|
|
| Re: MTA’s Proposed 2025-2029 Capital Program (1635807) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
[1 2] |
||
|
Page 2 of 2 |
||
|
| (1635935) | |
Re: MTA’s Proposed 2025-2029 Capital Program |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Sun Sep 22 06:25:27 2024, in response to Re: MTA’s Proposed 2025-2029 Capital Program, posted by Osmosis Jones on Sun Sep 22 02:37:09 2024. Why not order the setup Amtrak is ordering for The Empire Service,coaches and all,but for commuter services?Or the cars Alstom is building for CDOT? They would meet the service requirements easy. It seems the LIRR always does the opposite of what would be the best thing for it's riders. |
|
|
| (1635939) | |
Re: MTA’s Proposed 2025-2029 Capital Program |
|
|
Posted by Mitch45 on Sun Sep 22 07:48:43 2024, in response to MTA’s Proposed 2025-2029 Capital Program, posted by Q4 on Wed Sep 18 12:21:17 2024. No SAS expansion? |
|
|
| (1635940) | |
Re: MTA’s Proposed 2025-2029 Capital Program |
|
|
Posted by Fisk Ave Jim on Sun Sep 22 09:00:34 2024, in response to Re: MTA’s Proposed 2025-2029 Capital Program, posted by Osmosis Jones on Sun Sep 22 02:37:09 2024. Well, if the LIRR is going to invest $337 mil on new diesels, you can most likely kiss goodbye any future electrification commitment in our (and probably grandkids) lifetime. |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (1635958) | |
Re: MTA’s Proposed 2025-2029 Capital Program |
|
|
Posted by chicagoMotorman on Sun Sep 22 18:48:16 2024, in response to Re: MTA’s Proposed 2025-2029 Capital Program, posted by Edwards! on Sun Sep 22 00:17:03 2024. 5% |
|
|
| (1635960) | |
Re: MTA’s Proposed 2025-2029 Capital Program |
|
|
Posted by chicagoMotorman on Sun Sep 22 18:48:39 2024, in response to Re: MTA’s Proposed 2025-2029 Capital Program, posted by Edwards! on Sun Sep 22 06:25:27 2024. 5% |
|
|
| (1635962) | |
Re: MTA’s Proposed 2025-2029 Capital Program |
|
|
Posted by sloth on Sun Sep 22 18:52:39 2024, in response to Re: MTA’s Proposed 2025-2029 Capital Program, posted by Edwards! on Sun Sep 22 00:17:03 2024. The electric battery M7 thing died a quiet death awhile back. For one thing they no longer have surplus MU cars |
|
|
| (1635969) | |
Re: MTA’s Proposed 2025-2029 Capital Program |
|
|
Posted by Bill from Maspeth on Sun Sep 22 22:04:14 2024, in response to Re: MTA’s Proposed 2025-2029 Capital Program, posted by AlM on Sun Sep 22 01:38:57 2024. Sure they do.The DE30's......the 500 number series locos. |
|
|
| (1635973) | |
Re: MTA’s Proposed 2025-2029 Capital Program |
|
|
Posted by Q4 on Sun Sep 22 23:05:44 2024, in response to Re: MTA’s Proposed 2025-2029 Capital Program, posted by Mitch45 on Sun Sep 22 07:48:43 2024. No. nothing for Phase III. |
|
|
| (1636266) | |
Re: MTA’s Proposed 2025-2029 Capital Program |
|
|
Posted by 3-9 on Mon Sep 30 18:46:03 2024, in response to Re: MTA’s Proposed 2025-2029 Capital Program, posted by Edwards! on Sun Sep 22 06:25:27 2024. If you're talking about trailer cars and not MUs, then I agree. I think it's high time that the LIRR stop buying specialized equipment that's compatible with nothing else in the MTA, if not the US. Because of that, it makes it a pain to get additional cars and locomotives for LIRR diesel trains. |
|
|
| (1636267) | |
Re: MTA’s Proposed 2025-2029 Capital Program |
|
|
Posted by 3-9 on Mon Sep 30 18:46:58 2024, in response to Re: MTA’s Proposed 2025-2029 Capital Program, posted by Osmosis Jones on Sun Sep 22 02:37:09 2024. More dual modes? Did the LIRR suddenly get more slots into Penn? |
|
|
| (1636268) | |
Re: MTA’s Proposed 2025-2029 Capital Program |
|
|
Posted by Fisk Ave Jim on Mon Sep 30 19:54:35 2024, in response to Re: MTA’s Proposed 2025-2029 Capital Program, posted by 3-9 on Mon Sep 30 18:46:03 2024. I don't get why the LIRR didn't order GE diesels that Metro Morth (and Amtrak) ordered instead of those EMD30AC "lemons". The GE diesels seemed to be much more reliable.After all, LIRR & Metro NOrth are two branches of the same tree, why there is still so many differences? |
