mark1447 Posted April 21, 2012 Share #1 Posted April 21, 2012 In the book Evolution of NYCS, the cover shows that the R142 has some red decal wrapped around the Cab Window. Was the R142 originally suppose to come out like this? If so, what happened to it? I know the Red Strip is for a tribute to the Redbirds. Photo: http://i44.tinypic.com/14lrhp4.jpg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eric B Posted April 21, 2012 Share #2 Posted April 21, 2012 I guess it was a tentative design (trying to see if I remember that), but then it was finally replaced by the stripe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
INDman Posted April 21, 2012 Share #3 Posted April 21, 2012 I guess it was a tentative design (trying to see if I remember that), but then it was finally replaced by the stripe. Corect, there where also drawing with a rollsign in the offside cab window and another where the current LED sign was to be a rollsign. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Far Rock Depot Posted April 21, 2012 Share #4 Posted April 21, 2012 Corect, there where also drawing with a rollsign in the offside cab window and another where the current LED sign was to be a rollsign. True. I remember seeing all the concepts as an intern. The mock-up had the all red front with roll sign. The pic on the cover was drawn by a friend i gained working there. (i spent a lot of time in New Car Engineering) An older concept had the front resembling an L.A. subway car. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kamen Rider Posted April 21, 2012 Share #5 Posted April 21, 2012 90% of the time a finished product looks next to nothing like it's concept. Auto makers love to put out these exceting concept cars, and when they actually get around to building it, they take out all the flashy looks and it ends up looking just like last model. First, they were going to be a production version of the R110A/R130s, then they went with version with the R40-R68 side rollsign with the red racoon mask, then with the top one, then went back to the LEDs, before they settled on when we've got Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T to Dyre Avenue Posted April 22, 2012 Share #6 Posted April 22, 2012 I would have liked for them to have gone with the mock-up's front design (the red top half with the left side rollsign), but they seemed to want to move away from rollsigns completely in favor of top-mounted LED signs. That probably explains why the R143/160 cars have top-mounted LED signs too, as opposed to the R110B's rollsign. It's too bad because the left side rollsigns are much more legible from far away than the LED signs are (though the LEDs are way better than the flipdot signs that the R32s and R38s got saddled with during GOH). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Far Rock Depot Posted April 22, 2012 Share #7 Posted April 22, 2012 one of the things they tried out on the 110B was adding a destination under the bullet on the rollsigns making the bullet smaller. I admit, im one of the many here who would lke to see colored LED end signs, which were on the 110As, but when asking the engineers back then why only red, its for better visability for other T/O's operating trains behind it. Think about the logic. a T/O basically becomes more aware seeing red as a safty measure. Similar reason they continue with round head/marker lights instead of square or a stripe-like light as in the original concept of the 110Bs because it goes against FRA regs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eric B Posted April 23, 2012 Share #8 Posted April 23, 2012 I'm not sure if the "rollsign" on the mockups was necessarily supposed to represent a definite rollsign. It was probably just a rough representation of the sign, and not made to indicate which technology would be used. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Far Rock Depot Posted April 23, 2012 Share #9 Posted April 23, 2012 I'm not sure if the "rollsign" on the mockups was necessarily supposed to represent a definite rollsign. It was probably just a rough representation of the sign, and not made to indicate which technology would be used. Actually, it was. It wasnt until after the mock up was built and publicly displayed at Livingston St that they decided on the LED. The first concept is actually in the Evolution book and it resembled an R62. The second concept resembled an LA subway car. The third was was similar to the mock up. The forth has it looking like it does now except that one, and the following 3 played around with the vinyl graphics (the red on the end bonnet and sides. including the one in the OP. Granted, current sources on this are pretty much no longer available since this was 15 years ago. BUt mark my words as i always state, i spent a LOT of time in New Car Engineering when i was an intern. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mark1447 Posted April 23, 2012 Author Share #10 Posted April 23, 2012 Link dead, replaced: http://i39.tinypic.com/vfavbm.jpg Thx for the answers. Now just one more question. Will the MTA plan to add the red strips in its future fleet? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T to Dyre Avenue Posted April 23, 2012 Share #11 Posted April 23, 2012 I liked the fourth rendering - the one with the red on the sides. That really would have been a fitting tribute to the Redbirds. But I can see why the MTA rejected it. It would have probably cost quite a bit to maintain that red coloring (paint or vinyl) on 40% of the R142/188 fleet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.