Jump to content

Attention: In order to reply to messages, create topics, have access to other features of the community you must sign up for an account.
Sign in to follow this  
rfortyslant

T line subway car

Recommended Posts

The new (T) line will be out soon. what do you think the train car will be used for the line? judging by the (T) logo, it might be an r68 or r46. (NYCT)(MTA)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The new (T) line will be out soon. what do you think the train car will be used for the line? judging by the (T) logo, it might be an r68 or r46. (NYCT)(MTA)

 

Every rollsign & trains all ready has a T. I hope they put old cars on it first, then hyper-new stuff. :P

 

- Andy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well... I'd like a mix of the oldest cars with the hyper new stuff. But the first train has to be hyper-new. Just to emphasize the newness.

 

Supposedly the R32/38 rollsigns have them as a black letter on a white background.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Will because the 2nd Ave. Subway will fully be CBTB, all trains will be R160 and up. Possible R179 or R143 might run. I know that other older trains will be able to run on the line but that would be extremly rare or it'd be a G.O.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Will because the 2nd Ave. Subway will fully be CBTB, all trains will be R160 and up. Possible R179 or R143 might run. I know that other older trains will be able to run on the line but that would be extremly rare or it'd be a G.O.

 

i have never seen an r179 before! :eek:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The R32 and R38 rollsigns have the (T) route on them, but it is a black T in a white circle. I don't think they are on any other rollsign, I know my R40 side route sign does not have the (T) on it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Correct, only the R32 / R38 Have the Black circle with white lettering--"T" Logo on them. The "T" is NOT listed on any other rollsigns on any subway car. The (T) Line will not be out anytime soon, The earliest I heard is 2017-2019.:P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Correct, only the R32 / R38 Have the Black circle with white lettering--"T" Logo on them. The "T" is NOT listed on any other rollsigns on any subway car. The (T) Line will not be out anytime soon, The earliest I heard is 2017-2019.:P

 

Right, and with the timeline being 2017-2019, I don't see any trains operating the (T) other than NTT's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2017??!?!?!!?!?

ILL BE DEAD BY THEN!! :eek::eek:

lol hopefuly not

 

 

No you wont:p Yeah sorry Dude:o... The (T) is at minimum a decade out.. The OLDEST cars well see opertaing on the (T) will be R68s/R68A's, by then, theyll be about 30-34 years old.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Right, and with the timeline being 2017-2019, I don't see any trains operating the (T) other than NTT's.

 

Very True, but maybe well see some Hippo 68s :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I anticipate the (T) using the R160B cars, or maybe the proposed R179 cars. I don't see the (T) using any other cars. I played with the roll signs in the R32, R40, and R68A cars when the (:P terminated at Brighton Beach. I saw (H)(K) (Q6) (Qx) but no (T). No (T) will operate on the R68 nor R68A, but who knows. If only the (T) were existing then the (4)(5)(6) and <6> will not be so overcrowded.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I anticipate the (T) using the R160B cars, or maybe the proposed R179 cars. I don't see the (T) using any other cars. I played with the roll signs in the R32, R40, and R68A cars when the (B) terminated at Brighton Beach. I saw (H)(K) (Q6) (Qx) but no (T). No (T) will operate on the R68 nor R68A, but who knows. If only the (T) were existing then the (4)(5)(6) and <6> will not be so overcrowded.

 

im sad i never saw the (K) or (H) train :P i saw a picture wherre the (H) was running in 1990! :D i can also see the out line of (K) in an (A)(C)(E) train sign

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
im sad i never saw the (K) or (H) train :P i saw a picture wherre the (H) was running in 1990! :D i can also see the out line of (K) in an (A)(C)(E) train sign

 

I heard talk that they might bring back the (H) to replace the Rockaway (S) because it confuses the hell outta out-of-towners.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I heard talk that they might bring back the (H) to replace the Rockaway (S) because it confuses the hell outta out-of-towners.

 

(H) all the way!

 

- Andy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I heard talk that they might bring back the (H) to replace the Rockaway (S) because it confuses the hell outta out-of-towners.

 

As the (S) replaced the (H), so what goes around comes around... if that's not just a rumor.

 

But it's really the same route, just different designations... right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I anticipate the (T) using the R160B cars, or maybe the proposed R179 cars. I don't see the (T) using any other cars. I played with the roll signs in the R32, R40, and R68A cars when the (:P terminated at Brighton Beach. I saw (H)(K) (Q6) (Qx) but no (T). No (T) will operate on the R68 nor R68A, but who knows. If only the (T) were existing then the (4)(5)(6) and <6> will not be so overcrowded.

