|
|
| Re: Retirement Plans for R44/46? (subway cars you NEVER thought of) (48849) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
Page 3 of 8 |
||
|
| (49339) | |
Re: Retirement Plans for R44/46? (subway cars you NEVER thought of) |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Thu Feb 10 14:56:49 2005, in response to Re: Retirement Plans for R44/46? (subway cars you NEVER thought of), posted by JohnL on Thu Feb 10 12:00:51 2005. Good questions. But NYC's subways were built by competing companies, including one, IND, started by the city.So route decisions were made in part on besting the competition. But the final outcome wasn't bad for New Yorkers. The integrated system you see today is pretty good... |
|
|
| (49342) | |
Re: Retirement Plans for R44/46? (subway cars you NEVER thought of) |
|
|
Posted by M15 to South Ferry on Thu Feb 10 14:58:28 2005, in response to Re: Retirement Plans for R44/46? (subway cars you NEVER thought of), posted by RonInBayside on Thu Feb 10 14:56:49 2005. Especially the flexibility in Manhattan w/IND lines running up BMT lines and vice versa. |
|
|
| (49343) | |
Re: Retirement Plans for R44/46? |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Thu Feb 10 14:58:57 2005, in response to Re: Retirement Plans for R44/46?, posted by ALSTOM R160A on Thu Feb 10 11:33:33 2005. Tanks too. Somebody remind me how much Germany's King Tiger tank weighed in 1943. Was it about half the US Army's current behemoth (the M1A2 Abrams at 70 tons)? |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (49347) | |
Re: Retirement Plans for R44/46? |
|
|
Posted by M15 to South Ferry on Thu Feb 10 15:01:51 2005, in response to Re: Retirement Plans for R44/46?, posted by ALSTOM R160A on Thu Feb 10 11:33:33 2005. I heard the R16 was pretty heavy. |
|
|
| (49350) | |
Re: Retirement Plans for R44/46? (subway cars you NEVER thought of) |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Thu Feb 10 15:05:37 2005, in response to Re: Retirement Plans for R44/46? (subway cars you NEVER thought of), posted by M15 to South Ferry on Thu Feb 10 14:58:28 2005. Absolutely. And when the 63rd Street Connector opened, the TA could reroute trains from the Queens Blvd corridor all sorts of different ways.Wouldn't it have been interesting if, when the Archer Av line was built, the TA had added at least one ramp track between the two levels (whether it was non-revenue or revenue). A train could do a whole circle around Manhattan, Queens and Brooklyn and Eastern Division could receive cars from Jamaica Yard which didn't travel through Manhattan (big whoop) :0) |
|
|
| (49364) | |
Re: Retirement Plans for R44/46? |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Thu Feb 10 15:28:47 2005, in response to Re: Retirement Plans for R44/46?, posted by RonInBayside on Thu Feb 10 14:54:17 2005. Correction: I did not mean to say that the same type of car cannot be stretched and use the same components (eg a 75' version of the R143). The R68 will be around for some time to come, as will the R46s. It will not be possible however, to mate R143s and existing 75' cars together, however. |
|
|
| (49375) | |
Re: Retirement Plans for R44/46? |
|
|
Posted by R30A on Thu Feb 10 15:46:08 2005, in response to Re: Retirement Plans for R44/46?, posted by Bill from Maspeth on Thu Feb 10 03:14:55 2005. I think 5402 is 5268 through a numberswap... |
|
|
| (49401) | |
Re: Retirement Plans for R44/46? |
|
|
Posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Thu Feb 10 16:31:56 2005, in response to Re: Retirement Plans for R44/46?, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Wed Feb 9 17:22:14 2005. "Whhhooooooooooooooo", with a steady increase in pitch. They still do that. |
