Jump to content

R44 Early Retirement?

ctrain

By ctrain,
in New York City Subway

Recommended Posts


  • Replies 408
  • Created
  • Last Reply
rr4567

rr4567

Posted
Posted
I'm always glad when others here see the big picture. The amount of misinformation in here is so misleading that finding facts is like looking for a needle in a haystack. Subway car design and technology is not nearly as easy as many railfans think it is, and their understanding of parts, structure, what is safe and unsafe. NYC used subway cars with technology more than 90 years old (many preserved) that if explained in detail would blow the minds of even some of the most technically inclined here. Many of the cars in service today use more complex parts but many are based off the same ancient technologies and are tried and true. There are literally thousands components on subway cars and each and every one has an important role to play in the car, and two things may even be in the same "area" but if one thing goes bad, one problem result, if the other goes bad, another will result. It's very complicated, and for those interested in learning about it, you should do so over time, and you should not learn from other railfans because 95% of what you are told will be wrong, oversimplified, or both.

 

But let's just take a step back. A car that is being surveyed because of structural body condition now feels "unsafe" to a lot of railfans because the ride is "bumpy, not smooth, rough" etc.? Just from common sense, wouldn't a bumpy ride come from poor suspension, flat wheels or track conditions instead? Structural condition has hardly any impact on ride quality. Saying that it has an impact is every bit as ludicrous as claiming that a broken FIND caused the brakes on an R160 to take too long to stop the train.

When one problem arises, then everyone blames every other issue on that 1 thing.

 

and you should not learn from other railfans because 95% of what you are told will be wrong, oversimplified, or both.

So true.

LOL most of them couldn't care less about the structural integrity, or they have no idea, they just want to sound like they know what they are talking about. I bet if you gave them blindfolds and earplugs, put them on a car and asked them to guess the fleet, and put 'em on anything pre-NTT, they'd probably get most if not all of them wrong. Because there are few noticeable differences, no matter how many railfans will create to sound "sophisticated"

WHERE IS THE THANKS BUTTON WHEN YOU NEED IT!?!?

Those are questions that will be answered when a final decision is made on what to do with the cars.

 

For the R-62/A that's a long way off and the people who will make that decision then likely are not the same people in the position to make that decision now.

 

As for the current issue at hand with the R44's and the results of the survey, as mentioned just sit tight, information will be released when the timing is right and plenty of time to react. Once a decision comes down, then the Transit Museum can React (or not react) accordingly.

Yes. Best idea: wait.

 

 

But I thought the rust on the R-42 roofs was what caused the screechy stops?? :)

 

lol :)

no, it was the scratchitti :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Grand Concourse

Grand Concourse

Posted
Posted
Those are questions that will be answered when a final decision is made on what to do with the cars.

 

For the R-62/A that's a long way off and the people who will make that decision then likely are not the same people in the position to make that decision now.

 

As for the current issue at hand with the R44's and the results of the survey, as mentioned just sit tight, information will be released when the timing is right and plenty of time to react. Once a decision comes down, then the Transit Museum can React (or not react) accordingly.

 

True, thanks.

 

Lets say that the R44s are retired from service due too structural problems, just pretend for a second. I doubt that the museum would want anything to due with the R44s.

 

 

For the record, no decision has been made as to what will happen to the R44s so this is all speculation.

 

Ok, thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
R44 5278

R44 5278

Posted
Posted

Just so you all know, the R44s' last SMS only replaced their windows and the glass panels next to the doors. However, nothing else was replaced which explains why a few trains have bad suspension. As R32 3838 once said, the R44s' last SMS was a complete joke and a waste of money/time. It's just scratchitti; there's no need to waste money on lexan glass for old trains.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
dmouse

dmouse

Posted
Posted

I remember a few weeks ago seeing a R44 set @ Euclid with the trucks looking like they had just been SMS'ed with fresh paint and the blue suspension cords...

 

I think it was a mini SMS, but I havent seen that set in while.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
LRG

LRG

Posted
Posted
I remember a few weeks ago seeing a R44 set @ Euclid with the trucks looking like they had just been SMS'ed with fresh paint and the blue suspension cords...

 

I think it was a mini SMS, but I havent seen that set in while.

 

That has to be an R46 you saw. It's common for people to always get the two mixed up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Princelex

Princelex

Posted
Posted

Whether you like the R44's or not, whenever the day comes for these trains to be retired, it's going to be a sad day, at least for me it will be. These trains have dealt with and still deal with the longest line in the system. For them to still be around, considering the stuff that was and still is wrong with them is amazing. They are almost 40 years old now and if they have to go the way of the reef, then so be it but they've done their job and I've enjoyed riding on them and I will continue to do so until the last R44 goes bye-bye.

 

Just my 2 cents on the matter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Far Rock Depot Conductor

Far Rock Depot

Posted
Posted
Whether you like the R44's or not, whenever the day comes for these trains to be retired, it's going to be a sad day, at least for me it will be. These trains have dealt with and still deal with the longest line in the system. For them to still be around, considering the stuff that was and still is wrong with them is amazing. They are almost 40 years old now and if they have to go the way of the reef, then so be it but they've done their job and I've enjoyed riding on them and I will continue to do so until the last R44 goes bye-bye.

 

Just my 2 cents on the matter.

 

spoken well! I too have ridden these cars for 20 years. And they are still around!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
R32 3348

R32 3348

Posted
Posted
I Know right!

