Jump to content
Attention: In order to reply to messages, create topics, have access to other features of the community you must sign up for an account.


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 04/10/2019 in all areas

  1. 14 points
    From the FB Group "Transit Photos and Vidoes" via Mr. Edwards. Originally from Kawasaki: Looks like they'll occupy the 4000s.
  2. 6 points
    This is actually the non-operational mockup, similar to the very first photos of the R179s that were leaked in 2014. So this particular car won't see service, it's just used to confirm maintainability, build quality, spec compliance, etc. Also, this is the first of three similar but functionally different mockups (this one is for the R211A, and there will be one for the S and T, since there are functional differences between the three classes). Mock-up review for the R211A is underway and continuing through next week. After that comes climate room testing in May. So far so good!
  3. 6 points
    I wish the MTA could be more transparent with it's customers and tell us that.. it's been 4 years already..
  4. 6 points
    MBTA and MTA are in talks to do a fleet swap between the Red Line and Crosstown as CRRC cars are delivered to Boston as a budget move for Fast Forward. R68s will goto Q and W, R46 reefed, and R179s to Franklin Shuttle and H train.
  5. 5 points
    I try not to be too anal about this, but I do ask that we all do try to keep the topic related to the subject at hand, which is the 179s' ongoing delivery and placement into service. CBTC installation may be tangentially related here due to the potential for car placement, we do have two dedicated threads for CBTC signaling, both of which are stickied to the main subway page. Please use them for discussions on the signal upgrades and leave this thread for its intended purpose.
  6. 4 points
    2 shot timers basically give ops 2 chances to get their train's speed right. They have yellow over S aspects, and if you run through the block before the timer at or below its speed, it will clear to green and the next signal (which was red) will go to yellow/S. If you pass this first signal over speed, no matter, the next signal can be cleared as a one shot -- it's only if you pass that second signal over speed also that you get tripped. They're generally used in areas where restrictions go on for a longer distance, or in areas where restrictions do not have to be so granular as they cause less operator variability as, during normal operation, an op will never be facing a red.
  7. 4 points
    I know it's Cuomo colors, but I have to say that paint scheme really looks sharp. It's amazing how even a little paint in the front can add so much character to the car
  8. 4 points
    A really interesting presentation on work train CBTC compliance in Toronto. https://www.apta.com/mc/rail/previous/2017rail/presentations/Presentations/Palmer, Mike.pdf Toronto’s legacy signal system was essentially a copy of NYC’s and their original CBTC plans paralleled ours in waste. Their successful redesign of installation processes to minimize the need for AWS and the fact that Tomlin/Byford are at NYCT now gives me hope...
  9. 4 points
    Can I have what your having? Asking for a friend.
  10. 3 points
    Like I suspected, they'll probably use the 4000s and then go back to 3350-3999 when the R32s have been retired.
  11. 3 points
    It is. The doors are now 58 inches wide like R142/As
  12. 3 points
    I have half an hour to kill on an NJT platform, so here goes. I’m not gonna quote to save space. -Broadway/63: this is a fraught proposal. The sticking point with Queens reroutings is and always will be killing the . Once you’ve done that (and, hopefully, built a 59-63 passage) you really should just go for full deinterlining; there’s no really convincing reason to reduce capacity on 8th and create Yet Another Merge on the . There’s an operational impact here, too. Given that the would interact with the which would interact with the which would interact with the which would interact with the which would interact with the which would interact with the again, you end up with a circular scheduling issue — how do you get a bunch of doubly tied high frequency services to mesh well. The one (dare I say only?) plus that this proposal brings is that it preserves riders’ one seat ride onto 6th, which they’d lose under a full deinterlining scheme. This is certainly something to consider (especially when looking at investments that could facilitate deinterlining; a extension to QBP or 21/Qbridge would fix this and have a massive impact on crosstown trips), but even without such a change, the combination of and gets you decent access to every 6th Avenue station save for 34th and 23rd, stations south of which you should be taking the or catching the at Broadway — provided that transfer is built, of course. - line service in Brooklyn: I think it’s important in the short term. Looking to a 10-15 