ibebobo Posted March 1, 2008 Report Share Posted March 1, 2008 Does anyone have pics of the new 5000s or a link to them? I saw the CTAs pdf which shows them looking just like the 3200s. I also saw a news broadcast which shows them redisigned with slanted headlights - which I certainly hope is true as the old style is getting....umm a little boring after 20 something years! Thanks! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sw4400 Posted March 2, 2008 Report Share Posted March 2, 2008 Does anyone have pics of the new 5000s or a link to them? I saw the CTAs pdf which shows them looking just like the 3200s. I also saw a news broadcast which shows them redisigned with slanted headlights - which I certainly hope is true as the old style is getting....umm a little boring after 20 something years! Thanks! http://www.chicago-l.org Check this site out and go under Rolling Stock, then Train Gallery. You'll find pics of all the "L" cars used in years past and present. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Busjack Posted March 2, 2008 Report Share Posted March 2, 2008 I don't believe the previous post is responsive to the original request for "pics of the new 5000s." The January President's Report had some mock up views of possible changes, but they are clearly some CAD drawings imported into a PowerPoint. Obviously, since the cars are still in the design stage and prototypes will not be delivered until 2009, odds are 99.9% that there is no actual car of which to take a picture. As far as getting boring, the renderings with the beige plastic seat shells certainly were--clearly 1970s styling. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sw4400 Posted March 2, 2008 Report Share Posted March 2, 2008 I don't believe the previous post is responsive to the original request for "pics of the new 5000s." Oops... Sorry, it was a late night and I'm still half asleep... :mellow: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CHI74 Posted March 30, 2008 Report Share Posted March 30, 2008 B) Question does any one know why the new cars are to be numbered 5000 ? What i mean is why number them 5000 and not 3400 or something like that ? Thank you for you input :D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Busjack Posted March 30, 2008 Report Share Posted March 30, 2008 Question does any one know why the new cars are to be numbered 5000 ? What i mean is why number them 5000 and not 3400 or something like that ? Thank you for you input The only rule seems to be that 2 pieces of revenue equipment can't have the same number. Before the pdf was posted, most sources were saying 1000 or 3500. 1000 bit it when the buses got that number. Since they are starting a new series, which is incompatible with the earlier cars, starting with an even thousand is traditional. However, they could have started with 8000, too. Same kind of debate as those who insisted that the DE60LFs would be 7800s. Made sense from an articulated point of view, but didn't make any difference. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicago13 Posted March 30, 2008 Report Share Posted March 30, 2008 The only rule seems to be that 2 pieces of revenue equipment can't have the same number. Before the pdf was posted, most sources were saying 1000 or 3500. 1000 bit it when the buses got that number. Since they are starting a new series, which is incompatible with the earlier cars, starting with an even thousand is traditional. However, they could have started with 8000, too. Same kind of debate as those who insisted that the DE60LFs would be 7800s. Made sense from an articulated point of view, but didn't make any difference. There's really nothing stopping them from starting at 3500 since there is no revenue equipment in that range. The original plan was the new cars weren't going to be all that radically different from previous series so it was always speculated they were going to be called 3500 series. But when Kruesi threw that out and called for AC powered cars that were going to be incompatible with the previous equipment, they chose 5000 to make them stand out from the rest. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trainman8119 Posted March 31, 2008 Report Share Posted March 31, 2008 There's really nothing stopping them from starting at 3500 since there is no revenue equipment in that range. The original plan was the new cars weren't going to be all that radically different from previous series so it was always speculated they were going to be called 3500 series. But when Kruesi threw that out and called for AC powered cars that were going to be incompatible with the previous equipment, they chose 5000 to make them stand out from the rest. I think it is when things stay bascially the same, the numbers continue on. Since new cars will be built entirely different the first available number would be 5000. By the time they get here they will proably have 6 numbers ;) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Busjack Posted March 31, 2008 Report Share Posted March 31, 2008 I think it is when things stay bascially the same, the numbers continue on. Since new cars will be built entirely different the first available number would be 5000. By the time they get here they will proably have 6 numbers Boston seems to put leading zeros on its fleet numbers, and there are official references to the 0 series of buses. Maybe the reason is 4 digit numbers for buses and 5 for rapid transit cars. So not as far fetched as you thought. :P Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicago13 Posted March 31, 2008 Report Share Posted March 31, 2008 Boston seems to put leading zeros on its fleet numbers, and there are official references to the 0 series of buses. Maybe the reason is 4 digit numbers for buses and 5 for rapid transit cars. So not as far fetched as you thought. No it's not really. I know some tranist systems have started numbering their bus fleet according to the year the bus was delivered to the system: i.e. Buses delivered in 1995 would be numbered 95xx, or those delivered in 2002 would be numbered 02xx, etc.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Busjack Posted March 31, 2008 Report Share Posted March 31, 2008 No it's not really. I know some tranist systems have started numbering their bus fleet according to the year the bus was delivered to the system: i.e. Buses delivered in 1995 would be numbered 95xx, or those delivered in 2002 would be numbered 02xx, etc.. No, it is. This Google Search will turn up several official referencex\s to the "Zero Series" Nova RTSs being rehabbed. Also, for what it is worth, Wikipedia MBTA Bus Roster. That reflects some 0600 series New Flyers being delivered (they were supposed to be Neoplans, until Neoplan USA went belly up, sort of similar to the NJ Millennium problems). There may be an inference about the NFs, but not with regard to the 0001 1994 TMCs or 0139 1995 Novas. Another site with the complete MBTA roster indicates that all heavy rail rapid transit passenger cars (Orange, Blue and Red Lines) have numbers starting with 0, although my 5 digit observation wasn't correct with respect to the Blue Line. Apparently MBTA doesn't have a rule that bus and rail numbers can't be duplicated. 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.