|
|
| (1636273) | |
Re: MTA’s Proposed 2025-2029 Capital Program |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Tue Oct 1 00:27:32 2024, in response to Re: MTA’s Proposed 2025-2029 Capital Program, posted by 3-9 on Mon Sep 30 18:46:03 2024. Yes.Coaches. However,CDot has ordered a EMU that can run in non electric territory via battery. The |
|
|
| (1636332) | |
Re: MTA’s Proposed 2025-2029 Capital Program |
|
|
Posted by 3-9 on Wed Oct 2 22:48:59 2024, in response to Re: MTA’s Proposed 2025-2029 Capital Program, posted by Fisk Ave Jim on Mon Sep 30 19:54:35 2024. I heard the Genesis locomotives would have trouble clearing the overhang at Jamaica, but really, how difficult a problem is that? Multiple people must've lined their pockets with that one, since not one person objected to this. |
|
|
| (1636333) | |
Re: MTA’s Proposed 2025-2029 Capital Program |
|
|
Posted by 3-9 on Wed Oct 2 22:57:43 2024, in response to Re: MTA’s Proposed 2025-2029 Capital Program, posted by Edwards! on Tue Oct 1 00:27:32 2024. Let's see how far that goes. SPV-2024? |
|
|
| (1636339) | |
Re: MTA’s Proposed 2025-2029 Capital Program |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Thu Oct 3 00:41:28 2024, in response to Re: MTA’s Proposed 2025-2029 Capital Program, posted by 3-9 on Wed Oct 2 22:57:43 2024. You can go to the Alstom website for confirmation. It's pretty sweet.The cars look awesome. I'm hoping the TA would take a look at this contract for future projects. Makes sense |
|
|
| (1636362) | |
Re: MTA’s Proposed 2025-2029 Capital Program |
|
|
Posted by Andrew Saucci on Thu Oct 3 21:17:37 2024, in response to Re: MTA’s Proposed 2025-2029 Capital Program, posted by 3-9 on Mon Sep 30 18:46:58 2024. "More dual modes? Did the LIRR suddenly get more slots into Penn?"Maybe they'll order dual-mode trainsets that can run into Grand Central, unlike the ones that they have now. |
|
|
| (1636364) | |
Re: MTA’s Proposed 2025-2029 Capital Program |
|
|
Posted by Q4 on Thu Oct 3 22:41:49 2024, in response to Re: MTA’s Proposed 2025-2029 Capital Program, posted by Andrew Saucci on Thu Oct 3 21:17:37 2024. Besides the limited number of Dual Modes the LIRR has, they don’t go into Grand Central because the coaches they are attached to don’t fit in the original 63rd St. tunnel envelope (too high). |
|
|
| (1636365) | |
Re: MTA’s Proposed 2025-2029 Capital Program |
|
|
Posted by Osmosis Jones on Fri Oct 4 00:32:54 2024, in response to Re: MTA’s Proposed 2025-2029 Capital Program, posted by 3-9 on Mon Sep 30 18:46:58 2024. Unless Amtrak lets the LIRR use single-unit Charger consists into Penn, I think they ordered the 4 extra Chargers for increased fleet resiliency, and to avoid running them into the ground like they have the DM30s. Out of 27 Chargers, I’d expect only about 18 of them to be in service at any time. |
|
|
| (1636366) | |
Re: MTA’s Proposed 2025-2029 Capital Program |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Fri Oct 4 01:20:17 2024, in response to Re: MTA’s Proposed 2025-2029 Capital Program, posted by Q4 on Thu Oct 3 22:41:49 2024. Yeah,but it's the engines that present the problem.63rd st is subway car height,EMU. The LIRR engines are too tall to enter the tunnels,or tunnel leads to Grand Central. |
|
|
| (1636367) | |
Re: MTA’s Proposed 2025-2029 Capital Program |
|
|
Posted by Osmosis Jones on Fri Oct 4 01:23:28 2024, in response to Re: MTA’s Proposed 2025-2029 Capital Program, posted by Fisk Ave Jim on Mon Sep 30 19:54:35 2024. The LIRR got all fancy because they promised Port Jefferson riders electric service, but didn’t follow through, so they went the DM30/C3 route to try to distract Port Jefferson riders from the rug pulling they did. |
|
|
| (1636368) | |
