trainfan22 Posted February 23, 2008 Share #1 Posted February 23, 2008 This further proves my point that the.R142s are NOT good cars.207th street yard is overflowing with broken down R142/As.The MTA made a big mistake in buying these cars.http://www.nycsubway.org/perl/show?80432 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Posted February 23, 2008 Share #2 Posted February 23, 2008 My friend, when you click on the create link icon "", please paste the URL to the image on top of the http://. Or, remove the http:// part of your URL before pasting. Or else you get this: http://http://www.nycsubway.org/perl/show?80432 and it won't work. Hope this helps. B) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trainfan22 Posted February 23, 2008 Author Share #3 Posted February 23, 2008 My friend, when you click on the create link icon "", please paste the URL to the image on top of the http://. Or, remove the http:// part of your URL before pasting. Or else you get this: http://http://www.nycsubway.org/perl/show?80432 and it won't work. Hope this helps. B) Oh i forgot to remove the Http from the URL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
East New York Posted February 25, 2008 Share #4 Posted February 25, 2008 This further proves my point that the.R142s are NOT good cars.207th street yard is overflowing with broken down R142/As.The MTA made a big mistake in buying these cars.http://www.nycsubway.org/perl/show?80432 Could'nt it just be in for scheduled maintenance? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trainfan22 Posted February 26, 2008 Author Share #5 Posted February 26, 2008 Could'nt it just be in for scheduled maintenance? Its not there for scheduled maintence.Its there because the train is JUNK and falling apart.Those crappy cars will only get worst as time goes on.Its funny how the MTA paid like 1 Million for one subway car.And after only eight years in service they are falling apart. I hope the MTA learned their lesson.And the R160s wont suffer the same fate.I heard that the R143 was having problems too.But im not sure if thats a rumor or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil D. Posted February 26, 2008 Share #6 Posted February 26, 2008 They are Japanese trains...What do you expect? Just like the R143s and R160s falling apart already. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R68 Subway Car Posted February 26, 2008 Share #7 Posted February 26, 2008 They are Japanese trains...What do you expect? Just like the R143s and R160s falling apart already.How is the R143s falling apart when they had an MDBF over 303,000 miles. The R142As have a high MDBF as well. They are not falling apart. Why do you hate Kawasaki Rail Cars when they have performed so well? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R68 Subway Car Posted February 26, 2008 Share #8 Posted February 26, 2008 Its not there for scheduled maintence.Its there because the train is JUNK and falling apart.Those crappy cars will only get worst as time goes on.Its funny how the MTA paid like 1 Million for one subway car.And after only eight years in service they are falling apart. I hope the MTA learned their lesson.And the R160s wont suffer the same fate.I heard that the R143 was having problems too.But im not sure if thats a rumor or not. Do you have any proof that this car is there for a different reason other than scheduled maintainance? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trainfan22 Posted February 26, 2008 Author Share #9 Posted February 26, 2008 Do you have any proof that this car is there for a different reason other than scheduled maintainance? 207th st isnt assigned any R142/As.There are like five to six sets Out of service with tech problems and brake problems.And the 2007 MDBF hasnt even come out yet.So your 2006 MDBF is old anyway.And stop making a big deal about MDBF.MDBF is not everything if it was. The R32 would be retired and the R32. Arent going anywhere anytime soon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
East New York Posted February 26, 2008 Share #10 Posted February 26, 2008 This further proves my point that the.R142s are NOT good cars.207th street yard is overflowing with broken down R142/As.The MTA made a big mistake in buying these cars.http://www.nycsubway.org/perl/show?80432 They are Japanese trains...What do you expect? Just like the R143s and R160s falling apart already. Thats kind of harsh! I don't know too much about trains, so I guess thats why I like the new trains. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RTOMan Posted February 26, 2008 Share #11 Posted February 26, 2008 They are Japanese trains...What do you expect? Just like the R143s and R160s falling apart already. The R142's which ARENT japanese trains which are on the , and Lines have more "Issues" than the R142A's a LOT more.... So there goes your "japanese made trains" theory out the window... Just wanted you to know that... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R32 3348 Posted February 26, 2008 Share #12 Posted February 26, 2008 That thread became a flamefest. To avoid sparking the fire I will not participate on this thread but I encourage you to click that link if you are not a member of TS before you reply to him. *[edited by the administrator]* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
East New York Posted February 26, 2008 Share #13 Posted February 26, 2008 Ok well my take on the situation is this. Redbirds were good trains, but could it be because they were just simple? I mean the new high tech trains use much more advanced technology, therefore would automatically have a teething period longer than any other trains in MTA history. Besides that, If they were so bad, then why does the TA continue to buy them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trainfan22 Posted February 26, 2008 Author Share #14 Posted February 26, 2008 Ok well my take on the situation is this. Redbirds were good trains, but could it be because they were just simple? I mean the new high tech trains use much more advanced technology, therefore would automatically have a teething period longer than any other trains in MTA history. Besides that, If they were so bad, then why does the TA continue to buy them? The R160s are made diffently than the R142s.The R160s and the R142 are not made to the same specs.And the MTA cant buy anymore R32s or R40s because. Their builders are out of business. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