|
|
| (49405) | |
Re: Retirement Plans for R44/46? |
|
|
Posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Thu Feb 10 16:38:39 2005, in response to Re: Retirement Plans for R44/46?, posted by ALSTOM R160A on Thu Feb 10 11:33:33 2005. Not exactly. The BMT standards weighed in at 47-49 tons apiece while the R-1/9s weighed 42 tons each. And that's without A/C! The R-32s when new were considered lightweights at 35 tons apiece. |
|
|
| (49409) | |
Re: Retirement Plans for R44/46? (subway cars you NEVER thought of) |
|
|
Posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Thu Feb 10 16:46:49 2005, in response to Re: Retirement Plans for R44/46? (subway cars you NEVER thought of), posted by SelkirkTMO on Thu Feb 10 12:18:39 2005. And the bull and pinion gears gave them pizzazz.:) |
|
|
| (49413) | |
Re: Retirement Plans for R44/46? |
|
|
Posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Thu Feb 10 16:56:44 2005, in response to Re: Retirement Plans for R44/46?, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Wed Feb 9 17:46:32 2005. The ultimate smorgasbord train. Throw in an R-10 and an R-16, and you'd have a train for the ages. |
|
|
| (49414) | |
Re: Retirement Plans for R44/46? |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Thu Feb 10 16:57:30 2005, in response to Re: Retirement Plans for R44/46?, posted by RonInBayside on Thu Feb 10 14:54:17 2005. The economic factors which might favor new 75' cars are easy to understand. Five 60' cars will have to be purchased to replace just 4 75' cars. After the R160, all B division cars up for retirement will be 75' long. Replacing 75' cars with 75 cars might make sense then. And who knows the financial situation the MTA will be in in 2015, when the R46's start turning 40. |
|
|
| (49416) | |
Re: Retirement Plans for R44/46? |
|
|
Posted by ALSTOM R160A on Thu Feb 10 16:58:31 2005, in response to Re: Retirement Plans for R44/46?, posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Thu Feb 10 16:38:39 2005. The standards were 67 feet, as opposed to the 60 feet R-1/9's. And looking from R32 and up, cars seem to get heavier and heavier. The R160 will be the heaviest 60 foot car ever to be used in the system |
|
|
| (49417) | |
Re: Retirement Plans for R44/46? |
|
|
Posted by ALSTOM R160A on Thu Feb 10 17:00:34 2005, in response to Re: Retirement Plans for R44/46?, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Thu Feb 10 16:57:30 2005. Look, there has never been a 75 foot car on the NYC Subway system without major problems. Even the R68 has very heavy weight, and the R68A brakes are unbearable. |
|
|
| (49418) | |
Re: Retirement Plans for R44/46? |
|
|
Posted by ALSTOM R160A on Thu Feb 10 17:01:37 2005, in response to Re: Retirement Plans for R44/46?, posted by M15 to South Ferry on Thu Feb 10 15:01:51 2005. It was! |
|
|
| (49420) | |
Re: Retirement Plans for R44/46? |
|
|
Posted by ALSTOM R160A on Thu Feb 10 17:04:41 2005, in response to Re: Retirement Plans for R44/46?, posted by M15 to South Ferry on Thu Feb 10 12:58:53 2005. Sorry! Can't use R44SI's on NYC subways! Here's the problem: No tripcocks. Sure, they can be installed, but that would be stupid. And no signage, but that can be installed, but more waste of time. Ain't happening! |
|
|
| (49423) | |
Re: Retirement Plans for R44/46? |
|
|
Posted by ALSTOM R160A on Thu Feb 10 17:06:12 2005, in response to Re: Retirement Plans for R44/46?, posted by Eric B on Thu Feb 10 12:29:17 2005. Structurally, yes.Aesthetically, no. |
|
|
