fishmech Posted January 15, 2010 Share #26 Posted January 15, 2010 That's only $6000 per person you can fit into a packed subway car though! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
m7zanr160s Posted January 15, 2010 Share #27 Posted January 15, 2010 No, 3 of the 4 cars are sitting at 207th Street while the car that tried to fly went back to Kawasucki to get rebuilt or to see if it could be. LOL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
m7zanr160s Posted January 15, 2010 Share #28 Posted January 15, 2010 Yep, usually a bent frame is the end of a rail cars life. It's like severing a persons spine. EWWW... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
m7zanr160s Posted January 15, 2010 Share #29 Posted January 15, 2010 I thought is would cost way less because the car is already built. It's not like brand new parts have to be purchased (for the most part). I wonder if stripping it down and rebuilding it would cost more than buying a brand new one...? Maybe they would keep the old frame and build a new one, then put the parts back on. It sounds more expensive... But then again, three 143's sitting, collecting dust in the yard, is about a 3.6 million dollar waste, so...we'll see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KeystoneRegional Posted January 15, 2010 Share #30 Posted January 15, 2010 Please, watch the Nazi Banksters Crimes Ripple Effect at http://jforjustice.co.uk/banksters Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rr4567 Posted January 15, 2010 Share #31 Posted January 15, 2010 Use the last 3 cars for parts, the car that believed it could fly, remove it's parts too and scrap it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
St Louis Car 09 Posted January 15, 2010 Share #32 Posted January 15, 2010 The cars cost around $1.2 mil a piece. Yes it costs much. But you would think given its age that Kawasaki would discount it,but I guess the technology thrown in may keep it the same price. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
m7zanr160s Posted January 15, 2010 Share #33 Posted January 15, 2010 Or, maybe there's a warranty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
North-Eastern T/O Posted January 15, 2010 Share #34 Posted January 15, 2010 Or, maybe there's a warranty. NOT, It's been up for years before this happen, plus this would not be covered. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
m7zanr160s Posted January 15, 2010 Share #35 Posted January 15, 2010 Yeah, you're right. I forgot how long it's been. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eric B Posted January 15, 2010 Share #36 Posted January 15, 2010 Isn't it not even a single frame, but rather a series of metal strips making up the floor that were bent? Since this was not a usual crash, where the body was crushed; I would say completely dismantle it, take the exterior side panels off; and pay for a new frame and reuse everything that is reusable. So that would be like building a new car, but cost less than using all new material. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
INDman Posted January 15, 2010 Share #37 Posted January 15, 2010 Isn't it not even a single frame, but rather a series of metal strips making up the floor that were bent?Since this was not a usual crash, where the body was crushed; I would say completely dismantle it, take the exterior side panels off; and pay for a new frame and reuse everything that is reusable. So that would be like building a new car, but cost less than using all new material. I heard from a friend in CED that the frame was bent because the one end of the car went up in the air and the truck did not fall off, thus bending the frame. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eric B Posted January 16, 2010 Share #38 Posted January 16, 2010 That's what I heard (which I thought was ridiculous; again; it wasn't an impact), but then I also heard that this "frame" was individual strips making up the floor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
INDman Posted January 16, 2010 Share #39 Posted January 16, 2010 That's what I heard (which I thought was ridiculous; again; it wasn't an impact), but then I also heard that this "frame" was individual strips making up the floor. The floor is added onto the frame, but I don't know the structure of these cars that well and it would not suprize me if something like that was done to "cut down on weight". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
7LineFan Posted January 16, 2010 Share #40 Posted January 16, 2010 A frame could be replaced because a railcar is a robot not a living thing sir... The frame is the structure to which everything is mounted. It gives the car structure and support. Bending it ends its life because it gets weakened and becomes a liability to safety. And because everything is attached to it, you might as well just retire the car and get a new one rather than go through all the manpower to remove everything from the frame, build a new one, and then reattach everything to the new frame sir... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
INDman Posted January 16, 2010 Share #41 Posted January 16, 2010 Thats gross, but anyways. A frame could be replaced because a railcar is a robot not a living thing sir... Have you ever done any work what so ever on any rail vehicle? Unless you have, you have no idea what you are talking about. Like I had said before, a bent frame usually means that the car is done for. And yes, because I know your going to ask, I have done work on several rail cars including subway cars so I don know what I am talking about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2Julio Posted January 16, 2010 Share #42 Posted January 16, 2010 Have you ever done any work what so ever on any rail vehicle? Unless you have, you have no idea what you are talking about. Like I had said before, a bent frame usually means that the car is done for. And yes, because I know your going to ask, I have done work on several rail cars including subway cars so I don know what I am talking about. I can vouch for both. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
m7zanr160s Posted May 30, 2010 Share #43 Posted May 30, 2010 Since Kawasaki is done with the R160 order, is there any word on 8277? I figured that would take priority over a possible repair. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe C Posted May 31, 2010 Share #44 Posted May 31, 2010 Since Kawasaki is done with the R160 order, is there any word on 8277? I figured that would take priority over a possible repair. It's likely that the car is done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grand Concourse Posted May 31, 2010 Share #45 Posted May 31, 2010 I guess this means 3 'orphans'. Really short sighted of the MTA to have the R160s incompatable with the R143s. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest lance25 Posted May 31, 2010 Share #46 Posted May 31, 2010 @GC: Really?!?! I thought and short-sighted go hand-in-hand like twins attached at the hip. B) These are the guys who rehabbed the IRT redbirds only to dump them in the Atlantic months later. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rr4567 Posted May 31, 2010 Share #47 Posted May 31, 2010 Have you ever done any work what so ever on any rail vehicle? Unless you have, you have no idea what you are talking about. Like I had said before, a bent frame usually means that the car is done for. And yes, because I know your going to ask, I have done work on several rail cars including subway cars so I don know what I am talking about. Resopnse to bold section: You don? B) ____________________________________________________________________ A bent frame usually means that the structure is weakened, and may not hold together anymore. Knowing this, can't the MTA just have them build another R160 frame, and just use those R143 parts on it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SubwayGuy Posted May 31, 2010 Share #48 Posted May 31, 2010 A bent frame usually means that the structure is weakened, and may not hold together anymore. Knowing this, can't the MTA just have them build another R160 frame, and just use those R143 parts on it? Cheaper (and easier) to just buy a new car. Do you have any idea how long it takes to dismantle and then assemble an entire subway car? Always amazes me how it seems to short the buffs' circuits when something is 'unused'...be it express tracks or NTT's or whatever... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
INDman Posted May 31, 2010 Share #49 Posted May 31, 2010 Resopnse to bold section: You don? B) ____________________________________________________________________ A bent frame usually means that the structure is weakened, and may not hold together anymore. Knowing this, can't the MTA just have them build another R160 frame, and just use those R143 parts on it? Grow up, other people know what I was saying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rr4567 Posted May 31, 2010 Share #50 Posted May 31, 2010 Grow up, other people know what I was saying.Stop being so serious, it's called a joke. Cheaper (and easier) to just buy a new car. Do you have any idea how long it takes to dismantle and then assemble an entire subway car? Yes, I do realize how long it takes, but there may be a few issues. 1) Do they still make the parts? Yeah, it may seem like a stupid question at first, but technology gets old quick. I mean, look at the iPhone. Is the 2G version still manufactured? 2) Wouldn't it just be cheaper to build a frame vs. building a whole subway car (including buying the same parts all over again) Those are the only things I can think of right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.