Around the Horn Posted July 19, 2016 Share #201 Posted July 19, 2016 I looked it up on the wiki, and that design is slated for 2022. Even though they thought of it first, we'll probably get our trains before they get theirs. If it happens at all. Those trains are proposed to not have an operator and the union is fuming. The design might change. Sent from my iPod touch using NYC Transit Forums mobile app 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Union Tpke Posted July 19, 2016 Share #202 Posted July 19, 2016 If it happens at all. Those trains are proposed to not have an operator and the union is fuming. The design might change. Sent from my iPod touch using NYC Transit Forums mobile app I would hate this. Train operators can make decisions that computing can not do. They also know what to do in an emergency, how to help confused passengers, and for god's sake they are a living human being. Also, the railfanning hobby will go down, as we won't have people who work on the inside, and actually know what is going on. We won't have people to look up to anymore. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LTA1992 Posted July 19, 2016 Share #203 Posted July 19, 2016 Drivers aren't going anywhere any time soon. They have CBTC capabilities, yes. But it will be a long time before a full single non-isolated route is fully automated. An entire division may need to be automated before drivers are gone. And at the current pace, 2100 may be the time. In total seriousness. Sent from my N9132 using Tapatalk 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eric B Posted July 19, 2016 Share #204 Posted July 19, 2016 And they'll never be gone; they'll always have to have someone in front for a system as big and heavily used as this; they'll just activate an alerter button. I wonder how the open gangway setup will work. Will it be like the old articulated cars, with shorter car body segments on a non matching number of trucks; or is it really 60 foot cars with the space sealed up? Not sure how they'll be able to have it sealed like that, and the cars not move too much relative to each other.. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LTA1992 Posted July 19, 2016 Share #205 Posted July 19, 2016 And they'll never be gone; they'll always have to have someone in front for a system as big and heavily used as this; they'll just activate an alerter button. I wonder how the open gangway setup will work. Will it be like the old articulated cars, with shorter car body segments on a non matching number of trucks; or is it really 60 foot cars with the space sealed up? Not sure how they'll be able to have it sealed like that, and the cars not move too much relative to each other.. Good question. I'm trying to remember how the Paris Metro did it. Sent from my N9132 using Tapatalk 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Around the Horn Posted July 19, 2016 Share #206 Posted July 19, 2016 Toronto has 75' cars and gangways so anything is possible Sent from my iPod touch using NYC Transit Forums mobile app 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobtehpanda Posted July 19, 2016 Share #207 Posted July 19, 2016 Remember back when people insisted that open gangways were impossible? 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rbrome Posted July 19, 2016 Share #208 Posted July 19, 2016 I would hate this. Train operators can make decisions that computing can not do. They also know what to do in an emergency, how to help confused passengers, and for god's sake they are a living human being. Also, the railfanning hobby will go down, as we won't have people who work on the inside, and actually know what is going on. We won't have people to look up to anymore. I've ridden a fully automated line. (The new L9/L10 in Barcelona.) It's amazing for railfans. With no cab, you can stand right in front at a giant window. It's glorious. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HenryB Posted July 19, 2016 Share #209 Posted July 19, 2016 (edited) Remember back when people insisted that open gangways were impossible? Originally the R211s were planned to be 75ft so open gangways might not work well with that car length in NYC (?) but 60ft i think it should be fine Edited July 19, 2016 by HenryB 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rbrome Posted July 19, 2016 Share #210 Posted July 19, 2016 I wonder how the open gangway setup will work. Will it be like the old articulated cars, with shorter car body segments on a non matching number of trucks; or is it really 60 foot cars with the space sealed up? Not sure how they'll be able to have it sealed like that, and the cars not move too much relative to each other.. As is often discussed here, open gangways are extremely common all over the world. It's an old technology. In most systems that I've seen, each car has two trucks, just like old-style cars. In fact I'm pretty sure everything below the floor is exactly the same. The only modern trains I can think of with shared trucks are light rail and high-speed rail. I'm not sure why, but I don't think it's common with heavy-rail metros these days. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HenryB Posted July 19, 2016 Share #211 Posted July 19, 2016 I wonder it is possible or not to ask whoever won the bid to modify 1 set of NTT to open gangway configuration, so MTA could test it earlier and then decide how many open gangway configured R211 they want. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
