|
|
| Re: Slant R42... (642116) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
Page 2 of 5 |
||
|
| (642359) | |
Re: Slant R42... |
|
|
Posted by Phil D. on Mon Jun 30 23:03:01 2008, in response to Re: Slant R42..., posted by rionOne on Mon Jun 30 23:01:32 2008. Oh yeah, and who is this friend? |
|
|
| (642360) | |
Re: REEF PLEASE: Slant R42... |
|
|
Posted by BMTLines on Mon Jun 30 23:03:06 2008, in response to Slant R42..., posted by Phil D. on Mon Jun 30 17:00:16 2008. Time for this thread to take a dive.... |
|
|
| (642361) | |
Re: Slant R42... |
|
|
Posted by rionOne on Mon Jun 30 23:04:19 2008, in response to Re: Slant R42..., posted by Phil D. on Mon Jun 30 23:03:01 2008. I laid the path, you do the work... |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (642362) | |
Re: REEF PLEASE: Slant R42... |
|
|
Posted by Pablo M 201 on Mon Jun 30 23:05:15 2008, in response to Re: REEF PLEASE: Slant R42..., posted by BMTLines on Mon Jun 30 23:03:06 2008. Not yet. Once a few things are answered, then Larry can drown this. |
|
|
| (642363) | |
Re: Slant R42... |
|
|
Posted by Phil D. on Mon Jun 30 23:05:20 2008, in response to Re: Slant R42..., posted by rionOne on Mon Jun 30 23:04:19 2008. I have a feeling who it was, but, you can't just come out and tell me? |
|
|
| (642364) | |
Re: Slant R42... |
|
|
Posted by 9 local on Mon Jun 30 23:05:41 2008, in response to Re: Slant R42..., posted by Phil D. on Mon Jun 30 22:56:31 2008. No matter how hard you try, Phil, you will never supaman a ho.YOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU |
|
|
| (642365) | |
Re: Slant R42... |
|
|
Posted by AMoreira81 on Mon Jun 30 23:06:14 2008, in response to Re: Slant R42..., posted by Phil D. on Mon Jun 30 23:05:20 2008. You have some intelligence...you can figure it out. |
|
|
| (642367) | |
Re: PLEEF Please.. |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Mon Jun 30 23:07:49 2008, in response to Re: REEF PLEASE: Slant R42..., posted by Pablo M 201 on Mon Jun 30 23:05:15 2008. Cute photo |
|
|
| (642368) | |
Re: Slant R42... |
|
|
Posted by Phil D. on Mon Jun 30 23:08:15 2008, in response to Re: Slant R42..., posted by AMoreira81 on Mon Jun 30 23:06:14 2008. I pretty sure who it is, but I can't know for sure until I get some more info. |
|
|
| (642369) | |
Re: Slant R42... |
|
|
Posted by Pablo M 201 on Mon Jun 30 23:11:48 2008, in response to Re: Slant R42..., posted by Phil D. on Mon Jun 30 23:08:15 2008. Yeah, I can tell your not going to sleep |
|
|
| (642370) | |
Re: Slant R42... |
|
|
Posted by AMoreira81 on Mon Jun 30 23:12:31 2008, in response to Re: Slant R42..., posted by Phil D. on Mon Jun 30 22:51:18 2008. Are you really that fucking thick?You certainly are that thick. :-D |
|
|
| (642371) | |
Re: Slant R42... |
|
|
Posted by rionOne on Mon Jun 30 23:13:20 2008, in response to Re: Slant R42..., posted by Phil D. on Mon Jun 30 23:05:20 2008. Yeah, How about no! |
|
|
| (642373) | |
Re: Slant R42... |
|
|
Posted by metropod on Mon Jun 30 23:13:21 2008, in response to Re: Slant R42..., posted by AMoreira81 on Mon Jun 30 23:06:14 2008. some intelligence? your giving Phil too much credit. if he had any, he wouldn't have gotten caught. |
|
|
| (642375) | |
Re: Slant R42... |
|
|
Posted by Ken S. on Mon Jun 30 23:15:49 2008, in response to Re: Slant R42..., posted by metropod on Mon Jun 30 23:13:21 2008. IAWTP |
|
|
| (642397) | |
Judge Judy's Questions for Phil |
|
|
Posted by Ken S. on Tue Jul 1 00:04:43 2008, in response to Slant R42..., posted by Phil D. on Mon Jun 30 17:00:16 2008. 1. Aren't you sorry you made a fool of yourself?2. Are you a lowlife, Sir? 3. Are you on medication? 4. What the hell is wrong with you? Are you under psychiatric care? 5. Are you trying to justify to me the fact that you're an idiot? 6. You don't really want me to embarrass you today, do you? 7. Was it your intention, sir, to come into this courtroom, which, as you know, is a televised courtroom, and tell the world that you're not wrapped too tight? 8. Why are you looking at me like a rabbit in headlights? A complete list of Judge Judy insults. |
