depotofrelax Posted August 28, 2012 Share #901 Posted August 28, 2012 let the drama start lol. Why can they rebuild the R142A / R188 but what i am saying Except keeping Bombardier Propulsion. They should change the Propulsion system to Alstom ONYX transaction. Or the 360 R188 is the new cars . 6 line will still keep R142A or they should leave the propulsion way it is. Keep Bombardier Propulsion. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fan Railer Posted August 28, 2012 Share #902 Posted August 28, 2012 let the drama start lol. Why can they rebuild the R142A / R188 but what i am saying Except keeping Bombardier Propulsion. They should change the Propulsion system to Alstom ONYX transaction. Or the 360 R188 is the new cars . 6 line will still keep R142A or they should leave the propulsion way it is. Keep Bombardier Propulsion. Logistically speaking, it makes more sense to convert the propulsion, because the majority of the NTT fleet shares the Alstom propulsion system, so that makes for better parts interchangeability. As for the actual proof that they're doing it, there has not been a documented reliable source proving it, so we'll have to wait for that as confirmation. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
depotofrelax Posted August 28, 2012 Share #903 Posted August 28, 2012 The original plan was R142A #7211 - #7570 ( 360 converted to them to CBTC communication based train control) while it was supposed to be 146 new cars supposed to be the R188 roster number was 146 new cars were #7811 - #7956. I already know. if 360 cars is new it will be good news for 6 line they will able to keep 360 R142A. Still have additonal 100 cars will keep. #7221 - #7680 ( 460 cars) Intsend they will have only keeping 100 cars of R142A #7571 - #7670. with keep R62A .sending all R62A to 3 line. So 6 line will have R142A 100 cars & with mostly with R62A. has 3 line have R62A / R62. 146 new cars R188 roster was #7811 - #7956 So except complaining about 6 line at least they will have 100 cars of R142A cars while 360 R142A will be converted to R188. the new car roster number was #7811 - #7956. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
depotofrelax Posted August 28, 2012 Share #904 Posted August 28, 2012 And that will total 506 cars of R188 new cars for 7 line #7211 - #7570 , #7811 - #7956 ( 506 cars new cars for 7 line ) 6 line still keep #7571-#7670 100 cars. Additional cars . if there are car shortage for 6 line there is problem for 6 line. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheSubwayStation Posted August 29, 2012 Share #905 Posted August 29, 2012 Logistically speaking, it makes more sense to convert the propulsion, because the majority of the NTT fleet shares the Alstom propulsion system, so that makes for better parts interchangeability. If the MTA cared about interchangeability, then why would they have ordered the R179s with MITRAC propulsion? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grand Concourse Posted August 29, 2012 Share #906 Posted August 29, 2012 And if they wanted interchangeability, the R160B should've been compatible with the R143s and Kawasaki could've built an extra A car for that 'canarsie yard' set that has been left out for all these years later. 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fan Railer Posted August 29, 2012 Share #907 Posted August 29, 2012 If the MTA cared about interchangeability, then why would they have ordered the R179s with MITRAC propulsion? Because Bombardier has its own propulsion division, so it makes more sense to order the propulsion directly from them rather than have Bombardier contract it out to another company, as it may be more expensive to do that. there are a LOT more factors to consider when dealing with whether or not you can make a fleet interchangeable with another. Price is one of them. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fan Railer Posted August 29, 2012 Share #908 Posted August 29, 2012 And if they wanted interchangeability, the R160B should've been compatible with the R143s and Kawasaki could've built an extra A car for that 'canarsie yard' set that has been left out for all these years later. Once again, you're making it sound really simple. It's not. The R160s were SUPPOSED to be compatible with the R143's, but that was out of the MTA's control once the cars were delivered and tested. A lot of things can go wrong in the designing and contracting out to third party vendors process that would render a car type incompatible with another. And you're also forgetting that the R143's are WAY out of warranty and procurement contracting dates. In order to procure a replacement car, the MTA would have to go through a huge binding legal tender process that would cost a lot of money, just to get one car to render a single 4 car set revenue capable again. Not worth their time. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grand Concourse Posted August 29, 2012 Share #909 Posted August 29, 2012 So basically the MTA is stuck with a very expensive 3-car 'orphans' for parts then.... Well I guess they could be used again if something happens to another 4 car set... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orion VII 4 Life Posted August 30, 2012 Share #910 Posted August 30, 2012 Alstom propulsion boxes on the bottoms of the cars have a nameplate with the Alstom logo on it. I don't know about the converted cars, but the new cars will more than likely have new traction motors as I'm positive Bombardier no longer makes the Adtranz propulsion from the 142As. Kawasaki has been building a lot of cars with Siemens propulsion lately (in the 160Bs as well as the PA-5s), so I'm expecting them. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Vandelay Posted August 30, 2012 Share #911 Posted August 30, 2012 Why are people expecting that the traction motors would be changed? AC Traction motors are not cheap by any means. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orion VII 4 Life Posted August 30, 2012 Share #912 Posted August 30, 2012 Why are people expecting that the traction motors would be changed? AC Traction motors are not cheap by any means. They could be thinking that because the new cars will probably have different traction, but I don't see why the converted cars would need new motors to be compatible with the new ones. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheSubwayStation Posted August 30, 2012 Share #913 Posted August 30, 2012 Well, won't the new cars run in the same trainsets as the old ones? If that's the case, then the new motors will have to be compatible with the old ones. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T to Dyre Avenue Posted August 30, 2012 Share #914 Posted August 30, 2012 (edited) Once again, you're making it sound really simple. It's not. The R160s were SUPPOSED to be compatible with the R143's, but that was out of the MTA's control once the cars were delivered and tested. A lot of things can go wrong in the designing and contracting out to third party vendors process that would render a car type incompatible with another. And you're also forgetting that the R143's are WAY out of warranty and procurement contracting dates. In order to procure a replacement car, the MTA would have to go through a huge binding legal tender process that would cost a lot of money, just to get one car to render a single 4 car set revenue capable again. Not worth their time. The MTA could have written it into the R160 contract that the cars be compatible with the older R143s. They did it in the past. Every B Division car from R16 to R42 was capable of running in the same train under normal circumstances. Same with A Division cars from R12 to R36. Even post-GOH, R32s ran with R38s and R40ms ran with R42s. There was even a married pair made up of an R40m and an R42 (put together because their original mates, ironically, were in a collision). Now we have three R143s sidelined because "it's not worth it" to produce another car that can run with them. Ridiculous, that's what it is. Edited August 30, 2012 by T to Dyre Avenue 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fresh Pond Posted August 31, 2012 Share #915 Posted August 31, 2012 The MTA could have written it into the R160 contract that the cars be compatible with the older R143s. They did it in the past. Every B Division car from R16 to R42 was capable of running in the same train under normal circumstances. Same with A Division cars from R12 to R36. Even post-GOH, R32s ran with R38s and R40ms ran with R42s. There was even a married pair made up of an R40m and an R42 (put together because their original mates, ironically, were in a collision). Now we have three R143s sidelined because "it's not worth it" to produce another car that can run with them. Ridiculous, that's what it is. Actually every car class from R10 to R42 (both A and B division) can operate with each other due to them being SMEEs. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XcelsiorBoii4888 Posted August 31, 2012 Share #916 Posted August 31, 2012 So basically the MTA is stuck with a very expensive 3-car 'orphans' for parts then.... Well I guess they could be used again if something happens to another 4 car set... wait an r143 got into an accident?? im guessing the first car since i said theres a 3 car set not being used...does anyone know where that 3 car set is at? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SevenEleven Posted August 31, 2012 Share #917 Posted August 31, 2012 wait an r143 got into an accident?? The bumper block overrun in the yard when the T/O had a heart attack? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orion VII 4 Life Posted August 31, 2012 Share #918 Posted August 31, 2012 Well, won't the new cars run in the same trainsets as the old ones? If that's the case, then the new motors will have to be compatible with the old ones. R160 Alstom and Siemens can run in the same consist, so I'm sure they can do the same with these. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fresh Pond Posted August 31, 2012 Share #919 Posted August 31, 2012 (edited) wait an r143 got into an accident?? im guessing the first car since i said theres a 3 car set not being used...does anyone know where that 3 car set is at? 8277 hit a bumper block in Canarsie yard bad enough where the frame bent. No one knows what's gonna happen to it, but the other 3 cars of the set is sitting in 207 somewhere R160 Alstom and Siemens can run in the same consist, so I'm sure they can do the same with these. Well that doesn't really count since they both are a 160. But even that combination isn't perfect cuz of the propulsion packages. With the Siemens cars while braking, the dynamic brakes stay on until about 5 mph then the regular brake shoes kick in. Now with the Alstom cars, the dynamic brakes stay on all the way to 1 or 2 mph, then the brake shoes kick in. So in a sense, one car will be pulling the other when slowing down which causes the cars to bang into each other Edited August 31, 2012 by Fresh Pond 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheSubwayStation Posted August 31, 2012 Share #920 Posted August 31, 2012 Well that doesn't really count since they both are a 160. But even that combination isn't perfect cuz of the propulsion packages. With the Alstom cars while braking, the dynamic brakes stay on until about 5 mph then the regular brake shoes kick in. Now with the Siemens cars, the dynamic brakes stay on all the way to 1 or 2 mph, then the brake shoes kick in. So in a sense, one car will be pulling the other when slowing down which causes the cars to bang into each other You got the two mixed up. It's the Siemens that cuts out at 5 MPH. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R32 3838 Posted August 31, 2012 Share #921 Posted August 31, 2012 From what I heard the R188's will have the same systems as the R142A's 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Threxx Posted August 31, 2012 Share #922 Posted August 31, 2012 From what I heard the R188's will have the same systems as the R142A's NO. It's not like they are being built from the SAME CARS... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fresh Pond Posted August 31, 2012 Share #923 Posted August 31, 2012 NO. It's not like they are being built from the SAME CARS... Settle down kid, shit ain't that serious... 8 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orion VII 4 Life Posted August 31, 2012 Share #924 Posted August 31, 2012 NO. It's not like they are being built from the SAME CARS... 1. Calm down 2. I'm almost positive they don't make that propulsion anymore. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brighton Express Posted September 1, 2012 Share #925 Posted September 1, 2012 NO. It's not like they are being built from the SAME CARS... Geez man its just a train. You act like it is your LIFE. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.