Jump to content

R188 Discussion Thread

DOB2RTO

By DOB2RTO,
in New York City Subway

Recommended Posts

Maserati7200

Maserati7200

Posted
Posted

AWWang, just curious what's you're reason for wanting to put CBTC on the r62A's? Mine WAS because I thought they would be retired early without it. But If the R188's come, those R62A's are just going somewhere else hence they will not be retired early. The R188 is a contract that calls for 23 NEW cars and the rest of the R188 contract would be converted R142/A's by the original manufacturer (the contract says the Kawasaki converts R142A's and Bombardier converts R142's). Another part of this contract is for conversion kits so NYCT can do it themselves. What is doing to take place of those R142/A's? The R62's!

 

I now realize it wasn't necessary. So if that was you're reason: BACK DOWN, MAN. AND STOP MAKING A FOOL OF YOURSELF. So what's you're reason AWWang?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 391
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Cait Sith

Cait Sith

Posted
Posted

CBTC - Communication Based Train Control. Possible candidates - R142, R143, R160s. Specs for these cars makes it easy.

 

R62/R62As just cant be converted into that.....they would need similar specs associated with the R142s or R160s for it to actually work. If the (MTA) said it was capable, then ok, this pointless arguement would be done for. CBTC Requires integrated displays in cabs and a specialized GPS signaling system for each cab car.

 

The R62s are about 20 years out of date with that new technology and it would pretty much overwork those cars, considering all the equipment it has already. They can probably make wires through the walls, but that would interfere with several things.

 

Hell, even my uncle says that these cars may not even be able to be worked up to CBTC qualifications, and he works for the (MTA) and he goes to Coney Island Yard for duties for the summer time ( gets extra pay :P ). He's worked with the B Division cars along with the R62s and R142s that are there at times and he used to do the SMS for the R46s when the first few sets got the black floors. He doesnt know alot about car equipment but he knows his stuff and the things that are in these subway cars.

 

And here's another note, ever wonder why the (L) line was being tested for CBTC? THEIR CARS!!! The R143s were CBTC compatible, with a few adjustments here and there. So they tried to implement a system where the (L) Trains can be tracked via GPS ( tells when the next train comes, most of the time its very accurate ), and an upgraded signaling system. Pretty much related to the CBTC that the (L) line currently has. Thus pointing out why CBTC is better for newer equipment.

 

Make a dumb assumption and I'll personally introduce you to the floor

Link to comment
Share on other sites
via White Plains Road

via White Plains Road

Posted
Posted
Everyone here is just people who has addiction of arguing... I said just attach the system to wires and convert some of the ads on the roof to have CBTC things installed and you are perfectly describing the everyone who is arguing with me and me...

 

Wow....attach wires and ads on the roof=epic failure b/c it doesn't work that and its more work than adding ads on the roof and putting in wires....again you have no engineering skills so all of that is hotair coming out of your mouth. Second of all how can you add ads on a roof of a train and the only belong there is HVAC....so I would love to hear that explaination

 

I called you Stupid because you are arguing like you are going to explode!!!

 

You are disrespectful to me, other members and forums staff. You have the audacity to call me stupid but you haven't made a vaild point and you copying off of others ppl comments. I maybe disagree with other members but I never once call them a name. You are so lucky you a minor b/c I have a few not so nice words for you.....I really advise you to watch what say to me. You must not know me very well....I will not tolerate for any name calling from anyone on here. I'm so not the one to play with. I'll shallow my pride and not go off on you on here b/c I refuse to get banned!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Maserati7200

Maserati7200

Posted
Posted

Okay AWWang, Majinvegeta and CurAke79 made it very clear why it is pointless (and wayy too much work) for the R62A's to be converted. Even I advocating it realized I was wrong. So be mature AWWang, admit you are wrong As I am now.

 

HEY WORLD!!! I WAS WRONG WHEN I SAID IT WOULDN'T BE HARD/ILLOGICAL TO CONVERT R62A's to CBTC!

 

and AWWang, you never said what you;re reasoning was for WHY YOU THINK THE R62A'S SHOULD BE CONVERTED

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Maserati7200

Maserati7200

Posted
Posted
On-Topic

 

Even tho the R188s just might be the evil ancestor of the R142 ( look wise ) They should reinvent the bullet signage for the cars, digital bullet signs on the front of the cars, not that crappy red LED

 

Yeah, I was thinking about that too! The problem is, that would have to be an actual display (like the ones you get with you're computer), which costs a lot more than what is there now. It would be better though

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Cait Sith

Cait Sith

Posted
Posted
Yeah, I was thinking about that too! The problem is, that would have to be an actual display (like the ones you get with you're computer), which costs a lot more than what is there now. It would be better though

 

They can just do what they did with the R110Bs

 

(A)

Lefferts Blvd

 

Not a huge display of information. Just a digital route display on the front of the cars with the route bullet and destination. But interior wise, they can pull off an R160

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Cait Sith

Cait Sith

Posted
Posted
Oh, yup R-110B's but narrower could be the R-188 design... And R-110B's current stule could be R-179's... That would at least work for me without stating another arguement...