 

 

some of the R44s I have ridden are literally have parts of the floor held together with Duck Tape.

 

Like The Penguins say; " Its gonna take some Spit, Grit, AND a lot of duck tape"

 

^thats what's keeping the cars together lol:cool:

I like how everyone ignores the fact that before the R46s went in for an SMS it was very easy to step into an R46 on a Jamaica line and see duct tape all over the floor. Yet in this thread they are being treated as 100% better than the R46s. What does the floor have to do with the overall state of the car?

Regardless of what anyone says, I can tell the difference between ride quality between rail cars, just like cars. From, "Wow, this feels really smooth and nice...(R160)," or, "Cool, bouncy, LIRR feeling to this one" (R46), to, "Whoa, will it finish it's trip, after I get off?" (R44). Yeah, people pointed it out, so I said let me see. Even before this R44 thing came up I didn't like 44's because they were always dark and/or smelly, and/or uncomfortably hot every time I rode one. No car hating here.

So you made your judgment after someone gave a possibility of a problem with the R44 (which has nothing to do with ride quality), thereby affecting your judgment of the car itself. You would not have noticed these "problems" with the ride quality before people started shit talking them because they don't exist. I have been riding the R46s regularly for almost four years and I have started riding R44s regularly as well for the past couple of months. Their ride quality is almost, if not exactly the same.

I'm always glad when others here see the big picture. The amount of misinformation in here is so misleading that finding facts is like looking for a needle in a haystack. Subway car design and technology is not nearly as easy as many railfans think it is, and their understanding of parts, structure, what is safe and unsafe. NYC used subway cars with technology more than 90 years old (many preserved) that if explained in detail would blow the minds of even some of the most technically inclined here. Many of the cars in service today use more complex parts but many are based off the same ancient technologies and are tried and true. There are literally thousands components on subway cars and each and every one has an important role to play in the car, and two things may even be in the same "area" but if one thing goes bad, one problem result, if the other goes bad, another will result. It's very complicated, and for those interested in learning about it, you should do so over time, and you should not learn from other railfans because 95% of what you are told will be wrong, oversimplified, or both.

 

But let's just take a step back. A car that is being surveyed because of structural body condition now feels "unsafe" to a lot of railfans because the ride is "bumpy, not smooth, rough" etc.? Just from common sense, wouldn't a bumpy ride come from poor suspension, flat wheels or track conditions instead? Structural condition has hardly any impact on ride quality. Saying that it has an impact is every bit as ludicrous as claiming that a broken FIND caused the brakes on an R160 to take too long to stop the train.

THANK YOU

Just so you all know, the R44s' last SMS only replaced their windows and the glass panels next to the doors. However, nothing else was replaced which explains why a few trains have bad suspension. As R32 3838 once said, the R44s' last SMS was a complete joke and a waste of money/time. It's just scratchitti; there's no need to waste money on lexan glass for old trains.

That wasn't an SMS. That was just part of the (MTA)'s program to add vandal-resistant screens to the windows of every car that wasn't retiring (as of 2007 so that's the R32-R42s), like on the NTTs. The R44s haven't gotten a large 6-8 year SMS recently AFAIK (someone please correct me if I am wrong), but the R46s have. Also the SMS would only affect the ride quality if it was truing the wheels or something. Since that is done at regular intervals already you wouldn't need a large SMS to improve the ride quality in that respect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
R32 3838

R32 3838

Posted
Posted

 

That wasn't an SMS. That was just part of the (MTA)'s program to add vandal-resistant screens to the windows of every car that wasn't retiring (as of 2007 so that's the R32-R42s), like on the NTTs. The R44s haven't gotten a large 6-8 year SMS recently AFAIK (someone please correct me if I am wrong), but the R46s have. Also the SMS would only affect the ride quality if it was truing the wheels or something. Since that is done at regular intervals already you wouldn't need a large SMS to improve the ride quality in that respect.

 

 

That Was an SMS, They had their trucks redone and the sides were repainted, That took place in late 2003-04

 

At The Sametime The R46's were getting their 1st SMS, The R46's are getting their 2nd SMS and they are replacing the Old Boxes with new ones like the R68's as well as a New HVAC unit, The R32's/R38's got their SMS in 2001.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
dmouse

dmouse

Posted
Posted
That has to be an R46 you saw. It's common for people to always get the two mixed up.

 

it was a R44, car #52 something-something ( I forgot the last 2 numbers)

 

 

 

Why are the traction motors on some cars not being replaced? They sound really worn.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
R44 5278

R44 5278

Posted
Posted
it was a R44, car #52 something-something ( I forgot the last 2 numbers)

 

 

 

Why are the traction motors on some cars not being replaced? They sound really worn.

 

How can you tell if the traction motors sound worn if they don't squeak like those on the older SMEEs? The whirl is just a metallurgical quirk and nothing harmful to the train.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
INDman Train Operator

INDman

Posted
Posted
it was a R44, car #52 something-something ( I forgot the last 2 numbers)

 

 

 

Why are the traction motors on some cars not being replaced? They sound really worn.

 

Ok RCI, have you ridden the Low-V train or the Arnines? Their motors are older then anything else on the road other then the BQ cars in the TM and they are sure as hell not worn. In all the work I have done with museum trains, I have never heard of a traction motor that sounds "worn", usually when they do become worn out or have some other major problem, they just stop working.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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

  I accept