|
|
| R-160 Update (313363) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
|
Page 1 of 9 |
|
|
|
| (313364) | |
Re: R-160 Update |
|
|
Posted by R30A on Wed Sep 20 22:50:14 2006, in response to R-160 Update, posted by Train Dude on Wed Sep 20 22:48:06 2006. Kawasaki cars? |
|
|
| (313367) | |
Re: R-160 Update |
|
|
Posted by Newkirk Plaza David on Wed Sep 20 22:52:06 2006, in response to R-160 Update, posted by Train Dude on Wed Sep 20 22:48:06 2006. Thanks for the update. I am expecting a flurry of new cars being sent to Yonkers starting next month for final assembly, then come back to NYC for testing. |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (313369) | |
Re: R-160 Update |
|
|
Posted by Train Dude on Wed Sep 20 22:53:54 2006, in response to Re: R-160 Update, posted by R30A on Wed Sep 20 22:50:14 2006. Yes! R-160B |
|
|
| (313373) | |
Re: R-160 Update |
|
|
Posted by Mr Mabstoa on Wed Sep 20 22:58:51 2006, in response to R-160 Update, posted by Train Dude on Wed Sep 20 22:48:06 2006. I heard a rumor from a cleaner at Stillwell that there will be a hold-up to the cars going into service because they are filthy inside and have to be scrubbed by car inspectors.Also I hope the motors drop out! |
|
|
| (313381) | |
Re: R-160 Update |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Wed Sep 20 23:06:29 2006, in response to R-160 Update, posted by Train Dude on Wed Sep 20 22:48:06 2006. I wish the TA luck. |
|
|
| (313418) | |
Re: R-160 Update |
|
|
Posted by Mr. Harlem Line on Thu Sep 21 00:18:40 2006, in response to R-160 Update, posted by Train Dude on Wed Sep 20 22:48:06 2006. Thanks for the update. Can't wait to find out what lines they'll run on. |
|
|
| (313445) | |
Re: R-160 Update |
|
|
Posted by Bee Flexible #823 on Thu Sep 21 01:10:20 2006, in response to R-160 Update, posted by Train Dude on Wed Sep 20 22:48:06 2006. Send them back! |
|
|
| (313451) | |
Re: R-160 Update |
|
|
Posted by J trainloco on Thu Sep 21 01:26:42 2006, in response to Re: R-160 Update, posted by Mr. Harlem Line on Thu Sep 21 00:18:40 2006. I'm willing to wager:A, F, N, Q. |
|
|
| (313453) | |
Re: R-160 Update |
|
|
Posted by R7 Torresdale Express on Thu Sep 21 01:28:36 2006, in response to Re: R-160 Update, posted by Bee Flexible #823 on Thu Sep 21 01:10:20 2006. Gary got run over by an R160...Walking home from our house Christmas Eve... You can say there's no such thing as 76th Street... But as for Steve Krakowski, he believes... |
|
|
| (313455) | |
Re: R-160 Update |
|
|
Posted by R7 Torresdale Express on Thu Sep 21 01:32:32 2006, in response to Re: R-160 Update, posted by J trainloco on Thu Sep 21 01:26:42 2006. I think it'll be more like A, C, N, Q, W. |
|
|
| (313460) | |
Re: R-160 Update |
|
|
Posted by monorail on Thu Sep 21 01:35:38 2006, in response to Re: R-160 Update, posted by R7 Torresdale Express on Thu Sep 21 01:28:36 2006. good one! |
|
|
| (313461) | |
Re: R-160 Update |
|
|
Posted by J trainloco on Thu Sep 21 01:35:51 2006, in response to Re: R-160 Update, posted by R7 Torresdale Express on Thu Sep 21 01:32:32 2006. Err, yes, C and W should have been included with their respective lines. However, some things I've seen at livingston seem to jive with the F getting R160s. Jamaica will most likely get some R160s. |
