Jump to content

Nova RTS 9147

Veteran Member
  • Posts

    2,192
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Nova RTS 9147

  1. You will Still need Extra trains plus Your going to have to increase the headways on the (Q) and your going to need more trains for that

     

    But it's not going to be a plethora of trains that's needed. At worst, the R211s will be a bigger order than first intended.

     

    But then they'd need to be decreased again when the (T) finally exists.

    (Even though I question why the (Q)'s headways would need to be significantly increased for it to run an extra 5-7 stops from Midtown)

     

    Its more "if" than "when" at this point.

  2. I would like to know in the future are these cars going to be 60' or 75'? When the time arrives to replace equipment lets say the R46 it should be 75'. After all the adjustments they have made in our tunnels. Its only right.

     

    I also feel that we really do not need these cars yet. At least not for another 6-7 years. Last time I checked were broke. I think thats why they keep pushing it back. There is nothing wrong with our R46s and R32. What is wrong is that they junked alot more cars than they needed to. Which I am not surprised that they did. A lot of R32s should of been kept that way they could of junked the 42s that are in the Eastern Division. These are my thoughts on the situation.

     

    All signs are pointing to 60'. The R32s are showing their age, and they need to go, but not as urgently as the R42s.

     

    The R46s aren't going to be replaced by the R179s, the R46s will be here until at least 2015, and will be ousted by the R211s. The R179 was originally intended to replace the R44s (and thus were designed to be 75 footers), but the R44s had to go badly and now we're here.

  3. Finally, a reasonable statement to contradict all of the whiners and nagging railphiles.

     

    Do the people on this site piss and moan about the M8's not being in service yet because they commute back and forth for five or more days a week on the New Haven Line and have genuine beef with the current rolling stock, or does everyone just complain because they can't wait to get out there with their cameras and be the first ones to catch pictures and videos of the cars in revenue service?

     

    CDOT and MNR are doing the right thing in testing and retesting every function and aspect of these cars before allowing fare-paying passengers on board. People love to hear themselves talk, and those who b***h about the M8's still not being in service would be the same people to complain if a premature introduction into revenue service leads to equipment being O/S'ed due to issues that may have been observed and mitigated with a bit more testing. No one is going to be completely happy until MNR pays them to ride the M8's.

     

    For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled.

    -Richard Feynman

    -US educator & physicist (1918 - 1988)

  4. Maybe we should rename the title of this from "New M8's is a go!!" to "New M8's a Failure"

     

    I've been following this posting for a while with hopes of seeing the M8 come into service. Guess now all we'll have is hope and faith with these cars because I'm done waiting. Let it happen, my excitement on these cars has died....

     

    I'm still excited. Yea it's excruciating to wait, but given how complex these cars are mechanically, it's better to wait now than to watch as they're only run during rush hour like certain other rail fleets.....

     

    Most likely not. I doubt that we'll see an eight-car consist enter revenue service before Valentine's, and quite frankly, I'm happy that CDOT has been pushing the big debut back for one huge reason: thorough testing. These cars need to have the Dickens tested out of them in order to properly assess all capabilities and to quell as many issues before Kawasaki begins full swing production. I'd really hate to see a debacle similar to the R46's in the late 70's when the mothballed R16GE's were brought back into service because of shoddy construction.

     

    I couldn't agree more. There's no need to rush things. The M2's aren't completely falling apart and they can last one more year.

  5. WOW! Really? The MTA's original plan was to have 179s on SIR. 46s are only 2 years younger that the 44s. Do they really expect the 46s to last that long?

     

    Yes. The R46s are ~37, and in much better shape than the R44s at that age. They'll last with no problem.

     

    SI hasnt seen new cars since the 44s in 1973!

     

    That is true (and sad). But for the sake of historical precedence:

     

    The (A) and (C) have historically had the oldest fleet in the system. Not counting the recent addition of the R46s, the last new cars the lines had were.....the R46's (when the (C) was the (CC) and a good 70% of this board weren't even thoughts).

     

    The (G) only gets something new when the (F) is (f)ubared on weekends.

     

    The (R) doesn't fare any better in terms of fleet age (the occasional R160, but its still all 1970s retread).

     

    Cant do the IRT for obvious reasons. As for the modifications and all that, it can be done. It's been done before (when the R44SI were going through GOH) and it'll be done when they retire those rust buckets.

  6. All this talk of 60 or 75 footers, isn't there a small possiblity that the R179's could be 67 footers? They can be used on the (J)(M)(Z) and (L) with special modification. If I remember correctly, BMT Standards were 67 Ft., but they had special traction motors and trucks to allow them pass through the curves of the Myrtle/Canarsie lines.

     

    Not to pile on, but that cost money that the agency isn't willing to spend. An oddball fleet that requires every even number car marker to be altered for 7 car trains that are shorter than the 60 foot cars (A 480 ft R160 vs. your 469 ft train).

     

    The R110B were 67 footers, and they ran without problems in the subway system for years. Any 67 footers on the (A), and the (C) would be 9 cars in length, and those on the Jamaica Elevated would have to be anywhere between 7-8 cars.

     

    They were only on the (A) and (C) and you notice their length wasn't carried over to all B division NTTs. Let's also not get into the custom conductor boards.

  7. Geez! It's just an idea! I'm not smoking anything! I know a line like that will never happen , but it's good to express ideas we have in our head! It's called "Creativity!" you guys should try it instead of keeping fun ideas all bottled up. Even if it can't happen!

     

    You're telling me that you don't find anything wrong with this paragraph:

     

    But let's put our minds on the Idea of "the Kalila Ave line" K/P train. much more AWESOME! nice friendly and cute female populated riders , a Elevation of beautiful lilac purple skies by day and dark purple skies by night or when it's cloudy. a diverse fleet of R32s , R44s , R68s , R68As , R160As and R160B alstom and siemens the K/P are the whole package people.

     

    Are you seriously telling me there's nothing wrong with that paragraph!

  8. Nice. the 8th ave (K) train will be rememberd.....

     

    But let's put our minds on the Idea of "the Kalila Ave line" K/P train. much more AWESOME! nice friendly and cute female populated riders , a Elevation of beautiful lilac purple skies by day and dark purple skies by night or when it's cloudy. a diverse fleet of R32s , R44s , R68s , R68As , R160As and R160B alstom and siemens the K/P are the whole package people.

     

    Honestly kid, where do you pick this shit up? Are you channeling dead foamers high on pcp?

     

    What the f**k are you talking about???

     

    Ripped the words right out of my mouth.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.