 

R-160 traits can be implemented like F.I.N.D....

 

I'm with you on that one. The R179s should be like the R110Bs, just different specs here and there.

 

The R188s should have the R142 Design with slightly different cosmetic differences, front end to have a digitial display (almost like a rollsign) and interior displays like the R160s

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Maserati7200

Maserati7200

Posted
Posted
They can just do what they did with the R110Bs

 

(A)

Lefferts Blvd

 

Not a huge display of information. Just a digital route display on the front of the cars with the route bullet and destination. But interior wise, they can pull off an R160

 

Ohhh. I though the R110B had a Roll-sign in front that displayed (A)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Cait Sith

Cait Sith

Posted
Posted
Couldn't they just install an LCD on the front, make it look like rollsigns? It would be a lot brighter, if they backlit it.

 

That's what I was trying to explain. An LCD on the front that makes it look like what the R110Bs have.

 

The R188s could have that same thing, but since these seem to be singled out for the (7), that would be rather useless, but it would be kinda cool to see it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
R32 3348

R32 3348

Posted
Posted
But, the R-62 could go into SMS and Overhaul and have CBTC! Just deal with it, Just Deal With It, JUST DEAL WITH IT!!!

You just don't get it don't you... The R-62 I can tell, it can be CBTC ready! So just get over it and stop arguing and defending yourself when you do not get the point!!!

 

I like when people on this forums argue around... Just too much arguement, just too much!

You are the base of half of these arguments with your senseless drivel. And how old are you? That first sentence makes you out to be a three year old.

GO BACK TO SLEEP!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MTR Admiralty

MTR Admiralty

Posted
Posted
Okay AWWang, Majinvegeta and CurAke79 made it very clear why it is pointless (and wayy too much work) for the R62A's to be converted. Even I advocating it realized I was wrong. So be mature AWWang, admit you are wrong As I am now.

 

HEY WORLD!!! I WAS WRONG WHEN I SAID IT WOULDN'T BE HARD/ILLOGICAL TO CONVERT R62A's to CBTC!

 

and AWWang, you never said what you;re reasoning was for WHY YOU THINK THE R62A'S SHOULD BE CONVERTED

 

AGREED, though it may be possible, would it be worthwhile?

Grow up AWWang.. we're not trying to put you down here. But, you should really consider what SHOULD be said and what SHOULD NOT be said.

AWWang, no offence, but do you honestly know how to use the words such as EPIC FAIL? You can't say somebody is an epic fail, it either the person epically failed or the person is an epic failure.

So to sum it up, the R62/As (like it or not) should not be modernised in order to have the technology installed and if a conversion was to take place, that it should be done on the R142/As. It doesn't matter whether you like NTTs or not, it doesn't pertain what cars you like here, it is about WHAT WORKS FOR THE PEOPLE.

 

As for the on topic. I believe YES, that the rollsign should be brought back. Only DIGITISED with a LCD screen. That way the route is clearly shown and could be programmable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Trainmaster5 Motorman (Retired)

Trainmaster5

Posted
Posted

I've been watching this thread for a while and I'd like to add a few points if I may. I've been a motorman in the A division for over 25 years. I was present at Coney Island yard when the majority of the 62A cars were delivered there.I transferred most the cars from CI yard to East 180 st and 239th st yards to be prepped. I transferred cars from East 180st to 240th yard after they were prepped and tested. I spoke with the Bombardier people almost daily in the early stages. I remember clearly when a "Bomb" rep told a few of us m/m and car inspectors at East 180st yard that these cars should never be modified, that they were delivered as spec'd and that modifications would void all warrantys because of the weight and electrical system in each car. Those of us who remember when the hippo's, junior and senior, were designed and built know that the (NYCT) and NYS legislature instituted a rule where a certain percentage of the components in these cars had to be American made. Preferably New York made. I'm sure that many civil lawyers in our state are aware of that rule too. That's the main reason R62 or 62A cars can't and won't ever have the mods done to add CBTC to them. It's a violation of the structural integrity of the cars as well as the law. One accident with injuries would bankrupt NY state as well as the (MTA). As for the wireless GPS idea we have the ATS system on the IRT mainline and it loses train ID's and misroutes trains quite frequently. Our train radios have dead spots even with booster base stations in the system. That's why NYPD and FDNY don't trust the communication system down there. ATS system, like CBTC, is bought to you by the Siemans Co. Those of us who work down here want both systems scrapped yet some posters here have swallowed the Kool-Aid and want it to be implemented all over. I can see building an R188 with provisions for such a system but converting old cars is probably illegal and a waste. As far as the Queens Blvd lines, forget it. Why do you think they're testing it on the smallest lines and division ?

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