R42N

Going back to my negative thoughts on Wikipedia, check out today’s edit on the page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R_(New_York_City_Subway_service) Even though we all know it’s just one. Additionally, there is no reference to it anywhere on the Stations Guide. They really have to do a better job over there.

Even at a heavier use, it won’t reach the level that the or reaches today, which are current R32 lines.

The M3a’s interiors are more than fine, and they are just now being outfitted with security cameras, so I doubt that they are on the replacement docket. The M3a was introduced roughly around the same time that the R68 was introduced, and they haven’t been refurbished. I understand that commuter trains and subways are two different animals, but MNRR’s M3a’s do not need to be replaced, invest that money into the LIRR replacement.

Yep, no harm in throwing them on the . The never really gets too crowded, and is more of a controled line. Some of the R68’s on the could be used on other lines.

Exactly. For all we know, the R211’s could beat the R179.

Yeah, but in the pinch of rush hour, they’d rater run the train up Montague. I really think you shouldn’t inconvenience yourself over a once-in-a-year issue. But, what’s the harm of putting them on the instead? That quiets the critics.....

Exactly. Once CBTC turns on in Flushing, the Train of Many Colors won’t be operating on the anymore. Back to the Canarise problem, I truly think that if you add a one-seat ride to Manhattan from east of Broadway Junction stops, you wouldn’t need to boost service, as no one would be transferring to the . What you could do is suspend the current day route and turn all trains into the Canarise/Williamsburg/6th Ave/SAS route. That would be service every 10 minutes, and would still serve 14th Street. (Call it the or the .

Hold on. I understand that the cars can’t fit there, I said I have no worries of running the there, as there won’t be any instances where it’ll have to go there in a pinch. And why would it be “unwise” to run em on the , if that’s exactly where some of them are running right now? Personally, I’d like to see them on the Rockaway with a few sets remaining on the , like there always has been (even in the summer). If you want to throw them on the , go ahead. If you have no where to put them that needs them, just retire them, or throw 20 on the Rockaway Shuttle, and you’ll free 2 sets of R46’s, which is useful.

How many R32’s are expected to last post R179 introduction? You could place 20 R32’s on the Rockaway , and the rest on the line in a case-by-case basis roll. I have no concerns about Montague, but I don’t see why they should go through the hassle of switching yards, when you can just keep them on the line.

Yep, according to Niko G and Jason R (MTA Insiders, I think) the train will run from Houston Ave Lower East Side to 96street/2nd Avenue. I wonder how crowded the northbound railfan window will be this year......

Oh, 100%. The buses can get you there faster than the train if things work well, but still, if there is any inclement weather, if it’s too cold or too warm, or if it gets a reputation for being un-reliable or packed, you’ll still have the vast majority sticking with the subway. Heck even I wouldn’t want to enter the system, leave it, wait for a bus, and re-enter a wait some more twice a day.

Yep, that’s an idea I brought up. You could cut service by 40% out of Canarsie (to Bedford avenue), and add additional service (call it the , probably) via Williamsburg Bridge, 6th Avenue and up to 96st/2ave. With similar hours to the with 18 hours for 5 days a week. Of course, car shortage and passenger confusion will likely be cited as reasons on why this shouldn’t take place, but in a perfect system, this would be the best.

Agreed. For all the issues with the subways, the bus fleet instillation has been pretty good, and can be purchased and in-service in months, not years. That being said, this should be a back up to the back up plan, no one is going to want to take the go to street level because of overcrowding on the , wait for a bus, go slower, and the go back on the street and walk to the Court Square station, when you can do that in-house on the subway.

You do not need to extract any ’s. Bay Ridge-95th is not at capacity (barely), so you could run an additional up it’s normal route (help out some 4th ave local pax) and switch it over to the at 34th.

I get that Astoria’s headways would remain unchanged, that’s the problem. You would have to boost up service to that of another line, which would create five broadway lines, which one can’t do under the current car constraints. The only thing you can do is pick and peel one more , or , that’s it.

An additional problem, Trainmaster, is that in this day and age, there are a lot of people that don’t listen to announcements. Many people have headphones on, see the bullet as it pulls in, and grab a seat, never to look up at any signage, only to realize that things are wrong at Franklin Ave. This is why having the northbound (even through SeaBeach) is a smart move.

It’s also worth noting that while you are technically “splitting” service, you are essentially adding an additional 5th line, as Astoria would need it’s headways maintained, and with the car shortage and no R179s coming up soon with the recent issues, that’s not a solution. Here are the five lines under your scenario that would need decent headways: 96st or Astoria to Sea Beach Astoria to Bay Ridge Astoria to Bay Parkway Forest Hills to Bay Ridge 96st to Brighton Unfortunately, the car shortage really does knock down most of these scenarios, which is why extracting one from Queens Blvd is the best solution at the moment.