|
|
| (313506) | |
Re: R-160 Update |
|
|
Posted by North-Easten T/O on Thu Sep 21 07:31:10 2006, in response to Re: R-160 Update, posted by J trainloco on Thu Sep 21 01:35:51 2006. Well then I guess then I will have to be trained on them for nexted pick, I will have a "A" job on Friday and a "C" job on Saturday. I can't wait!Robert |
|
|
| (313507) | |
Re: R-160 Update |
|
|
Posted by North-Easten T/O on Thu Sep 21 07:32:02 2006, in response to Re: R-160 Update, posted by North-Easten T/O on Thu Sep 21 07:31:10 2006. Next not Nexted, I don't knwo were I came up with this one.Robert |
|
|
| (313735) | |
Re: R-160 Update |
|
|
Posted by South Brooklyn Railway on Thu Sep 21 16:14:38 2006, in response to Re: R-160 Update, posted by J trainloco on Thu Sep 21 01:26:42 2006. There not getting rid of the R46's on the F. |
|
|
| (313736) | |
Re: R-160 Update |
|
|
Posted by Newkirk Plaza David on Thu Sep 21 16:16:27 2006, in response to Re: R-160 Update, posted by J trainloco on Thu Sep 21 01:26:42 2006. A, C, G, N, Q, J/Z, M |
|
|
| (313739) | |
Re: R-160 Update |
|
|
Posted by (3) Livonia Ave. Local on Thu Sep 21 16:19:52 2006, in response to R-160 Update, posted by Train Dude on Wed Sep 20 22:48:06 2006. Great news. |
|
|
| (313743) | |
Re: R-160 Update |
|
|
Posted by Jace on Thu Sep 21 16:35:10 2006, in response to Re: R-160 Update, posted by Train Dude on Wed Sep 20 22:53:54 2006. One train (2 units) are the first Siemens cars - they'll probalby be busy testing these cars too. |
|
|
| (313758) | |
Re: R-160 Update |
|
|
Posted by This is Grand on Thu Sep 21 16:55:20 2006, in response to Re: R-160 Update, posted by South Brooklyn Railway on Thu Sep 21 16:14:38 2006.  PROFF?
|
|
|
| (313768) | |
Re: R-160 Update |
|
|
Posted by J trainloco on Thu Sep 21 17:10:35 2006, in response to Re: R-160 Update, posted by South Brooklyn Railway on Thu Sep 21 16:14:38 2006. Absolutely, 100% wrong. NYCT has indicated that the 3rd line to get CBTC will be the F. If that happens within 10 years, expect the R46's to move somewhere else at the twilight of their careers. |
|
|
| (313769) | |
Re: R-160 Update |
|
|
Posted by J trainloco on Thu Sep 21 17:11:44 2006, in response to Re: R-160 Update, posted by Newkirk Plaza David on Thu Sep 21 16:16:27 2006. Why would the G get R160's?Anyway, I've seen documents that suggest (but do not state for a certainty at all) that the A, F, Q and N will all recieve at least some R160s. |
|
|
| (313770) | |
Re: R-160 Update |
|
|
Posted by This is Grand on Thu Sep 21 17:13:49 2006, in response to Re: R-160 Update, posted by J trainloco on Thu Sep 21 01:26:42 2006. AAGH, no more speculating on the R160s PLEASE!!!
|
|
|
| (313771) | |
Re: R-160 Update |
|
|
Posted by South Brooklyn Railway on Thu Sep 21 17:14:24 2006, in response to Re: R-160 Update, posted by This is Grand on Thu Sep 21 16:55:20 2006. Then where would the R46's go? |
|
|
| (313773) | |
Re: R-160 Update |
|
|
Posted by This is Grand on Thu Sep 21 17:15:42 2006, in response to Re: R-160 Update, posted by South Brooklyn Railway on Thu Sep 21 17:14:24 2006. Why don't we wait and see what will happen instead of propagating all this idle speculation?