Re: MTA’s Proposed 2025-2029 Capital Program |
|
|
Posted by Osmosis Jones on Fri Oct 4 01:42:08 2024, in response to Re: MTA’s Proposed 2025-2029 Capital Program, posted by Edwards! on Sun Sep 22 06:25:27 2024. The LIRR got $6 Billion out of the $68 Billion that the MTA is going to use for infrastructure projects in this Capital Plan, and they claim that isn’t enough to replace the C3s (a statement I’m neutral on, I’m not a finance guy lol). They’re focused on getting rid of the M3s (ordering 150+ more M9s) and DM30s only for now. If they’re ordering Chargers with Amtrak and Metro-North though, that’s a good sign that they learned about overly customizing things. |
|
|
| (1636377) | |
Re: MTA’s Proposed 2025-2029 Capital Program |
|
|
Posted by Q4 on Fri Oct 4 09:58:16 2024, in response to Re: MTA’s Proposed 2025-2029 Capital Program, posted by Edwards! on Fri Oct 4 01:20:17 2024. The coaches are higher. IIRC the horn on the locomotives might cause a problem but could be moved. |
|
|
| (1636379) | |
Re: MTA’s Proposed 2025-2029 Capital Program |
|
|
Posted by Fisk Ave Jim on Fri Oct 4 11:12:06 2024, in response to Re: MTA’s Proposed 2025-2029 Capital Program, posted by Edwards! on Fri Oct 4 01:20:17 2024. Yep. In addition, The tunnels were designed long before anyone thought of the LIRR ordering bi-level coaches. |
|
|
| (1636400) | |
Re: MTA’s Proposed 2025-2029 Capital Program |
|
|
Posted by 3-9 on Fri Oct 4 20:28:40 2024, in response to Re: MTA’s Proposed 2025-2029 Capital Program, posted by Fisk Ave Jim on Sat Sep 21 14:05:07 2024. I thought there was resistance to the electrification of Port Jefferson and Oyster Bay branches. Especially Oyster Bay, who didn't want to change the "character" of their part of LI. |
|
|
| (1636401) | |
Re: MTA’s Proposed 2025-2029 Capital Program |
|
|
Posted by 3-9 on Fri Oct 4 20:32:39 2024, in response to Re: MTA’s Proposed 2025-2029 Capital Program, posted by Osmosis Jones on Fri Oct 4 01:42:08 2024. Won't the Chargers still be electrically different from MN and Amtrak because they have to work with the C3s? |
|
|
| (1636408) | |
Re: MTA’s Proposed 2025-2029 Capital Program |
|
|
Posted by Osmosis Jones on Sat Oct 5 02:48:47 2024, in response to Re: MTA’s Proposed 2025-2029 Capital Program, posted by 3-9 on Fri Oct 4 20:32:39 2024. As built, the Chargers will be compatible with the C3s HEP-wise, but not communication-wise nor control-wise. Something to do with mismatching jumpers.I don’t think they’ll modify the Chargers to remedy that though, but rather buy adapter cables or interface devices that will allow the Charger’s system to communicate with the C3s systems. |
|
|
| (1636409) | |
Re: MTA’s Proposed 2025-2029 Capital Program |
|
|
Posted by Osmosis Jones on Sat Oct 5 03:10:03 2024, in response to Re: MTA’s Proposed 2025-2029 Capital Program, posted by 3-9 on Fri Oct 4 20:28:40 2024. I don’t know about Oyster Bay, but quite the contrary for Port Jefferson riders. Port Jefferson riders have been advocating for electrification since at least the 80s, but the LIRR prioritized Ronkonkoma and claimed they had no money left for Port Jefferson after that.The MTA released a report recently stating electrification to Port Jefferson would cost $3.1+ Billion as of this year, while the new Chargers they’re ordering will cost about a dozen million per unit for comparison. |
|
|
| (1636424) | |
Re: MTA’s Proposed 2025-2029 Capital Program |
|
|
Posted by Q4 on Sat Oct 5 11:49:24 2024, in response to Re: MTA’s Proposed 2025-2029 Capital Program, posted by Osmosis Jones on Sat Oct 5 03:10:03 2024. I was going through a PDF of the MTA’s 1968 A Program and it was calling for the electrification for the Mainline to Port Jefferson in two phases, first to Northport and then Port Jefferson. Good idea then and now. It also called for electrification to Ronkonkoma in two phases (completed in 1987). |
|
|
[1 2] |
||
|
Page 2 of 2 |
||