East New York Posted February 26, 2008 Share #15 Posted February 26, 2008 The R160s are made diffently than the R142s.The R160s and the R142 are not made to the same specs.And the MTA cant buy anymore R32s or R40s because. Their builders are out of business. I understand that, but my point is that they can only get better. Even though they are not built to the same specs, they are still on the same "basic" technology. So if they were so bad, why did they order 160's? Kawasaki isnt the only subway builder are they? The TA had to like something about the trains. And isnt the 142 made in the US by Bombardier? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Posted February 26, 2008 Share #16 Posted February 26, 2008 Alright guys don't forget to respect each others opinions and views. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trainfan22 Posted February 26, 2008 Author Share #17 Posted February 26, 2008 I understand that, but my point is that they can only get better. Even though they are not built to the same specs, they are still on the same "basic" technology. So if they were so bad, why did they order 160's? Kawasaki isnt the only subway builder are they? The TA had to like something about the trains. And isnt the 142 made in the US by Bombardier? I dont have a problem with kawasaki or bombardier.Bombardier is an canada i belive.They ordered R160s to replace the R40s and the R42s.Because those cars need "replacement" and are to old.But what im trying to say is that.The nyc subway is a very rough place.And the NTT might not be able to adjust. And i like kawasaki you must got. Me confused with a another poster LOL. And yes there are other car buliders like altsom,bombardier.But right now theres only three car builders kawasaki,bombardier and altsom.St louis car company went out fo busness.Because of the R44 being lemons.Dont know about the other car builders. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
East New York Posted February 27, 2008 Share #18 Posted February 27, 2008 I dont have a problem with kawasaki or bombardier.Bombardier is an canada i belive.They ordered R160s to replace the R40s and the R42s.Because those cars need "replacement" and are to old.But what im trying to say is that.The nyc subway is a very rough place.And the NTT might not be able to adjust. And i like kawasaki you must got. Me confused with a another poster LOL. And yes there are other car buliders like altsom,bombardier.But right now theres only three car builders kawasaki,bombardier and altsom.St louis car company went out fo busness.Because of the R44 being lemons.Dont know about the other car builders. No I understand, I'm just trying to learn a little more about the trains is all. I think this is an interesting topic, and I never really talked about trains before. This is all new to me, so I was just trying to see where everyone is coming from. I've most likely been on all the different brands but cant really tell one from another except the fact that some talk and some don't, and I like them all! LOL B) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trainfan22 Posted February 27, 2008 Author Share #19 Posted February 27, 2008 No I understand, I'm just trying to learn a little more about the trains is all. I think this is an interesting topic, and I never really talked about trains before. This is all new to me, so I was just trying to see where everyone is coming from. I've most likely been on all the different brands but cant really tell one from another except the fact that some talk and some don't, and I like them all! LOL B)Ahh allright i got you. Ok i will try to help you out. I will start off with the old trains.And what lines they run on. R32 runs on the and lines R38 runs on the and lines R40 runs on the and lines R42 runs on the and lines R44 runs on the and rocaway park shuttle R46 runs on the and lines R62 runs on the and sometimes line R62A runs on the and lines R68 runs on the and sometimes line R68A runs on the and sometimes Now on to the new tech trains R142 runs on the lines R142A runs on the and lines R143 runs on the R160A runs on the and lines.And soon on the line R160B runs on the line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
East New York Posted February 27, 2008 Share #20 Posted February 27, 2008 Ahh allright i got you. Ok i will try to help you out. I will start off with the old trains.And what lines they run on. R32 runs on the and lines R38 runs on the and lines R40 runs on the and lines R42 runs on the and lines R44 runs on the and rocaway park shuttle R46 runs on the and lines R62 runs on the and sometimes line R62A runs on the and lines R68 runs on the and sometimes line R68A runs on the and sometimes Now on to the new tech trains R142 runs on the lines R142A runs on the and lines R143 runs on the R160A runs on the and lines.And soon on the line R160B runs on the line. Thanks a lot!!! B) Thats what i've been waiting on but I didn't want to ask and sound any more ignorant to the subject than I already am! You must have been reading my mind!!!!B):D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R32 3348 Posted February 27, 2008 Share #21 Posted February 27, 2008 I've most likely been on all the different brands but cant really tell one from another except the fact that some talk and some don't, and I like them all! LOL B) Try this - http://www.nycsubway.org/cars/currentfleet.html Also - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_york_city_subway_rolling_stock Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
East New York Posted February 28, 2008 Share #22 Posted February 28, 2008 Try this - http://www.nycsubway.org/cars/currentfleet.html Also - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_york_city_subway_rolling_stock Thanks a lot! You all are very helpful and I appreciate it! Yep, I've been on all the different types of trains. I remember the different designs. I've only been on an R160 once, on a railfaning day, as I never really have a reason to catch the line. I thought it was just some type of brand new R142/143 because of the new FIND signs. LOL! That Track Geometry Car looks sweet as hell on the wiki link. I've never seen that before, and I've probably been to the Borough Hall-Jay St station more than any other, second to Halsey St of course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pablo M 201 Posted February 28, 2008 Share #23 Posted February 28, 2008 The R142's which ARENT japanese trains which are on the , and Lines have more "Issues" than the R142A's a LOT more.... So there goes your "japanese made trains" theory out the window... Just wanted you to know that... Haha, Phil got pwn3d. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Posted February 28, 2008 Share #24 Posted February 28, 2008 This further proves my point that the.R142s are NOT good cars.207th street yard is overflowing with broken down R142/As.The MTA made a big mistake in buying these cars.http://www.nycsubway.org/perl/show?80432 The R142's broke MDBF records. They became great because of all the successful testing that was done with the R110A/B's that were further refined and implemented. They're smoother and quicker ride was also a factor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil D. Posted February 28, 2008 Share #25 Posted February 28, 2008 Haha, Phil got pwn3d.Uh, no I didn't. I know some are made Kawasaki and some are made by Bombardier. Both of these foreign builders suck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.