year horizon, though, it shouldn’t be the emphasis. The train’s ridership is (at least the plurality) folks who can’t fit on the . We need to serve them, but we can’t lose sight of the fact that the could, with some traction power upgrades, take another 4-6tph (over the already planned 22) and with terminal upgrades, 30+ — provided dwell times are kept somewhere reasonable. Planning the as if its reliever status is immutable is thus wasteful. There’s another side to this problem which I believe bears more emphasis — the . Veterans of these sorts of conversations probably are tired of hearing me say this, but I think it bears repeating: the , really all the way from Myrtle to Jamaica, runs through some really good, really underdeveloped land — land, as we know, that can only be tapped for density with transit improvements. Killing skip stop would be a great start for the area, but doing so does have a good-sized runtime impact (+4-5 mins IIRC). This isn’t to say we shouldn't do it, but when doing so we do have to think about other ways to reduce runtime to Manhattan points, which is where I think investments in express service (Bway Jct-Marcy, or with a new 3rd track Crescent-Marcy) could come in. Thing is, expresses require frequency to have real impact both so that local stops don’t get screwed, and so that the express itself can actually get ahead of a local leader. This is where increased service comes in — getting more than 12tph rush onto Jamaica unlocks a world of service pattern (and thus developmental) possibilities. - and yards: what Lance said. It’s harder to operate, sure, but the benefits outweigh the costs here — and there are plenty of places to lay up trains along the corridor anyway. - Queens deinterlining generally: I truly believe that deinterlining should only be done where it has an appreiciable, operationally unattainable impact on capacity. So areas where interlining creates capacity shadows on core routes, areas where line-specific throughput restrictions overly complicate merge scheduling, and areas where deinterlining changes the effective capacity picture. Queens falls into that latter category. As much as I’d like to see something new be built in the borough, the probability of that happening in the next 20-30 years is exceedingly low, so we’ve gotta work with what we have. Examining the current situation, we see that Astoria is underserved, that 8th and 63 have ~15tph of spare capacity, and that Queens Boulevard Local is vastly less crowded than QB express — even at its comparatively low throughputs. For Astoria, we rebuild the terminal and send there. 8th/63 you’re gonna want the classic deinterlining of 6th-63 and 8th-53. And for Queens Boulevard, you’re going to want a way to make local trains attractive under a 8th-53 6th-63 service plan, which means making them something more than local duplicates of expresses that just interline their ways into their respective corridors at 36. This essentially means 8th-53-Local and 6th-63-Express. The decision at Roosevelt thus becomes one of O/D and not just of speed, allowing you leverage local capacity — increasing effective capacity, in other words. Is this plan perfect? No, you’re sacrificing speed for 53 riders. But without investment in new tunnels, it’s what we’ve got — though this would require some analysis of the length situation.
  13. 3 points
    Based on the early 1999 schedules from the MTA's archived site, all three lines ran roughly every 7-8 minutes each (or 24 trains per hour total) at the height of the rush hours. I'll link to the Archive.org pages later today as I'm currently working off my phone. Re: Astoria service and yards If the lack of direct yard access was a true issue, it would've been one back in 1920 when the Broadway line was extended beyond Whitehall St across the river. The fact that it only became an issue in the mid-1980s leads me to believe something else was in play beyond giving the a home yard. Remember the service operations in place at the time, especially during the overnight hours. Two of the four South Brooklyn lines, the Sea Beach and the West End , were both relegated to shuttle operations between 36 St/4 Av and Coney Island, while the 4th Avenue was the only direct service to Manhattan as something had to serve Astoria. Flipping the and back in '87 allowed for the elimination of one of the late night Coney Island shuttles while retaining the primary Broadway service to Astoria. Remember that for the first couple of years post-swap, the and ran 24/7 to their respective destinations, and it wasn't until 1990 when owl period service was converted to the shuttle to 36 Street. The lack of direct yard access does add unnecessary mileage to the cars, but it shouldn't be considered such a prohibiting factor to altering service if needed. If it was such a problem, the and wouldn't run their present routes as they both currently have long relays to their home yards from their usual terminals.