|
|
| (642401) | |
Re: Slant R42... |
|
|
Posted by rionOne on Tue Jul 1 00:23:51 2008, in response to Re: Slant R42..., posted by Phil D. on Mon Jun 30 22:49:22 2008. "Everytime you get a day off your in a transit system somewhere in the U.S taking pics."Oh, and get it right, I'm AT WORK visiting transit systems in the US taking pics, on the clock, making paper! Cakin' It! |
|
|
| (642426) | |
Re: Slant R42... |
|
|
Posted by monorail on Tue Jul 1 01:21:30 2008, in response to Re: Slant R42..., posted by Phil D. on Mon Jun 30 21:39:00 2008. 'First off, don't call me a dumbass. You don't fucking know me.'just curious... IF he fucking knew you, would it then be okay for him to call you a dumbass? please don't take it personally, I'm just curious..... |
|
|
| (642432) | |
Re: Slant R42... |
|
|
Posted by Amanda on Tue Jul 1 01:38:24 2008, in response to Re: Slant R42..., posted by 9 local on Mon Jun 30 22:15:44 2008. You TTMG peeps are worse than women, I swear. |
|
|
| (642434) | |
Re: Slant R42... |
|
|
Posted by aem7ac on Tue Jul 1 01:40:19 2008, in response to Re: Slant R42..., posted by Amanda on Tue Jul 1 01:38:24 2008. What is TTMG |
|
|
| (642437) | |
Re: Slant R42... |
|
|
Posted by Osmosis Jones on Tue Jul 1 01:48:15 2008, in response to Re: Slant R42..., posted by 9 local on Mon Jun 30 22:32:07 2008. Ouch, that was cold. |
|
|
| (642438) | |
Re: Slant R42... |
|
|
Posted by Osmosis Jones on Tue Jul 1 01:52:07 2008, in response to Re: Slant R42..., posted by Amanda on Tue Jul 1 01:38:24 2008. I agree, people need to get off of Phil D.'s nuts and go their own way for real. |
|
|
| (642441) | |
Re: Slant R42... |
|
|
Posted by monorail on Tue Jul 1 01:59:03 2008, in response to Re: Slant R42..., posted by Osmosis Jones on Tue Jul 1 01:52:07 2008. 'I agree, people need to get off of Phil D.'s nuts'is there a problem with his nuts? |
|
|
| (642442) | |
Re: Slant R42... |
|
|
Posted by rionOne on Tue Jul 1 02:04:12 2008, in response to Re: Slant R42..., posted by Osmosis Jones on Tue Jul 1 01:52:07 2008. You know, that would work and be the business if Phil D. stayed in check instead of getting people hyphy here. |
|
|
| (642447) | |
Re: Slant R42... |
|
|
Posted by MABSTOA Yard Dispatcher on Tue Jul 1 02:33:47 2008, in response to Re: Slant R42..., posted by Phil D. on Mon Jun 30 22:51:18 2008. I would not talk Phil. What about all the builders plates you and John stole off the laid up B trains? Yep, I know more than you think. |
|
|
| (642456) | |
Re: Slant R42... |
|
|
Posted by Mr Mabstoa on Tue Jul 1 03:48:05 2008, in response to Re: Slant R42..., posted by rionOne on Mon Jun 30 22:25:46 2008. What floating door did those guys come in to this country!? |
|
|
| (642457) | |
Re: Slant R42... |
|
|
Posted by Osmosis Jones on Tue Jul 1 03:49:52 2008, in response to Re: Slant R42..., posted by rionOne on Tue Jul 1 02:04:12 2008. I think that you should just ignore him if he bothers you, being arrested is enough punishment for him in my opinion. |
|
|
| (642458) | |
Re: Slant R42... |
|
|
Posted by Osmosis Jones on Tue Jul 1 03:51:30 2008, in response to Re: Slant R42..., posted by monorail on Tue Jul 1 01:59:03 2008. That's a question that only he knows the answer to, however I'd prefer that the answer from him to be made via e-mail. |
|
|
| (642469) | |
Re: Slant R42... |
|
|