I feel like we’ve been through all of this before. The Astoria-95th Street Late Night isn’t really a anymore, it’s a in Queens and Manhattan and a in Brooklyn, and the designations would have different route patterns during different times of day. I know the argument is that it’s a “supplemental” route, but there is a reason why ’s are sent up SAS during midday GOs, and it’s because the is more familiar along the Astoria Line and at Lex-5th/59th. When the MTA has the ability to do so, they will try to keep designations as familiar as possible, while it might be awesome for me or you to have a cool, changing 24/7 route, it would come off as sloppy in the eyes of the public. The current service pattern keeps things under control. ------ And, to talk about the and trains, I’m shocked they aren’t signed as or ’s going southbound. One of the major benefits of the rush hour ’s is that they are signed as ’s northbound, thus eliminating the need for constant manual announcements to transfer, only to have a bunch of riders (with headphones) realizing the train is on the express track at 57/7.

There isn’t any room to add additional sets, and even if so, Whitehall couldn’t accommodate it. Adding an extra is the most painless scenario.

Well, Astoria (with the booming LIC/Hoyt population) really needs more trains than it has (Even if it is at maximum TPH on the schedule, they often fall behind which leads to massive gaps in service during rush hours. Queens Blvd, on the other hand, is doing quite well, and can spare an or an without much (any) issue. So, unless if you want to switch northern terminals to provide one extra train, the will be going up SAS. I really don’t see an issue with this. As long as it’s not a regular thing, one switch will not ruin the day. The Broadway Line is not the Lexington Avenue Line, it’s headways are not overwhelming to the point where merging isn’t feasible.

Out of curiosity, are the CQ310’s (from Atlanta) up to our specifications? They are retiring them and were built in the 1980s, they might be a quick stop gap measure (kind of like how the LIRR leased MARC cars this past summer). The only line that would need them would be the (about 32 cars) just until the R179’s come through. Another (expensive) option is to rehab the R32s/42s to the point where they aren’t even the same car, almost a complete replacement. The only reason I’m throwing out these crazy ideas is because one has to face reality that the R179s are going to be significantly delayed.

If push comes to shove the will not get a boost. Relatively few Passengers will be transferring to the as it doesn’t go to Manhattan, and the number of passengers taking the to the or will be few and far between, as the or is a one-time transfer, not two transfers with tons of staircases. The will only need about 70% of it’s cars to run the limited service it will be providing, shifting those displaced cars over to the and is more than what’s needed. The problem lies in the mean distance between failures of the R32’s and R42’s. Both of which are becoming alarmingly low, but that’s what happens when you have 50 year old cars in service. The most practical thing would be to re-open the R160 assembly line, but that would be admitting defeat, which would be to problematic for the MTA in their “The New - New York” campaign. They are probably going to wait it out on the R179’s or transfer them over to the R211’s.

See that’s exactly the problem. Unless if it’s the official site, I don’t get how Wikipedia doesn’t check their other sources to verify that their information is correct. It’s not just here, it happens on the aviation pages as well. As LGA was saying, we are drifting off topic (even though this is a good conversation). Any idea when those 1-2 trains are going to head up SAS?

It doesn’t work like that. The MTA can’t just say, “oh well, the seats can’t take wait, the computer keeps on glitching, and the lights are malfunctioning constantly, but we need them in service, so let’s go!” Nowadays, things go through rigorous acceptance testing, all of which gets heavily audited by the state and by the public. If word came out that MTA rushed in un-safe cars (which, they really couldn’t do considering the testing mandates) there would be so much negative press that it would be un-sufferable for the MTA. Yes, the MTA needs more, reliable cars, but they don’t need them for the Canarsie project. With the entire manhattan section of the closed, and the significantly decreased ridership due to commuters seeking alternatives, you will be able to move the 24 R160’s the has to the , and also take another 24 R143’s to either the or the , all without impacting the reduced crowds. Obviously, the R32s and R42s probably won’t be able to hold on longer than 2022, so they will need to be retired soon, but a postponement (or restructure) isn’t the worst case scenario.

Exactly, evading fare is so damn easy, and it’s the hardest in NYC. Take a vacation to a city like Toronto, where gates are left open and they have ten feet wide openings with ticket “choppers” that occasionally roam to the back without issue. In New York, I’d say the most famous case of fare evasion is when you report yourself. I always see people (typically older) go to the station agent complaining about why their expired insufficient metro card isn’t working, and the agent, seeing a growing line, waves them through the special entry to stop the complaining.