R-211 Soliciations Have Been Posted

[bobtehpanda]

If the positioning of the wheel sets in the R110B was a problem, then all I can say is that they should have followed the design of the BMT Standard.  That way, they could have avoided the problem.  As to train length, the best solution is not always the easiest.  What I'm saying is that the platforms would have to eventually be lengthened to accommodate 10-car 67.5' trains, or 675 feet in total length.  But don't tell me that it's not doable; subway platforms have been lengthened numerous times in the past to keep up with longer trains.  It's called the inevitable march of progress, which the MTA seems unwilling to accept (Eastern Division is case in point).

 

If I remember correctly, wasn't the issue with the Eastern Division the fact that the 75 ft cars' turning radii was greater than the elevated structures allowed? We don't want trains knocking into each other during the rush.

[R10 2952]

Again, progress is progress.  Maybe there was no ADA when the MTA was extending platforms in the 1950s, but there were other problems...

 

@bobtehpanda: 75' cars do have that problem, but I was talking about 67.5' cars.  The A/B Standards were 67.5' and operated on the Eastern Division for decades without knocking into each other.

[Missabassie]

JR E233s would look good over here, they're nearly 67 feet.

Of course I know that'll NEVER happen...

[bobtehpanda]

JR E233s would look good over here, they're nearly 67 feet. Of course I know that'll NEVER happen...

 

I mean, Japanese trains aren't really designed to withstand impacts the way American trains are since they almost never crash them in the first place. They're designed to be extremely efficient cattle cars (and they are, for what it's worth).