|
|
| Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)) (381329) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
Page 2 of 6 |
||
|
| (381616) | |
Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)) |
|
|
Posted by BMTLines on Mon Feb 5 00:24:05 2007, in response to Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)), posted by The Port of Authority on Mon Feb 5 00:21:13 2007. Damn - that cab is bigger than my living room ;-) |
|
|
| (381624) | |
Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)) |
|
|
Posted by 5119 on Mon Feb 5 00:30:14 2007, in response to Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)), posted by The Port of Authority on Sun Feb 4 20:02:00 2007. If you're talking about "old cars," then I'll go back to the "real old cars," the ones I preferred. The Lo-V's, R 1/9's, BMT Stabdards, and Triplexes all had character and yes,while not having modern amenities like arir-conditioning, fast acceleration/deceleration, were, to me, much more fun to ride, with their geared sounds, windmill fans which, surprisingly kept you cooled in the summer, and the heated seats in the winter. Andthe lasted almost 50 years inservice, even after the TA initiated a policy of deferred maintenance in 1956. If thany of these cars had performance issues, it was the Lo-V's, which never realized their speed potential due to the fact that they had to pull trailer cars. (10 car train, 7 motors, 3 trailers.) |
|
|
| (381658) | |
Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)) |
|
|
Posted by salaamallah@hotmail.com on Mon Feb 5 02:01:42 2007, in response to Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)), posted by Train Dude on Sun Feb 4 22:34:14 2007. okthen i am the one getting .........old lmao !! |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (381659) | |
Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)) |
|
|
Posted by salaamallah@hotmail.com on Mon Feb 5 02:02:35 2007, in response to Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)), posted by (X) 2nd Avenue Local on Sun Feb 4 22:44:56 2007. and no RFW to remember them with either !!lmao |
|
|
| (381700) | |
Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)) |
|
|
Posted by Mr. D - TYPE on Mon Feb 5 08:30:38 2007, in response to Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)), posted by 5119 on Mon Feb 5 00:30:14 2007. You are so right. You picked the best of the best, hands down. I would only add the R-32`S. |
|
|
| (381704) | |
Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)) |
|
|
Posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Mon Feb 5 08:41:04 2007, in response to Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)), posted by 5119 on Mon Feb 5 00:30:14 2007. Same here. The R-1/9s and R-10s were at the top of my list of all time favorites. I also rode on the BMT standards on the Canarsie, but just plain did not like them. Never rode on the Triplexes or prewar IRT equipment, though.Sadly, the Triplexes were yanked way too soon. None of them made it to 40 years except for the pilot units. What made it especially galling was the fact that unlike the R-16s, which were mercifully put out of their misery, the Triplexes were still running beautifully when sent to slaughter. |
|
|
| (381705) | |
Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (rolling stock decisions and issues) |
|
|
Posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Mon Feb 5 08:42:20 2007, in response to Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (rolling stock decisions and issues), posted by BMTLines on Sun Feb 4 21:40:07 2007. IMHO the premature slaughter of the Triplexes takes the cake. |
|
|
| (381706) | |
Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (rolling stock decisions and issues) |
|
|
Posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Mon Feb 5 08:42:54 2007, in response to Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (rolling stock decisions and issues), posted by (X) 2nd Avenue Local on Sun Feb 4 23:16:04 2007. I wish they'd bring back front destination signs. |
|
|
| (381707) | |
Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (rolling stock decisions and issues) |
|
|
Posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Mon Feb 5 08:44:31 2007, in response to Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (rolling stock decisions and issues), posted by (X) 2nd Avenue Local on Sun Feb 4 23:13:40 2007. The original door engines on the R-16s were problematic, especially when it snowed. I still remember when they still had vertical door pockets and were clean. |
|
|
| (381710) | |
Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)) |
|
|
Posted by Fulton Frank on Mon Feb 5 08:53:07 2007, in response to Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)), posted by TonyBroadway on Sun Feb 4 18:23:52 2007. very well said...... |
|
|
| (381739) | |
Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)) |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Feb 5 10:34:33 2007, in response to Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)), posted by (SIR) North Shore Line on Sun Feb 4 19:11:17 2007. Supposedly they were a bitch to maintain, but those were the first generation D types and multisections. Cars are now permanently linked into 4 or 5 car sets, and with an old system full of sharp curves, articulation should be revisited. |
|
|
| (381740) | |
Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)) |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Feb 5 10:37:03 2007, in response to Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)), posted by Rail Blue on Sun Feb 4 19:33:42 2007. And each 5 car set would only have 6 trucks, as opposed to 10. Naturally, these trucks would have to be stronger and have more horsepower. But fewer numbers means less maintenance $$$ spent. |
|
|
| (381762) | |
Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (rolling stock decisions and issues) |