| (49426) | |
Re: Retirement Plans for R44/46? |
|
|
Posted by M15 to South Ferry on Thu Feb 10 17:14:10 2005, in response to Re: Retirement Plans for R44/46?, posted by ALSTOM R160A on Thu Feb 10 17:04:41 2005. Yeah if anything it would be from the subway to SI rather than the reverse. |
|
|
| (49428) | |
Re: Retirement Plans for R44/46? |
|
|
Posted by ALSTOM R160A on Thu Feb 10 17:15:32 2005, in response to Re: Retirement Plans for R44/46?, posted by M15 to South Ferry on Thu Feb 10 17:14:10 2005. That's much easier. Just remove the tripcocks, put on FRA-approved glass, install dimmers for the headlights, and put a grabbar on the front. |
|
|
| (49429) | |
Re: Retirement Plans for R44/46? |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Thu Feb 10 17:16:41 2005, in response to Re: Retirement Plans for R44/46?, posted by ALSTOM R160A on Thu Feb 10 17:00:34 2005. The R68's are the most reliable cars in the B division's fleet. Performance wise, they're superb. The R44/46's problems have nothing to do with their length. |
|
|
| (49430) | |
Re: Retirement Plans for R44/46? |
|
|
Posted by ALSTOM R160A on Thu Feb 10 17:18:16 2005, in response to Re: Retirement Plans for R44/46?, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Thu Feb 10 17:16:41 2005. Once the R160's come in, give them 5 years, and they'll be even better in terms of MBDF on the B-Division. Oh, and the R68A, the brakes SUCK! |
|
|
| (49432) | |
Re: Retirement Plans for R44/46? |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Thu Feb 10 17:25:22 2005, in response to Re: Retirement Plans for R44/46?, posted by ALSTOM R160A on Thu Feb 10 17:18:16 2005. I only accept critical details about R68 performance from one man on this board, and he's in the perfect position to comment on that subject. |
|
|
| (49440) | |
Re: Retirement Plans for R44/46? |
|
|
Posted by ALSTOM R160A on Thu Feb 10 17:47:29 2005, in response to Re: Retirement Plans for R44/46?, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Thu Feb 10 17:25:22 2005. Once again, I didn't say R68, I said R68A. |
|
|
| (49455) | |
Re: Retirement Plans for R44/46? |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Junction on Thu Feb 10 18:54:32 2005, in response to Re: Retirement Plans for R44/46?, posted by Wado MP73 on Thu Feb 10 01:19:42 2005. me me me me me me me me me! |
|
|
| (49460) | |
Re: Retirement Plans for R44/46? (subway cars you NEVER thought of) |
|
|
Posted by Dan Lawrence on Thu Feb 10 19:16:14 2005, in response to Re: Retirement Plans for R44/46? (subway cars you NEVER thought of), posted by SelkirkTMO on Thu Feb 10 11:49:53 2005. Good point, but all we got to see was the two "issing pic" boxes and the text. |
|
|
| (49467) | |
Re: Retirement Plans for R44/46? |
|
|
Posted by R30A on Thu Feb 10 19:32:16 2005, in response to Re: Retirement Plans for R44/46?, posted by ALSTOM R160A on Thu Feb 10 17:15:32 2005. Actually you have it backwards.Tripcocks and signs are VERY easy to install. Grabirons involve welding, Headlight dimmers involve rewiring, and you need new glass. |
|
|
| (49470) | |
Re: Retirement Plans for R44/46? |
|
|
Posted by joe c on Thu Feb 10 19:48:04 2005, in response to Re: Retirement Plans for R44/46?, posted by ALSTOM R160A on Thu Feb 10 17:01:37 2005. Were the R16's heavy because of there A/C or something else?til next time |
|
|
| (49561) | |
Re: R44/46 |
|
|
Posted by Eric B on Fri Feb 11 00:49:53 2005, in response to Re: R44/46, posted by SelkirkTMO on Thu Feb 10 13:43:43 2005. There was no extra-extra, extra board, VR, RDO relief. etc. back then, where newbies could work them? |
|
|
| (49577) | |