|
|
|
| (313776) | |
Re: R-160 Update |
|
|
Posted by South Brooklyn Railway on Thu Sep 21 17:16:58 2006, in response to Re: R-160 Update, posted by This is Grand on Thu Sep 21 17:15:42 2006. Exactly. But people on this board will still speculate. |
|
|
| (313789) | |
Re: R-160 Update |
|
|
Posted by J trainloco on Thu Sep 21 17:30:04 2006, in response to Re: R-160 Update, posted by This is Grand on Thu Sep 21 17:13:49 2006. No! More Speculation! NOW!!!! Bwahaha. |
|
|
| (313791) | |
Re: R-160 Update |
|
|
Posted by J trainloco on Thu Sep 21 17:30:39 2006, in response to Re: R-160 Update, posted by South Brooklyn Railway on Thu Sep 21 17:16:58 2006. Including yourself. |
|
|
| (313792) | |
Re: R-160 Update |
|
|
Posted by South Brooklyn Railway on Thu Sep 21 17:32:15 2006, in response to Re: R-160 Update, posted by South Brooklyn Railway on Thu Sep 21 17:16:58 2006. Nope. |
|
|
| (313880) | |
Re: R-160 Update |
|
|
Posted by Eric B on Thu Sep 21 21:24:34 2006, in response to Re: R-160 Update, posted by J trainloco on Thu Sep 21 17:11:44 2006. It seems the 60 160A2 cars were ordered at such a quantity for the G.Also, whenever Jamaica does get new cars, I would think they would go to the E, which they want 60 ft cars on because they load better. So the E would no longer have to have old cars in order to have the greater number of doors. |
|
|
| (313886) | |
Re: R-160 Update |
|
|
Posted by Train Dude on Thu Sep 21 21:36:21 2006, in response to Re: R-160 Update, posted by Eric B on Thu Sep 21 21:24:34 2006. The number was actually 64 IIRC but they were not for the G line. The additional purchace was to make the East all R-160/R-143. I think most of the T/Os who work the G will tell you (unless things have changed recently), when using 60' cars on the line, RTO is required to operate 10-car trains. Hence 64 R-160s would not be enough. |
|
|
| (313891) | |
Re: R-160 Update |
|
|
Posted by R68A - 5200 on Thu Sep 21 21:49:02 2006, in response to Re: R-160 Update, posted by Train Dude on Thu Sep 21 21:36:21 2006. Isn't that because the existing 60' cars to run on the G Line only have corner cabs? |
|
|
| (313901) | |
Re: R-160 Update |
|
|
Posted by Eric B on Thu Sep 21 22:10:27 2006, in response to Re: R-160 Update, posted by Train Dude on Thu Sep 21 21:36:21 2006. No, it's 60 cars, or 12 five car units, (64 is not divisible by 5) which would be operated as 5 car trains on the G.Four car units are for the East, but that order (160A1) is 340 cars. |
|
|
| (313966) | |
Re: R-160 Update |
|
|
Posted by Bee Flexible #823 on Thu Sep 21 23:58:13 2006, in response to Re: R-160 Update, posted by R7 Torresdale Express on Thu Sep 21 01:28:36 2006. It's only a few months away. Good one Dante. |
|
|
| (313968) | |
Re: R-160 Update |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Fri Sep 22 00:00:52 2006, in response to Re: R-160 Update, posted by R7 Torresdale Express on Thu Sep 21 01:28:36 2006. 8-) |
|
|
| (313969) | |
Re: R-160 Update |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Fri Sep 22 00:00:55 2006, in response to Re: R-160 Update, posted by R7 Torresdale Express on Thu Sep 21 01:28:36 2006. 8-) |
|
|
| (313970) | |
Re: R-160 Update |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Fri Sep 22 00:00:59 2006, in response to Re: R-160 Update, posted by R7 Torresdale Express on Thu Sep 21 01:28:36 2006. 8-) |
|
|
| (313975) | |
Re: R-160 Update |
|
|
Posted by R7 Torresdale Express on Fri Sep 22 00:09:51 2006, in response to Re: R-160 Update, posted by This is Grand on Thu Sep 21 17:13:49 2006. All I know is I don't wanna be there when McCrappers hears the Siemens set. |
|
|
| (314181) | |
Re: R-160 Update |
|
|