Posted by G1Ravage on Tue Jul 1 05:42:38 2008, in response to Re: Slant R42..., posted by Phil D. on Mon Jun 30 22:49:22 2008. I don't live like that. I got a life with Family, Friends, and alot of shit to attend to.Then riddle me this, Batman: Which SubChat member listens to his radio scanner day in and day out, in the hopes of hearing about a train with door problems in the BMT East, so he can post about it and claim it was an R-160 with problems? |
|
|
| (642470) | |
Re: Judge Judy's Questions for Phil |
|
|
Posted by G1Ravage on Tue Jul 1 05:50:31 2008, in response to Judge Judy's Questions for Phil, posted by Ken S. on Tue Jul 1 00:04:43 2008. LOL Thanks for that. |
|
|
| (642495) | |
Re: Slant R42... |
|
|
Posted by SUBWAYSURF on Tue Jul 1 07:40:30 2008, in response to Re: Slant R42..., posted by rionOne on Tue Jul 1 02:04:12 2008. hyphy? |
|
|
| (642498) | |
Re: Slant R42... |
|
|
Posted by SUBWAYSURF on Tue Jul 1 07:48:12 2008, in response to Re: Slant R42..., posted by Phil D. on Mon Jun 30 21:41:54 2008. nope, Phildo |
|
|
| (642499) | |
Re: Slant R42... |
|
|
Posted by SUBWAYSURF on Tue Jul 1 07:49:14 2008, in response to Re: Slant R42..., posted by Newkirk Plaza David on Mon Jun 30 17:22:09 2008. haha |
|
|
| (642504) | |
Re: Slant R42... |
|
|
Posted by rionOne on Tue Jul 1 07:56:36 2008, in response to Re: Slant R42..., posted by SUBWAYSURF on Tue Jul 1 07:40:30 2008. Hyphy...Slang for excited, upset, etc. |
|
|
| (642562) | |
Re: Slant R42... |
|
|
Posted by SUBWAYSURF on Tue Jul 1 10:41:24 2008, in response to Re: Slant R42..., posted by rionOne on Tue Jul 1 07:56:36 2008. Very logical, Thank You. |
|
|
| (642607) | |
Since We are on the subject....TIME TO SHOW HOW ROBUST THE OLD SMEES ARE. |
|
|
Posted by JournalSquare-K-Car on Tue Jul 1 11:24:22 2008, in response to Re: Slant R38..., posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Mon Jun 30 17:24:17 2008. For one, the photo in the previous post displays how robust those SMEEs are. Look at the frame, not a piece of damage, the only damage is a bent front portion of the body, which is easily fixable.I got all these photos fro Nycsubway.org  Now look at that St. Louis R38, you see the frame structures beneath the bolsters, and you can see how well the car held up, and that only the front is damaged....barely up to the first door.  Now look at that R32 BUDD Brightliner above, look at how well even the ROOF held up, and again, this car was rebuilt and put back into service...need i say more.. talk about robust, these railcars are truly well built. I bet that train was doing 20+MPH too.  Now look at this R42, it held up extremely well, very robust, and it was hit at 18+MPH, so there is proof of how robust they are.  There is the R40 that hit the R42. It was even rebuilt into a slant, and if you examine the photo, you will see that the damage didn't even reach the first door leaf...because of the SMEE's very robust coonstruction using frames.  This arten derailed around columbus circle, and columbus circle is a fast station...so this train must have been doing 30 or 40 miles when it hit the pillars, and it held up well for that.  If robert ray were piloting an R12 during the union square catastrophe, maybe the only damage would be like the damage on the car above... the frames would keep the car together well. |
|
|
| (642632) | |
Re: Since We are on the subject....TIME TO SHOW HOW ROBUST THE OLD SMEES ARE. |
|
|
