Maserati7200 Posted February 26, 2009 Share #1 Posted February 26, 2009 Can you have lets say set of 6 R46 run on the ? The entire train won't be too long (it will be 450 feet when the standard 8 60 foot set is 480 feet) and certainly not too heavy considering The R160's, which are heavier, run on those lines. :cool: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fan Railer Posted February 26, 2009 Share #2 Posted February 26, 2009 Can you have lets say set of 6 R46 run on the ? The entire train won't be too long (it will be 450 feet when the standard 8 60 foot set is 480 feet) and certainly not too heavy considering The R160's, which are heavier, run on those lines. :cool: i believe the turn radius on several parts of the line are too small to fit 75 foot cars. and it would be more cost effective to expand to 600ft platforms than to mod for 75ft cars. same for the lines. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KeystoneRegional Posted February 26, 2009 Share #3 Posted February 26, 2009 Please, watch the Nazi Banksters Crimes Ripple Effect at http://jforjustice.co.uk/banksters Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SubwayGuy Posted February 26, 2009 Share #4 Posted February 26, 2009 No. Loading gauge issues, particularly related to curves. 75 foot cars taking curves on opposite tracks at the same time would create fouling points due to the overhang of the car ends past the trucks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
N-Trizzy2609 Posted February 26, 2009 Share #5 Posted February 26, 2009 The can't run 75 feet mistakes at all. The Crescent Street curve is to blame for that. They can operate on the . The would probably be able to use them now that the Snickerer Avenue El is gone tho the Morgan Street maybe too extreme for 75 Footers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R421969 Posted February 26, 2009 Share #6 Posted February 26, 2009 The can't run 75 feet mistakes at all. The Crescent Street curve is to blame for that. They can operate on the . The would probably be able to use them now that the Snickerer Avenue El is gone tho the Morgan Street maybe too extreme for 75 Footers. sometimes I think that the wheels are scrapping against the tracks when that turn occurs...it feels as though its 2 sharp. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
metsfan Posted February 26, 2009 Share #7 Posted February 26, 2009 No. Loading gauge issues, particularly related to curves. 75 foot cars taking curves on opposite tracks at the same time would create fouling points due to the overhang of the car ends past the trucks. This is the only reason they don't run them. The tunnel clearances are very tight,, would have to be taken at 10 mph or so, but add in another train & it doesn't work. Platform gaps are less of an issue since most station platforms attempt to be straight along most of the length. The 75 foot cars may be retired a lot earlier than their age determines due to the new 60 foot cars being delivered allowing much more flexibility in those areas without issue. - A Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KeystoneRegional Posted February 27, 2009 Share #8 Posted February 27, 2009 Please, watch the Nazi Banksters Crimes Ripple Effect at http://jforjustice.co.uk/banksters Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maserati7200 Posted February 27, 2009 Author Share #9 Posted February 27, 2009 The 75 foot cars may be retired a lot earlier than their age determines due to the new 60 foot cars being delivered allowing much more flexibility in those areas without issue. But the R179 order is supposedly 75 feet (says so in the Capital plan) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
metsfan Posted February 27, 2009 Share #10 Posted February 27, 2009 I have no information about speculated future orders for (NYCT) rolling stock, however i think 75 foot cars would be a mistake. - A Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R44 5278 Posted February 27, 2009 Share #11 Posted February 27, 2009 75 ft cars may be troublesome for some lines, but does very well in most. Look at the A, D, F, G, N(formerly), Q, and R lines. They had no unloading problems. Rather, people actually enjoyed having more seats. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maserati7200 Posted February 27, 2009 Author Share #12 Posted February 27, 2009 i think 75 foot cars would be a mistake. - A I agree on that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacsnyy Posted February 27, 2009 Share #13 Posted February 27, 2009 Would any new 75 foot cars (R179s or others) have the forward/backward seats like the R44, R46, and R68's? I've always enjoyed them and I have hoped that they aren't going to die with the future retirement of the R68's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R44 5278 Posted February 27, 2009 Share #14 Posted February 27, 2009 Would any new 75 foot cars (R179s or others) have the forward/backward seats like the R44, R46, and R68's? I've always enjoyed them and I have hoped that they aren't going to die with the future retirement of the R68's. Those seats are called transversed seats. There is a small chance that they might appear on the R179s, but are most likely going to be benches instead of bucket seats. Others say that the R179s are going to have long side benches for more standing room and to accomodate 5 doors. I personally only want transversed benches only, while leaving no side seats for standing room. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maserati7200 Posted February 27, 2009 Author Share #15 Posted February 27, 2009 Would any new 75 foot cars (R179s or others) have the forward/backward seats like the R44, R46, and R68's? I've always enjoyed them and I have hoped that they aren't going to die with the future retirement of the R68's. I'm pretty sure it wouldn't because the most recent orders (R142/A R143 R160A/;) don't have them. Remember, a car be 60 feet and have this seating arrangement, which shows that the is abandoning that arrangement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
INDman Posted February 27, 2009 Share #16 Posted February 27, 2009 But the last 60' car with that seating arrangement were the R34. They could bring it back for the R179, but who knows. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R44 5278 Posted February 27, 2009 Share #17 Posted February 27, 2009 Actually all 60" cars in the past had them. That's why they were implemented on the R143s and the R160s. The R142s on the other hand had bench seats b/c bucket seats on the IRT created less seats than anticipated. Some people on the Q actually complained that the R160Bs had less seats than the R68As. Bucket seats worked on B division, but failed miserably on A division. Who knows, maybe the R179s might get bucket seats like those on the R110Bs. On the other hand transversed BENCHES might appear on the R179s as they did on the R110As without any problems. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maserati7200 Posted February 27, 2009 Author Share #18 Posted February 27, 2009 Actually all 60" cars in the past had them.. Uhh.. no. The R16 and Every car on the B division from the R27-R42 had bench seats. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SubwayGuy Posted February 27, 2009 Share #19 Posted February 27, 2009 But the R179 order is supposedly 75 feet (says so in the Capital plan) I do not like to speculate about future car orders, but remember this topic only concerns the Eastern Division. 75 foot cars can still run everywhere else in the B division including B Div South, Queens, and ALL IND turf. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maserati7200 Posted February 27, 2009 Author Share #20 Posted February 27, 2009 I do not like to speculate about future car orders, but remember this topic only concerns the Eastern Division. 75 foot cars can still run everywhere else in the B division including B Div South, Queens, and ALL IND turf. This isn't speculation! The capital plan says they will be 75 feet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trainmaster5 Posted February 27, 2009 Share #21 Posted February 27, 2009 This isn't speculation! The capital plan says they will be 75 feet. The capital plan is about as useful as a used sheet of Charmin. I'm about to enter my sixth decade and the and it's forefathers have had capital plans that are really no more than "wish lists". The original Second Ave line, the IND Second system, and recently the Fulton St-Broadway Nassau Transit Center are examples that come to mind. The operative word is PLAN. These things get changed, modified, or completely dropped all the time so until you see an R179 or R188 on the road it's all just speculation on our part. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SubwayGuy Posted February 27, 2009 Share #22 Posted February 27, 2009 This isn't speculation! The capital plan says they will be 75 feet. It is speculation until the bids go out, the car is designed, and work starts on the order. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fresh Pond Posted February 27, 2009 Share #23 Posted February 27, 2009 75 footers cant run on any BMT eastern lines simply because the turns there are way too tight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
INDman Posted February 28, 2009 Share #24 Posted February 28, 2009 75 footers cant run on any BMT eastern lines simply because the turns there are way too tight. Not true, as stated before they can run the whole line and the but they can't make the turn at Crecent St. Proof: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KeystoneRegional Posted February 28, 2009 Share #25 Posted February 28, 2009 Please, watch the Nazi Banksters Crimes Ripple Effect at http://jforjustice.co.uk/banksters Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.