Re: R44/46 |
|
|
Posted by Metal Management INC on Fri Feb 11 02:22:59 2005, in response to Re: R44/46, posted by SelkirkTMO on Thu Feb 10 13:43:43 2005. Here is the photo Eric, P-Wire not included. For the bonus points tell me what the air line blowout was for and don't say it was gastric discharge of chicken sammiches
|
|
|
| (49580) | |
Re: Retirement Plans for R44/46? |
|
|
Posted by Bill from Maspeth on Fri Feb 11 02:43:04 2005, in response to Re: Retirement Plans for R44/46?, posted by Rapid Transit Series on Thu Feb 10 07:49:28 2005. Poor planning. |
|
|
| (49581) | |
Re: Retirement Plans for R44/46? |
|
|
Posted by Bill from Maspeth on Fri Feb 11 02:45:36 2005, in response to Re: Retirement Plans for R44/46?, posted by R30A on Thu Feb 10 15:46:08 2005. No it is not. |
|
|
| (49583) | |
Re: Retirement Plans for R44/46? |
|
|
Posted by Bill from Maspeth on Fri Feb 11 02:51:23 2005, in response to Re: Retirement Plans for R44/46?, posted by joe c on Thu Feb 10 19:48:04 2005. R16's were single cars, they were never air conditioned and were all steel. I don't know how their weight compared to an R1/9. |
|
|
| (49620) | |
Re: Retirement Plans for R44/46? |
|
|
Posted by #3 West End Jeff on Fri Feb 11 09:22:11 2005, in response to Re: Retirement Plans for R44/46?, posted by vengence on Wed Feb 9 16:28:16 2005. Let's see. The first R-44s entered service in 1972 and I believe that last ones were delivered in 1974. I wonder if they'll limp along into 2012?#3 West End Jeff |
|
|
| (49625) | |
Re: Retirement Plans for R44/46? |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Fri Feb 11 09:27:46 2005, in response to Re: Retirement Plans for R44/46?, posted by Rapid Transit Series on Thu Feb 10 07:49:28 2005. To prevent unscheduled, unauthorized instructional sessions?:0) |
|
|
| (49626) | |
Re: R44/46 |
|
|
Posted by ALSTOM R160A on Fri Feb 11 09:28:51 2005, in response to Re: R44/46, posted by Metal Management INC on Fri Feb 11 02:22:59 2005. No video :( |
|
|
| (49647) | |
Re: R44/46 |
|
|
Posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Fri Feb 11 11:08:27 2005, in response to Re: R44/46, posted by Metal Management INC on Fri Feb 11 02:22:59 2005. That looks very familiar. I remember when those speedometers actually worked! |
|
|
| (49648) | |
Re: Retirement Plans for R44/46? |
|
|
Posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Fri Feb 11 11:12:41 2005, in response to Re: Retirement Plans for R44/46?, posted by Bill from Maspeth on Fri Feb 11 02:51:23 2005. The R-16s averaged 85,000 pounds, not much more than the R-1/9s. Had they been equipped with A/C, their weight would have approached BMT standard proportions. |
|
|
| (49663) | |
Re: Retirement Plans for R44/46? |
|
|
Posted by Arrow III MU on Fri Feb 11 12:30:15 2005, in response to Re: Retirement Plans for R44/46?, posted by Eric B on Thu Feb 10 12:09:30 2005. "I wonder if anyone remembers the 68's whistling somewhat like that for a while when fairly new; and the (Phase II I believe) 32's right after GOH."I do and so did a majority of the GOH R33ML's. Jamie |
|
|
| (49669) | |
Re: R44/46 |
|
|
Posted by Eric B on Fri Feb 11 12:58:19 2005, in response to Re: R44/46, posted by Metal Management INC on Fri Feb 11 02:22:59 2005. Thanks!☺Now I can compare this with its ghost; today's celeston style replacement by Westcode or NYAB. (Looks like an entirely different panel. I thought that we had the same panels today, paunted black, and that they only replaced the controller. It was so long ago since I saw one of these.) They should put them back without the P-Wire (use whatever technology they are using on the new cars). Is this from a 44 or 46, and whichever one this is, was the other identical; or what differences were there? That's before my time, so I don't even know what you're asking about. |