 

they should use R68/R68A cars on the (T) because what is the point of having a low capacity R160s if you want this line to relieve (4)(5)(6)<6>. but since they want to have platform screen doors and r160 on the (Q) i think the MTA will use the R160. but by any chance they can use R179 for both of the routes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
they should use R68/R68A cars on the (T) because what is the point of having a low capacity R160s if you want this line to relieve (4)(5)(6)<6>. but since they want to have platform screen doors and r160 on the (Q) i think the MTA will use the R160. but by any chance they can use R179 for both of the routes.

 

There's already better capacity with the R160B cars. R160B cars are 60 feet long where as R142 on (4) and (5) and R142A's on (4)(6)<6>. B division cars are more wider and longer than A division cars. The (4)(5)(6)<6> load by the R160A and R160B running on the (T) and (Q) at 2nd Avenue will help balance commuter ridership, on the East Side of Manhattan.

 

The (4)(5)(6)<6> will have their passenger load reduced by at least 25% if the (Q)(T) were running at 2nd Avenue today.

 

The 2nd Avenue project has been in the works for about 75 years, and I think this dream can become a reality someday, it's just a few setbacks.

 

R68 trains will have less passenger flow than R160 cars. 10 car R160's have 40 sets of doors where as 8 car R68 (75 feet long) only has 32 sets of doors combined. I'm more considerate about passenger flow than seating. :P People need to get in and out of these (Q) and (T).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There's already better capacity with the R160B cars. R160B cars are 60 feet long where as R142 on (4) and (5) and R142A's on (4)(6)<6>. B division cars are more wider and longer than A division cars. The (4)(5)(6)<6> load by the R160A and R160B running on the (T) and (Q) at 2nd Avenue will help balance commuter ridership, on the East Side of Manhattan.

 

The (4)(5)(6)<6> will have their passenger load reduced by at least 25% if the (Q)(T) were running at 2nd Avenue today.

 

The 2nd Avenue project has been in the works for about 75 years, and I think this dream can become a reality someday, it's just a few setbacks.

 

R68 trains will have less passenger flow than R160 cars. 10 car R160's have 40 sets of doors where as 8 car R68 (75 feet long) only has 32 sets of doors combined. I'm more considerate about passenger flow than seating. :P People need to get in and out of these (Q) and (T).

 

A r68/R68A can store up to 500 passengers each car. the R160A/B cans tore uo to 250. R68 are 8 car sets cause they are longer than R160s. so overall a set of R68/a will load more passengers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A r68/R68A can store up to 500 passengers each car. the R160A/B cans tore uo to 250. R68 are 8 car sets cause they are longer than R160s. so overall a set of R68/a will load more passengers.

 

500 people? That's just nonsense. While it is true that the R160 can fit 250 people in a car (actually, 240 in an A car and 246 in a B car according to Wikipedia) the R68 is only 15 feet longer. That's only 150 square feet since the car is 10 feet wide, minus the area it takes for seating on top of that. There's no way 250 more people can fit in 150 square feet if it already takes at least 600. I have to agree with Metatops on this one; there are eight fewer doors on an R68/A train, and the fewer doors there are, the more passengers crowd around them, leading to slower service. So the R160s are better. I think this is one of the reasons the (MTA) went back to 60 ft cars, no?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The new (T) line will be out soon. what do you think the train car will be used for the line? judging by the (T) logo, it might be an r68 or r46. (NYCT)(MTA)

Straight R160s and R179s. I'll be shocked to see anything else other than those two.

they should use R68/R68A cars on the (T) because what is the point of having a low capacity R160s if you want this line to relieve (4)(5)(6)<6>. but since they want to have platform screen doors and r160 on the (Q) i think the MTA will use the R160. but by any chance they can use R179 for both of the routes.
Nope. No screen doors on SAS. Hell, that'll take longer. And I don't see that happening if SAS will using a mix of 60 foot and 75 foot cars.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
500 people? That's just nonsense. While it is true that the R160 can fit 250 people in a car (actually, 240 in an A car and 246 in a B car according to Wikipedia) the R68 is only 15 feet longer. That's only 150 square feet since the car is 10 feet wide, minus the area it takes for seating on top of that. There's no way 250 more people can fit in 150 square feet if it already takes at least 600. I have to agree with Metatops on this one; there are eight fewer doors on an R68/A train, and the fewer doors there are, the more passengers crowd around them, leading to slower service. So the R160s are better. I think this is one of the reasons the (MTA) went back to 60 ft cars, no?

 

yes go find it on wikipedia R46. same specifications in seats.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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