Posted by trainsarefun on Tue Jul 1 11:51:32 2008, in response to Since We are on the subject....TIME TO SHOW HOW ROBUST THE OLD SMEES ARE., posted by JournalSquare-K-Car on Tue Jul 1 11:24:22 2008. While I know that you are already the expert of all things in your own mind, do you know what happens to people when they are located in the parts of cars you have pictured that have been completely torn away?How is it that you can count large portions of a car simply horrifically collapsed and torn as a sign of strength? If robert ray were piloting an R12 during the union square catastrophe, maybe the only damage would be like the damage on the car above... the frames would keep the car together well. What is your experience in engineering???? Answer the question, or stop posting your speculative BS. The way to stop the Union Square wreck is (1) to prevent severely intoxicated employees from trying to perform their duties, (2) for the conductor on Robert Ray's train to have done his job, (3) for Robert Ray to know what a bottom yellow aspect on a signal means, and (4) probably wheel detectors, given that NYCT doesn't have a unviersal speed control system. |
|
|
| (642636) | |
Re: Since We are on the subject....TIME TO SHOW HOW ROBUST THE OLD SMEES ARE. |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Tue Jul 1 11:54:36 2008, in response to Since We are on the subject....TIME TO SHOW HOW ROBUST THE OLD SMEES ARE., posted by JournalSquare-K-Car on Tue Jul 1 11:24:22 2008. None of those trains suffered a lateral hit.None of them took a vertical hit. ROAR |
|
|
| (642644) | |
Re: Since We are on the subject....TIME TO SHOW HOW ROBUST THE OLD SMEES ARE. |
|
|
Posted by JournalSquare-K-Car on Tue Jul 1 12:03:31 2008, in response to Re: Since We are on the subject....TIME TO SHOW HOW ROBUST THE OLD SMEES ARE., posted by trainsarefun on Tue Jul 1 11:51:32 2008. I agree, but if there was a set of R12s, the damage to the cars and death toll would be less. Those cars were not so torn and collapsed at first, before they were shipped to the yard, they had the damaged parts cut out, but they actually did hold up well.The fact is that the newer rains, especially the NTTs are poorly built, and have no frames, so in a collision, they will just fold up, and crush everyone inside. Here is a pic of an Arnine hanging off a cliff  An NTT would have buckled. That Arnine seems to have slammed through the bumper like nothing....and those are some HEAVY BUMPERS THERE. |
|
|
| (642646) | |
Re: Since We are on the subject....TIME TO SHOW HOW ROBUST THE OLD SMEES ARE. |
|
|
Posted by JournalSquare-K-Car on Tue Jul 1 12:05:55 2008, in response to Re: Since We are on the subject....TIME TO SHOW HOW ROBUST THE OLD SMEES ARE., posted by Broadway Lion on Tue Jul 1 11:54:36 2008. That R12 took a lateral hit to the side, and what do you mean vertical? You mean have a train hit the roof? The SMMEs are stcked on top of each other for reefing, and the roofs hold up. |
|
|
| (642649) | |
Re: Since We are on the subject....TIME TO SHOW HOW ROBUST THE OLD SMEES ARE. |
|
|
Posted by trainsarefun on Tue Jul 1 12:11:59 2008, in response to Re: Since We are on the subject....TIME TO SHOW HOW ROBUST THE OLD SMEES ARE., posted by JournalSquare-K-Car on Tue Jul 1 12:03:31 2008. The fact is that the newer rains, especially the NTTs are poorly built, and have no frames, so in a collision, they will just fold up, and crush everyone inside.You didn't answer my question, so I will ask it again: What is the basis of your alleged expertise in engineering? What is your basis of your alleged expertise as to construction of newer rolling stock? |
|
|
| (642650) | |
Re: Since We are on the subject....TIME TO SHOW HOW ROBUST THE OLD SMEES ARE. |
|
|
Posted by JournalSquare-K-Car on Tue Jul 1 12:18:46 2008, in response to Re: Since We are on the subject....TIME TO SHOW HOW ROBUST THE OLD SMEES ARE., posted by trainsarefun on Tue Jul 1 12:11:59 2008. the NTTs might have collision posts, but they will do poorly in crashes. The posts will probably shear off more easily than on the SMEEs, and they use too much plastic in the NTTs, and probably the metal is of a lower quality too. |
|
|
| (642657) | |
Re: Since We are on the subject....TIME TO SHOW HOW ROBUST THE OLD SMEES ARE. |
|
|