|
|
| (49672) | |
Re: R44/46 |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Fri Feb 11 13:28:53 2005, in response to Re: R44/46, posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Fri Feb 11 11:08:27 2005. How high did you see the needle go? |
|
|
| (49679) | |
Re: R44/46 |
|
|
Posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Fri Feb 11 13:56:20 2005, in response to Re: R44/46, posted by Eric B on Fri Feb 11 12:58:19 2005. That's an R-46 control console. The R-44 had a similar console, but the speedometer looked different. |
|
|
| (49685) | |
Re: R44/46 |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Fri Feb 11 14:37:11 2005, in response to Re: R44/46, posted by Metal Management INC on Fri Feb 11 02:22:59 2005. Coooool. I remember seeing these in the 1980's. A drastic difference from the contemporary R16/27/30ish controls. Reminds me of the days when the train operators had their own throttle handles hanging from their belts and a detachable radio in one hand. |
|
|
| (49766) | |
Re: R44/46 |
|
|
Posted by MJF on Fri Feb 11 19:33:33 2005, in response to Re: R44/46, posted by Metal Management INC on Fri Feb 11 02:22:59 2005. Where's the stuck brake by-pass? |
|
|
| (49772) | |
Re: R44/46 |
|
|
Posted by Mark W. on Fri Feb 11 19:45:35 2005, in response to Re: R44/46, posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Fri Feb 11 13:56:20 2005. The console I have is from an R-46 as well. |
|
|
| (49794) | |
Re: R44/46 |
|
|
Posted by ALSTOM R160A on Fri Feb 11 21:27:05 2005, in response to Re: R44/46, posted by Mark W. on Fri Feb 11 19:45:35 2005. You have a console? |
|
|
| (49801) | |
Re: R44/46 |
|
|
Posted by mr_brian on Fri Feb 11 21:42:31 2005, in response to Re: R44/46, posted by ALSTOM R160A on Fri Feb 11 21:27:05 2005. I saw it...or at least I think I was there with him and others when he got it. |
|
|
| (49805) | |
Re: R44/46 |
|
|
Posted by joe c on Fri Feb 11 22:26:36 2005, in response to Re: R44/46, posted by Metal Management INC on Fri Feb 11 02:22:59 2005. OMG!that looks easier to drive then the current driving system the R44/46 has.i purfer the SMEE system R10-R42.til next time |
|
|
| (49806) | |
Re: R44/46 |
|
|
Posted by ALSTOM R160A on Fri Feb 11 22:27:43 2005, in response to Re: R44/46, posted by joe c on Fri Feb 11 22:26:36 2005. What current driving system? There are several systems in place right now. What about the SMEE system on the R62-R68. Also, the R44 and R46 has SMEE now. In fact, every car has SMEE besides the R142/A/R143. |
|
|
| (49812) | |
Re: Retirement Plans for R44/46? (subway cars you NEVER thought of) |
|
|
Posted by VictorM on Fri Feb 11 22:50:00 2005, in response to Re: Retirement Plans for R44/46? (subway cars you NEVER thought of), posted by SelkirkTMO on Thu Feb 10 11:49:53 2005. I saw an R-10 truck on display at the Transit Museum a few years ago (I hope it's still there). It's a real work of art. I was especially impressed with the two motors - each one rated at 100HP. I thought they would have to be a lot bigger. |
|
|
| (49815) | |
Re: R44/46 |
|
|
Posted by joe c on Fri Feb 11 22:59:51 2005, in response to Re: R44/46, posted by ALSTOM R160A on Fri Feb 11 22:27:43 2005. I'm talking about the current driving system on the R44/46.and the SMEE system i'm talking about is the 2 piece,the controller and the breaker like you find on the R42.til next time |
|
|
|
Page 3 of 8 |
||
