the Midnights in Queens seen the Set myself in The Yard 4200 series... Queens Blvd if anything while CBTC work is on going is supplement city anyway(Local service earlier due to the G line CBTC work) with a 179th Street weekend shutdown coming soon for some weekends. |
|
|
| (1633738) | |
Re: R211a sets |
|
|
Posted by Railman718 on Sun Jul 7 17:55:46 2024, in response to R211a sets, posted by Edwards! on Thu Jul 4 16:19:21 2024. A general reply to this discussion not to the OP...Oh and i forgot to add with the revised flagging rules regarding CBTC operation in ATPM mode as well as ATO being in inhibited often expect even slower trips... No im not going to get into why that's happening Here on this site either... |
|
|
| (1633739) | |
Re: R211a sets |
|
|
Posted by Train Dude on Sun Jul 7 18:53:56 2024, in response to Re: R211a sets, posted by 3-9 on Sun Jul 7 16:14:25 2024. If you are speaking of DC Propulsion, thermostat common causes of a dead motor are group switch box issues, either a hi voltage contactor or a low voltage circuit board. Traction motors rarely fail save for not replacing brushes or in the winter getting packed with salt and ice.As for the NTTs, the AC traction motors are sealed -rarely causing a failure. The most common source of AC propulsion failure is an inverter failure. Dropped armatures due to bearing failures are common to both motor types but in general, quite rare overall. |
|
|
| (1633740) | |
Re: R211a sets |
|
|
Posted by Train Dude on Sun Jul 7 18:59:10 2024, in response to Re: R211a sets, posted by 3-9 on Sun Jul 7 16:14:25 2024. Sorry about the type-0If you are speaking of DC Propulsion, the most common causes of a dead motor are group switch box issues, either a hi voltage contactor or a low voltage circuit board. Traction motors rarely fail save for not replacing brushes or in the winter getting packed with salt and ice. As for the NTTs, the AC traction motors are sealed -rarely causing a failure. The most common source of AC propulsion failure is an inverter failure. Dropped armatures due to bearing failures are common to both motor types but in general, quite rare overall. |
|
|
| (1633741) | |
Re: R211a sets |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Sun Jul 7 20:26:18 2024, in response to Re: R211a sets, posted by Railman718 on Sun Jul 7 17:50:58 2024. Thank you for the confirmation.Haven't seen the set being put through it's paces,as of yet, since there is no longer time to "rail fan".. since moving to a new area. Hope things are well for you,Rob. |
|
|
| (1633747) | |
Re: R211a sets |
|
|
Posted by Railman718 on Mon Jul 8 11:29:35 2024, in response to Re: R211a sets, posted by Edwards! on Sun Jul 7 20:26:18 2024. Yeah they have that set in the back of the yard by the wash it’s hidden well..Indeed they are thank you two years five months I’m turning in the brake handle… |
|
|
| (1633757) | |
Re: R211a sets |
|
|
Posted by 3-9 on Tue Jul 9 00:14:04 2024, in response to Re: R211a sets, posted by Train Dude on Sun Jul 7 18:59:10 2024. ok, thanks |
|
|
| (1633764) | |
Re: R211a sets |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Tue Jul 9 15:18:30 2024, in response to Re: R211a sets, posted by Railman718 on Mon Jul 8 11:29:35 2024. Great to hear.You know, I "retired" myself sometime ago, but it seems like with my "private business",Im working harder than befor My son handled most of the systems, but he wanted to head back to school for his engineering degree.. So... It's all good, though. Gives me something to do, especially since I enjoy what I'm doing. Take care,Rob. |
|
|
| (1633825) | |
Re: R211a sets |
|
|
Posted by Railman718 on Thu Jul 11 08:42:32 2024, in response to Re: R211a sets, posted by Edwards! on Tue Jul 9 15:18:30 2024. Thanks brother you be well… |
|
|