  14. 3 points
    True, though the master towers usually get staffing proportional to their burden. Yes, actually. Night of March 18/19. This was during 8th Ave/53 FasTrack. A bunch of work trains bound for 53 plugged the northbound local track on 6th south of/in 47-50. Now, the and were scheduled up that track into Queens, but north of 34 they could have followed the in crossing to the northbound express to circumvent the disruption...but they didn’t. So what we got were some truly terrifying runtimes (including some 10ish minute dwells at 34th) as the blockage’s delay effect cascaded down the line. I was tracking the nights events, and saved a stringline partway through the mess. On mobile so can’t format to display in the page, but you can view it here. There are, of course, thousands of other events like this. Tonight’s massive gap in service could have been remediated with pulling a or (of which there were plenty) down Culver. Some of the last two nights’ service gaps on Concourse could have been partially mitigated by running the Concourse layups up there in service (which has, FWIW, been done before). The half-hour long gap in n/b service that evolved this afternoon seemingly from a T/ABD could have been eased with a local . On the more general scale, there are things like emphasizing reverse peak skips to reduce rider impact of service-making, allowing for short turning, forcing RCC to communicate better with itself/towers, would all do massive things for service quality.
  15. 3 points
    Are you out of your mind?! "faster service north of Church Avenue for Southern Brooklyn without the inconvenience to Carroll Gardens and Boreum Hill passengers the express service inflicts on them" Not having the at 4th Avenue and Carroll Street is a HUGE inconvenience and I shouldn't even have to explain why this is a terrible idea but here we are...
  16. 2 points
    While waiting for a friend at Spring Street yesterday, I decided to record a few trains passing by. I even caught an out of service 3 heading up Lexington Avenue, which is quite a rare sight! Enjoy!
  17. 2 points
    I don't understand why they have to be different topics. They're both trains on a track, except the trains are different sizes and sometimes one run on the street. The American way of pigeonholing different transit concepts has got to be one of the dumbest things. Trams in Europe can be, and often are, a mix of sections that you might call a subway, light rail, or a streetcar.
  18. 2 points
    Just saw XE60 on the B44 route testing. I don’t think it’s in revenue service.
  19. 2 points
    Hybrid 6800 is on the B1!!!!!! Probably a loaner but I hope someone photographs this. Also 6506 is on the B6..
  20. 2 points
    Can't be any worse than the guy who brought a 30-foot long I-beam onto the train last month.
  21. 2 points
    The CNG ones out of WF did. They like the warmth of the engine area plus ppl leaving garbage on the bus makes the perfect environment for them. There's nothing to be concerned about if you're a rider. It's just nasty when one comes out in the open from time to time.
  22. 2 points
  23. 2 points
    You have quite the imagination lol. Reminds me of rumor that the R32s were going to Nigeria..
  24. 1 point
    Thankfully I have a very understanding boss and PTO to use. I am praying that I pass the first 10 days. Thing is after u pass u must resign from your job. No 2 week notice. I hate doing that to my coworkers but there’s no choice.
  25. 1 point
    Nice catch, I caught 6506 on the B3
  26. 1 point
  27. 1 point
    4977,5133,5136,5164 scrapped from jamaica. 9 RTS are left
  28. 1 point
    It seems like all the poles in the car are yellow.
  29. 1 point
    Its not because of the AC vents because that's the location of the screens on the newer LFS buses coming in. It's because of the stupid stop requested light in the rear.
  30. 1 point
    These are loans atm. Ulmer Park is on a shortage.
  31. 1 point
    That Baby Blue theme would of look much better as the NYCT buses color scheme. At night the current new scheme makes the bus looks dark on the road and the only way you can tell its a bus coming down the road at night is by the destination sign and the LED head lights.
  32. 1 point
    Funny part is when I was saying the 4700s to Bklyn a while ago every was shooting that idea down... now look lol
  33. 1 point
    They are there for training. Yukon is still next
  34. 1 point
    Enjoy this ride up the 8th Avenue Express, from High Street to 125 St. Sadly the window was dirty on my train, but I was lucky that I caught it as soon as I got off the F at Jay.
  35. 1 point
    It's been super delayed at this point... that's why I said in a previous post the stations will open probably never, because that's the state that they look like they're in, lol! It's impossible not to have gotten used to it by now, though. The only thing I hate about it is that it overcrowds the B9.
  36. 1 point
    Despite being a transplant from the suburbs, I feel like this is because all those other transplants from the suburbs are bringing suburban values to the city. The difference between the NYC I lived in in the 80s and visited in the 90s and early aughts is stark.