itmaybeokay Posted July 19, 2016 Share #212 Posted July 19, 2016 They have absolutely no chance at getting the R211 order. Yes they are disqualified completely. That means if they submit a bid for the contract MTA has no plans on evaluating it or even giving it consideration. The reason they are disqualified is because MTA is not happy at ALL with the R179 order, and the delays are costing the MTA about $50 Million dollars. At the end of the day MTA will be compensated, however, the last straw was the fact that the R179 should have been here about 2 weeks ago according to the revised schedule. It's wasn't. So from this day forward, they are disqualified until further notice. If the MTA could cancel the R179 order and double up the R211 order they would..... They are pissed like nothing I have seen in over a decade. Dayum take a chill pill MTA... You're not glad they're pissed? It's you and I and all of us who are paying for these cars - they ought to be pissed, we ought to be pissed. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T to Dyre Avenue Posted July 19, 2016 Share #213 Posted July 19, 2016 Not a big fan of the split front destination sign. Looks clunky to me. I'd rather they put all that information in one place, whether it's the top or the side of the door. I think it makes sense. Imagine how overshadowed the words would be if they were under the bullet. Secondly, having the destination sign up top gets rid of the dead space the older renderings had there. Sent from my N9132 using Tapatalk The destination sign could be located over the route bullet too. That would be just as good, because then it would be more visible that if it were under the bullet. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eric B Posted July 19, 2016 Share #214 Posted July 19, 2016 As is often discussed here, open gangways are extremely common all over the world. It's an old technology. In most systems that I've seen, each car has two trucks, just like old-style cars. In fact I'm pretty sure everything below the floor is exactly the same. The only modern trains I can think of with shared trucks are light rail and high-speed rail. I'm not sure why, but I don't think it's common with heavy-rail metros these days. Do these other systems (especially the more “modern” ones) have tight curves like we do? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GojiMet86 Posted July 19, 2016 Share #215 Posted July 19, 2016 I think Paris got tighter curves because they have even shorter cars. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LTA1992 Posted July 19, 2016 Share #216 Posted July 19, 2016 I think Paris got tighter curves because they have even shorter cars.Actually, it's the other way around. The tight curves are a result of following the streets.The destination sign could be located over the route bullet too. That would be just as good, because then it would be more visible that if it were under the bullet.I don't know. Aesthetically, I just prefer what was shown in the pics. Sent from my N9132 using Tapatalk 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MHV9218 Posted July 19, 2016 Share #217 Posted July 19, 2016 Actually, it's the other way around. The tight curves are a result of following the streets. What lol? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LTA1992 Posted July 19, 2016 Share #218 Posted July 19, 2016 (edited) What lol? I just realized. I'll go sit in a corner and rethink my life now. Edited July 19, 2016 by LTA1992 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HenryB Posted July 19, 2016 Share #219 Posted July 19, 2016 So hopefully the project of R211 goes well after it gains so many attention from public and media 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jose Angel Posted July 19, 2016 Share #220 Posted July 19, 2016 What cars is the R211 going to replace, the R44's, the R46's or both? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xfer2Nowhere Posted July 19, 2016 Share #221 Posted July 19, 2016 What cars is the R211 going to replace, the R44's, the R46's or both? The Subway R44s are all gone. There will be a Staten Island Railway version to replace the 44s here. On the Subway, it's intended for the R46s and whatever the 179s don't finish off. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jon2305 Posted July 19, 2016 Share #222 Posted July 19, 2016 (edited) What cars is the R211 going to replace, the R44's, the R46's or both? They'll most likely replace the remaining R32s and possibly all of the R46s. The R44s have already been retired from service. As stated above, several new R211s will replace the current fleet on the Staten Island Railway. Edited July 19, 2016 by jon2305 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fan Railer Posted July 19, 2016 Share #223 Posted July 19, 2016 Do these other systems (especially the more “modern” ones) have tight curves like we do? The TTC has some pretty tight curves, and the Rocket is 6-75 foot cars with open gangways. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jose Angel Posted July 19, 2016 Share #224 Posted July 19, 2016 Guys check this link out. http://www.mta.info/news-subway-new-york-city-transit-governor/2016/07/19/plan-adds-1025-subway-cars-including-750-open 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amtrak41 Posted July 19, 2016 Share #225 Posted July 19, 2016 Wider doors likely means 4 fewer seats than an R160. I do not like the diaganol bars at the ends of the benches. Something like PATH or TTC has is better. They could always bump R68's to SIR so as not to deal with a semi-RR version of the R211, that would likely be individually coupled again. 0 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.