Posted by Mitch45 on Tue Jul 1 12:28:51 2008, in response to Since We are on the subject....TIME TO SHOW HOW ROBUST THE OLD SMEES ARE., posted by JournalSquare-K-Car on Tue Jul 1 11:24:22 2008. Yow - some of those cars look like they were hit with cruise missiles. I can only imagine what the Malbone Street train must have looked like after the crash, other than the pics that have been published. |
|
|
| (642659) | |
Re: Since We are on the subject....TIME TO SHOW HOW ROBUST THE OLD SMEES ARE. |
|
|
Posted by metropod on Tue Jul 1 12:30:58 2008, in response to Re: Since We are on the subject....TIME TO SHOW HOW ROBUST THE OLD SMEES ARE., posted by JournalSquare-K-Car on Tue Jul 1 12:18:46 2008. ANSWER HIS FUCKING QUESTION! |
|
|
| (642661) | |
Re: Since We are on the subject....TIME TO SHOW HOW ROBUST THE OLD SMEES ARE. |
|
|
Posted by JournalSquare-K-Car on Tue Jul 1 12:33:09 2008, in response to Re: Since We are on the subject....TIME TO SHOW HOW ROBUST THE OLD SMEES ARE., posted by Mitch45 on Tue Jul 1 12:28:51 2008. got any pics of malbone?Also, malbone wreck was with WOODEN CARS, so it doesn't count, and those were OLD wooden cars, before they built them with good steel frames. |
|
|
| (642671) | |
Re: Since We are on the subject....TIME TO SHOW HOW ROBUST THE OLD SMEES ARE. |
|
|
Posted by trainsarefun on Tue Jul 1 12:42:30 2008, in response to Re: Since We are on the subject....TIME TO SHOW HOW ROBUST THE OLD SMEES ARE., posted by JournalSquare-K-Car on Tue Jul 1 12:18:46 2008. You didn't answer my question, so I will ask it again:What is the basis of your alleged expertise in engineering? What is your basis of your alleged expertise as to construction of newer rolling stock? |
|
|
| (642675) | |
Re: Since We are on the subject....TIME TO SHOW HOW ROBUST THE OLD SMEES ARE. |
|
|
Posted by JournalSquare-K-Car on Tue Jul 1 12:44:03 2008, in response to Re: Since We are on the subject....TIME TO SHOW HOW ROBUST THE OLD SMEES ARE., posted by trainsarefun on Tue Jul 1 12:42:30 2008. How about i ask you the same thing? Engineering comes naturally to me, and the fact that NTTs have no frames has been stated by some MTA personnel. |
|
|
| (642687) | |
Re: Since We are on the subject....TIME TO SHOW HOW ROBUST THE OLD SMEES ARE. |
|
|
Posted by trainsarefun on Tue Jul 1 12:55:54 2008, in response to Re: Since We are on the subject....TIME TO SHOW HOW ROBUST THE OLD SMEES ARE., posted by JournalSquare-K-Car on Tue Jul 1 12:44:03 2008. How about i ask you the same thing?Note that I don't speculate as you do as to how various trains would do in crash testing. Engineering comes naturally to me So you have completed no training in the subject then? You have no credentials in it? and the fact that NTTs have no frames has been stated by some MTA personnel. Which ones stated this where and when? |
|
|
| (642688) | |
Re: Since We are on the subject....TIME TO SHOW HOW ROBUST THE OLD SMEES ARE. |
|
|
Posted by JournalSquare-K-Car on Tue Jul 1 12:58:42 2008, in response to Re: Since We are on the subject....TIME TO SHOW HOW ROBUST THE OLD SMEES ARE., posted by trainsarefun on Tue Jul 1 12:55:54 2008. I believe traindude said the newer trains don't have center sills and frames. Also, i have personally peeked under the newer NJT stock, and saw lots of wires, but no frames or sills, and the older stock has the frames and sills, and the BUDDS even have the good side sills. |
|
|
| (642706) | |
Re: Slant R42... |
|
|
Posted by monorail on Tue Jul 1 13:39:57 2008, in response to Re: Slant R42..., posted by G1Ravage on Tue Jul 1 05:42:38 2008. who? |
|
|
| (642769) | |
Re:(Larry you forgot this) Slant R42... |
|
|
Posted by Railman718 on Tue Jul 1 14:50:56 2008, in response to Re: Slant R42..., posted by G1Ravage on Tue Jul 1 05:42:38 2008. You forgot one Larry!!!! |
|
|
|
Page 2 of 5 |
||