|
|
Posted by (X) 2nd Avenue Local on Mon Feb 5 11:25:27 2007, in response to Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (rolling stock decisions and issues), posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Mon Feb 5 08:42:54 2007. Yes, and crisp clear LED, at that! |
|
|
| (381765) | |
Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (rolling stock decisions and issues) |
|
|
Posted by Rapid Transit Guy on Mon Feb 5 11:30:07 2007, in response to Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (rolling stock decisions and issues), posted by (X) 2nd Avenue Local on Sun Feb 4 23:13:40 2007. .....flickering lights on them, even though that was a standard occurence on all pre-GOH laht and stainless steel/carbon steel mixed cars. To me, I felt like once the lights would start flickering they would go out and not come back on.That's one of the things that made them so cool. I like them best on the R-36WF's on the (7). |
|
|
| (381778) | |
Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (rolling stock decisions and issues) |
|
|
Posted by (X) 2nd Avenue Local on Mon Feb 5 11:45:00 2007, in response to Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (rolling stock decisions and issues), posted by Rapid Transit Guy on Mon Feb 5 11:30:07 2007. Yeah, but the (7) was different. I've ridden that line for years, so I was mor familiar with it and the R-36WF's, so I've grown accustomed to it. However, infrequent rides on the R-16's whenever they appeared on the (RR)--when it was running to Astoria--was a whole different experience. They looked different, felt different from the IRT cars, and my first memories of dark subway cars for an extended period of time, was on the R-16's, and in my 8-10 year old mind, that left quite an impression on me. |
|
|
| (381800) | |
Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (rolling stock decisions and issues) |
|
|
Posted by Rapid Transit Guy on Mon Feb 5 12:23:15 2007, in response to Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (rolling stock decisions and issues), posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Mon Feb 5 08:44:31 2007. Any idea why the original doors were problematic? I heard the R-16's suffered performance issues when it snowed, too. |
|
|
| (381805) | |
Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (rolling stock decisions and issues) |
|
|
Posted by subway nutz on Mon Feb 5 12:29:30 2007, in response to Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (rolling stock decisions and issues), posted by (X) 2nd Avenue Local on Sun Feb 4 23:13:40 2007. Ha! you got caught in the R-16 blitz! |
|
|
| (381810) | |
Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (rolling stock decisions and issues) |
|
|
Posted by (X) 2nd Avenue Local on Mon Feb 5 12:46:23 2007, in response to Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (rolling stock decisions and issues), posted by subway nutz on Mon Feb 5 12:29:30 2007. The R-16 blitz? |
|
|
| (381814) | |
Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (rolling stock decisions and issues) |
|
|
Posted by subway nutz on Mon Feb 5 12:54:51 2007, in response to Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (rolling stock decisions and issues), posted by (X) 2nd Avenue Local on Mon Feb 5 12:46:23 2007. Yeah, that's the term is use to refer to them whenever they start acting up in revenue service. |
|
|
| (381815) | |
Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (rolling stock decisions and issues) |
|
|
Posted by (X) 2nd Avenue Local on Mon Feb 5 13:00:41 2007, in response to Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (rolling stock decisions and issues), posted by subway nutz on Mon Feb 5 12:54:51 2007. Though I vaguely recall the whole ride on the R-16's from one point to another (from Queensborough Plaza to 34th Street), I think it's safe to say that I made it to my destination in one piece. |
|
|
| (381816) | |
Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (rolling stock decisions and issues) |
|
|
Posted by subway nutz on Mon Feb 5 13:04:49 2007, in response to Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (rolling stock decisions and issues), posted by (X) 2nd Avenue Local on Mon Feb 5 13:00:41 2007. "Though I vaguely recall the whole ride on the R-16's from one point to another (from Queensborough Plaza to 34th Street), I think it's safe to say that I made it to my destination in one piece."On a train in a compromised state. |
|
|
| (381819) | |
Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (rolling stock decisions and issues) |
|
|
Posted by (X) 2nd Avenue Local on Mon Feb 5 13:10:09 2007, in response to Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (rolling stock decisions and issues), posted by subway nutz on Mon Feb 5 13:04:49 2007. You're so silly. But you did brought up a colorful point, though, about the R-16's--opeationally compromised and debilitated were it main characteristics. |
|
|
| (381826) | |
Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)) |
|
|
Posted by Rail Blue on Mon Feb 5 13:30:39 2007, in response to Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)), posted by BMTLines on Mon Feb 5 00:24:05 2007. They need ATO! |
|
|
| (381828) | |
Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)) |
|
|
Posted by Wado MP73 on Mon Feb 5 13:42:36 2007, in response to Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)), posted by WillD on Sun Feb 4 23:32:56 2007. According to this pdf file on RATP's site, the MF2000 has been running on line to since 1/17. The MF2000 is NOT articulated. Look again at the GIF file. |
|
|
| (381829) | |
Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)) |
|
|
Posted by Wado MP73 on Mon Feb 5 13:44:03 2007, in response to Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)), posted by R4 Bryn Mawr LCL/R5 Paoli EXP on Sun Feb 4 20:32:16 2007. How? |
|
|
| (381835) | |
Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (rolling stock decisions and issues) |
|
|
Posted by Rail Blue on Mon Feb 5 13:59:54 2007, in response to Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (rolling stock decisions and issues), posted by (X) 2nd Avenue Local on Sun Feb 4 23:13:40 2007. That was the scary part. I didn't like the flickering lights on them, even though that was a standard occurence on all pre-GOH laht and stainless steel/carbon steel mixed cars.And you can still find this phenomenon in London on the C Stock - all those flat junctions make the lights flicker like a Christmas tree. |
|
|
| (381865) | |
Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)) |
|
|
Posted by The Port of Authority on Mon Feb 5 16:58:22 2007, in response to Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)), posted by 5119 on Mon Feb 5 00:30:14 2007. Those sound exciting... but sadly those were years before my time. |
|
|
| (382016) | |
Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)) |
|
|
Posted by subway nutz on Mon Feb 5 20:20:43 2007, in response to Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)), posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Mon Feb 5 08:41:04 2007. Now the Standards were a classy piece of equipment. Their sturdiness and durability was an asset. They didn't look cheaply built like the post-war laht fleets. So were the R1/R9's. The R10's I didn't particularly care for.But mercifully the R16's are all gone. Thankfully the MTA only ordered 200 of those suckers. Can you imagine if they were 500, 800 or even 1,000 of those cars, and all were operationally compromised? What state would be subway be in? |
|
|
| (382041) | |
Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)) |
|
|
Posted by Rapid Transit Guy on Mon Feb 5 21:13:27 2007, in response to Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)), posted by subway nutz on Mon Feb 5 20:20:43 2007. I don't know, but there would've been enough replacement cars ordered to match that number, so they would've likely went out the same way as the last 190 or so cars. |
|
|
| (382051) | |
Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)) |
|
|
Posted by subway nutz on Mon Feb 5 21:43:37 2007, in response to Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)), posted by Rapid Transit Guy on Mon Feb 5 21:13:27 2007. There were 200 cars in the original R16 contract, not 190. |
|
|
| (382056) | |
Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)) |
|
|
Posted by Rapid Transit Guy on Mon Feb 5 21:56:29 2007, in response to Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)), posted by subway nutz on Mon Feb 5 21:43:37 2007. I know, but some cars were destroyed in accidents and later scrapped. |
|
|
| (382127) | |
Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)) |
|
|
Posted by SUBWAYMAN on Tue Feb 6 02:33:37 2007, in response to Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)), posted by Rapid Transit Guy on Mon Feb 5 21:56:29 2007. There were 2 R16s that were destroyed in accidents 6494 in 1957 and 6304 in 1970. |
|
|
| (382187) | |
Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)) |
|
|
Posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Tue Feb 6 09:56:43 2007, in response to Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)), posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Feb 5 10:37:03 2007. And each 5 car set would only have 6 trucks, as opposed to 10. Naturally, these trucks would have to be stronger and have more horsepower. But fewer numbers means less maintenance $$$ spent.But it also means that if one car is out of service, the whole set has to go out of service. That means more cars have to be ordered to keep the same spare ratio. It also means more shop space is taken up when one car is in for maintenance, because you can't leave the adjacent cars out in the yard with a truck missing. |
|
|
| (382191) | |
Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)) |
|
|
Posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Tue Feb 6 09:59:16 2007, in response to Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)), posted by Wado MP73 on Sun Feb 4 19:42:29 2007. Once again, I'd like to remind people that you don't need articulation for that. It's just that NYCTA does not order their cars with between-car diaphragms and plates.Diaphragms were considered for the R-142 order. Here's the mockup, made from an R-17: 
|
|
|
| (382242) | |
Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)) |
|
|
Posted by Wado MP73 on Tue Feb 6 12:16:35 2007, in response to Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)), posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Tue Feb 6 09:56:43 2007. But it also means that if one car is out of service, the whole set has to go out of service.The same goes with R142 and later cars (and non single R62 and R68). because you can't leave the adjacent cars out in the yard with a truck missing. All you need is a spare truck or a special truck for this purpose. |
|
|
| (382243) | |
Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)) |
|
|
Posted by Wado MP73 on Tue Feb 6 12:17:52 2007, in response to Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)), posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Tue Feb 6 09:59:16 2007. Do you know the reason it wasn't adopted? |
|
|
| (382261) | |
Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)) |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Tue Feb 6 12:43:01 2007, in response to Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)), posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Tue Feb 6 09:56:43 2007. That's already the case with the new tech cars (and the 75' cars as well). One car needs work, the entire set must be withdrawn. That's why I said articulation makes more sense now than it did 20-30 years ago. |
|
|
| (382264) | |
Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)) |