  37. 1 point
    This was at Broadway Junct. before being sent to FB Depot
  38. 1 point
    Some changes along the Queens bound The curve from 47th-50th to 5th/53rd looks like it's had its timers fixed. The 2 shot GTs appear to clear at the posted speed (20 or 25). No trains were ahead of us at 5th so I couldnt see if the STs were fixed too. The 53rd St tube had one of the 2 shots disabled or fixed, I only saw one active. Finally a new 30 miles sign replaced the old 23 miles sign on the QBL local leaving Steinway. Based on riding the both yesterday and right now.
  39. 1 point
    Why am I not surprised by NJ Transit playing the blaming game? Haven't they learned anything from the Super Bowl fiasco? It tells me they are inept to deal with huge crowds and provide the equipment and personal needed for such a mega event. What a disgrace of a transit operation
  40. 1 point
  41. 1 point
    If I had a dime for the amount of random crap I saw people shoving onto the subway... chairs, metal poles, now this crap...
  42. 1 point
    Vandals strike again... https://mobile.twitter.com/corbynssoulmate/status/1115359338464448513
  43. 1 point
    Stop trying to push that BS. It's honestly becoming painful.
  44. 1 point
    This is really starting to become an issue. @Lance attempted to trim these kinds of off-topic discussions from this thread as they hold little to no relation to the R179s whatsoever. It's actually irritating to come here looking to find relevant updates on the R179s only to find things like this.
  45. 1 point
    Just got a call from a retired C/R now living in Vegas. He said that he’s taking bets on how long before Prince Andrew places the CBTC plans next to the 14th Street shutdown ones 😁. I’m keeping my money in my pocket. Carry on.
  46. 1 point
    And Flatbush Depot have the most of RTS. I think Flatbush is gonna have the last of the RTS in the city.
  47. 1 point
    Here's my take on operating the 179 on the A line. The good: 1) The train is a rocket ship, after living on 46's and 32's I had to watch my speed because certain areas where the older trains are doing 40, on the 179 it's going 8-10+ miles faster, great! 2) It's new, so the cabs smell fresh & clean. 3) it's shiny. After being on the A for so long, I'm not used to seeing something new...EVER 4) Smiles...When I enter some busy stations, customers are smiling or surprised the A has some new stuff. The cameras come out, they stare, they mouth "is this an A?" 5) Privacy...The cab windows are tinted, less eyeballs on the t/o's sitting down. The bad: 1) The cab is smaller than the 160's On the 160's there was a cut out behind the seat so the seat can go further back. There is no cut out behind the cab seat on a 179. If the t/o is tall or big, it's a problem. Knees hit the console, of you're a big dude the t/o is so close to the console. 2) The cab window sucks. Those cab windows should slide sideways like a 46 or straight down like a 68. Conductors have been complaining about the latch hitting their chins and making it harder for shorter people to see. 3) The placement of the speedometer is near the ceiling or where the air gauge is on a 160. That is the stupidest thing I have ever seen. speedometer and gauges should be eye level like any other normal transportation vehicle. 4) The master controller...THe MC is terrible, the handle is small and you have to put some muscle into holding it while operating which can start to hurt the hand, especially when the t/o is going express. Can't switch from left hand to right hand...terrible 5) The placement of the master controller. The MC is on the right hand side and it's very uncomfortable to operate while doing a long run. Local trip, fine you can rest your hand between stops, but from Howard beach to Broad channel, forget it. 6) The 179's on the C and probably J line...The operating crews cannot hear the automated announcements in their cabs. They fixed this issue with the A-179 supposedly they are correcting this with the C-179's and whatever 179's that are out there. I have more but it's more technical.
  48. 1 point
    M9 test train today in Farmingdale:
  49. 1 point
    Notwithstanding Ed Mangano being horrible, NICE exists because was bad at running MSABA. It can’t even run NYCT well. So expanding its operations is a “No”. But it is nice that all metrocards work on BeeLine and NICE - even the unlimiteds.
  50. 1 point
    Those proposals came from attendees at the meetings, not NYCT itself. I sure hope nobody at NYCT would propose a Co-op City-to-Brooklyn route.
This leaderboard is set to New York/GMT-05:00
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.