Posted by J trainloco on Fri Sep 22 13:20:41 2006, in response to Re: R-160 Update, posted by R68A - 5200 on Thu Sep 21 21:49:02 2006. Yeah, and on top of that, they can't be operated in 300' long segments, meaning the G train's C/R boards aren't going to work. |
|
|
| (314186) | |
Re: R-160 Update |
|
|
Posted by Grand Concourse on Fri Sep 22 13:25:59 2006, in response to Re: R-160 Update, posted by Jace on Thu Sep 21 16:35:10 2006. How come the R160B's aren't using the Siemens propulsion for all its cars? I thought when tested on the R143 a few yrs ago they did fine? |
|
|
| (314193) | |
Re: R-160 Update |
|
|
Posted by Grand Concourse on Fri Sep 22 13:29:19 2006, in response to Re: R-160 Update, posted by J trainloco on Thu Sep 21 17:10:35 2006. Well the E, G, R, V would all be candidates unless the MTA is crazy enough to move every single R46's to another yard. |
|
|
| (314196) | |
Re: R-160 Update |
|
|
Posted by Grand Concourse on Fri Sep 22 13:31:49 2006, in response to Re: R-160 Update, posted by R7 Torresdale Express on Thu Sep 21 01:28:36 2006. LMAO. |
|
|
| (314197) | |
Re: R-160 Update |
|
|
Posted by J trainloco on Fri Sep 22 13:33:04 2006, in response to Re: R-160 Update, posted by Grand Concourse on Fri Sep 22 13:29:19 2006. Most likely, CBTC would be installed on the QB express tracks as part of the project, meaning the E would NOT be a candidate. |
|
|
| (314212) | |
Re: R-160 Update |
|
|
Posted by Grand Concourse on Fri Sep 22 13:43:46 2006, in response to Re: R-160 Update, posted by J trainloco on Fri Sep 22 13:33:04 2006. They must be crazy, they can't get the CBTC to work on an isolated L line and they are thinking of implimenting this on the QB line?Unless it is just the F from Church Av to Stillwell, I don't see it working on the F on QB. |
|
|
| (314221) | |
Re: R-160 Update |
|
|
Posted by J trainloco on Fri Sep 22 13:49:08 2006, in response to Re: R-160 Update, posted by Grand Concourse on Fri Sep 22 13:43:46 2006. The whole point of CBTC is to increase capacity. The main line they want to implement it on IS QB. The reason why Canarsie was chosen first was to work out the bugs. It seems that they got that part right.CBTC will increase capacity on the QB and Flushing lines when it gets the bugs worked out. |
|
|
| (314270) | |
Re: R-160 Update |
|
|
Posted by Railman718 on Fri Sep 22 14:41:07 2006, in response to Re: R-160 Update, posted by J trainloco on Fri Sep 22 13:49:08 2006. That will be a while on the 7 line that i can tell you they have lots of track and switches and signals to replace..Not saying they wont do it but just dont hold your breath waiting on it.. |
|
|
| (314273) | |
Re: R-160 Update |
|
|
Posted by J trainloco on Fri Sep 22 14:43:16 2006, in response to Re: R-160 Update, posted by Railman718 on Fri Sep 22 14:41:07 2006. They aren't supposed to do it until the L is finished. That aint happening any time soon.BTW, if they install CBTC, they don't need to install new signals. |
|
|
| (314327) | |
Re: R-160 Update |
|
|
Posted by South Brooklyn Railway on Fri Sep 22 16:15:45 2006, in response to Re: R-160 Update, posted by R7 Torresdale Express on Fri Sep 22 00:09:51 2006. I'm sure there are more cars that we can move to avoid him. |
|
|
| (314330) | |
R62'son the 7Re: R-160 Update |
|
|
Posted by South Brooklyn Railway on Fri Sep 22 16:28:28 2006, in response to Re: R-160 Update, posted by Railman718 on Fri Sep 22 14:41:07 2006. If the 7 will get R142S's soon, then where would those R62's go then? |
|
|
| (314345) | |
Re: R-160 Update |
|
|
Posted by Subterranean Railway on Fri Sep 22 17:16:15 2006, in response to Re: R-160 Update, posted by South Brooklyn Railway on Thu Sep 21 17:32:15 2006. Eh?You're clearly speculating. |
|
|
|
|
Page 1 of 9 |
|