|
|
Posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Tue Feb 6 12:46:30 2007, in response to Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)), posted by Wado MP73 on Tue Feb 6 12:16:35 2007. The same goes with R142 and later cars (and non single R62 and R68).A cars can be swapped with A cars and B cars can be swapped with B cars much more easily than an articulated car could be swapped. All you need is a spare truck or a special truck for this purpose. That's still much more labor-intensive than each car having its own pair of trucks. |
|
|
| (382267) | |
Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)) |
|
|
Posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Tue Feb 6 12:48:12 2007, in response to Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)), posted by Wado MP73 on Tue Feb 6 12:17:52 2007. Do you know the reason it wasn't adopted?No. I'm guessing cost. |
|
|
| (382268) | |
Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)) |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Tue Feb 6 12:50:53 2007, in response to Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)), posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Tue Feb 6 12:46:30 2007. How often do you see this happen? Any time you see cars swapped in sets, it's usually permanent (like with the mismatched R44 sets). I've never seen a mismatched R142/143/160 set in service, ever. |
|
|
| (382292) | |
Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)) |
|
|
Posted by Future Motorman on Tue Feb 6 13:38:39 2007, in response to Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)), posted by WillD on Sun Feb 4 23:32:56 2007. That is a true new-tech subway train. Nice. |
|
|
| (382295) | |
Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)) |
|
|
Posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Tue Feb 6 13:50:03 2007, in response to Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)), posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Feb 5 10:34:33 2007. The Triplexes were hardly maintained at all, yet through it all still ran like tops until their premature withdrawal. I still say they would have laughed in the face of deferred maintenance, but eventually it would have caught up with them, too. |
|
|
| (382296) | |
Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)) |
|
|
Posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Tue Feb 6 13:53:17 2007, in response to Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)), posted by subway nutz on Mon Feb 5 20:20:43 2007. The BMT standards were damn near indestructible. There is a classic photo of 2779 plowing through Ocean Parkway station after splitting a switch and taking out everything in its path. Was it hurt? Scrapes, bruises and a dent or two. |
|
|
| (382298) | |
Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)) |
|
|
Posted by Wado MP73 on Tue Feb 6 14:04:14 2007, in response to Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)), posted by WillD on Sun Feb 4 23:32:56 2007. I found a page with pics of MF2000 in service.I can't wait to ride them on my next visit. |
|
|
| (382317) | |
Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)) |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Tue Feb 6 16:00:54 2007, in response to Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)), posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Tue Feb 6 09:59:16 2007. Nope...That was a converted car used to carry WELDED RAIL SECTIONS...! |
|
|
| (382319) | |
Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)) |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Tue Feb 6 16:01:06 2007, in response to Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)), posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Tue Feb 6 09:59:16 2007. Nope...That was a converted car used to carry WELDED RAIL SECTIONS...! |
|
|
| (382340) | |
Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)) |
|
|
Posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Tue Feb 6 16:49:27 2007, in response to Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)), posted by Edwards! on Tue Feb 6 16:00:54 2007. Nope...That was a converted car used to carry WELDED RAIL SECTIONS...! It does make sense that the end would be chopped off for the CWR train, but the information I was given was that diaphragms were considered for the R-142s early on. In any event, it was used in some capacity as an R-142 mockup. 
|
|
|
| (382342) | |
Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)) |
|
|
Posted by Green over Green on Tue Feb 6 17:11:41 2007, in response to Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)), posted by (SIR) North Shore Line on Sun Feb 4 20:11:22 2007. On a recent run through the 60th street tube on the new N train, passengers were subjected to an endless series of intrusive automated announcements that lasted all the way from QBP to Lexington Ave. Things hit rock bottom when we were warned that it is unsafe to ride outside of the car. Duh!Once again I have to say this to the engineers of the world: Just because you know how to do something doesn't make it a good idea. |
|
|
| (382344) | |
Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)) |
|
|
Posted by Tunnel Rat on Tue Feb 6 17:28:17 2007, in response to Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)), posted by Edwards! on Tue Feb 6 16:01:06 2007. JEEZ,it looks like bmtguy had a large buildup&discharge of gas. |
|
|
| (382346) | |
Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (rolling stock decisions and issues) |
|
|
Posted by The Port of Authority on Tue Feb 6 17:35:35 2007, in response to Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (rolling stock decisions and issues), posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Mon Feb 5 08:42:54 2007. They're not really needed at this time, except for the few lines that have more than one possible destination. |
|
|
|
Page 2 of 6 |
||
