Jump to content

R179 8258

Veteran Member
  • Posts

    501
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by R179 8258

  1. 1 hour ago, Railfan 007 said:

    Plochochi is the name (paused the video where there is no CC) and he says around the 58:40 mark that the R211s will have Alstom propulsion, for people who want a source to quote: 

     

     NOOOOOOOOOOOOO ! Please not like the R160s 

  2. 31 minutes ago, Richard Lewis said:

    Wait...The (L) Train Shutdown Coming To April 2019. Should Are Ride On R32 And R42 (L) Train On Shuttle Train At Bedford Ave And Canarsie-Rockaway Parkway Or Broadway Junction Are Both Directions? 2 Sets of 4 Cars R32 And 4 Sets of 4 Cars R42 And R143 2 Sets of 4 Cars on Rolling Stocks. There's No 14th Street Line In Manhattan on (L) Train Shutdown At April 2019 By A Way R179 Are Still Coming Replacement R42. R143 Are Coming to (J) (Z)Line On April 2019.

    Bro there is not shut down anymore ... look a few pages back 

  3. 4 hours ago, King Transit said:

    That is a great thought. As a wish/fantasy, the B82 used to be at Ulmer Park also(is that right ?) It's destination of Bay 38 of Sheepshead Bay is near the area of Ulmer Park, also integrating the lines of the B6. Just like between GA and FP transfers, I'm assuming UP will take the B82 +SBS to trade for the B6 to ENY Depot. The B6's destination of Rockaway P. was integrating with the B42 & B82(ENY routes) and ending at Livonia/Ashford st. were near areas of ENY depot. So, this is why the B82 could go for UP

    That’s a good plan extremely good but one can only wish my friend 

  4. 44 minutes ago, aemoreira81 said:

    Regarding the SBS fleet, might it make more sense to move the B82 Select to Flatbush? With the replacement of all of the bridges between Exits 14 and 9, buses should be able to use the Belt Parkway to deadhead. Even capped at 40 mph, I would suspect that it would be a shorter deadhead to Flatbush Depot, and more importantly, the pooling of the fleet could mean needing only one batch for the B44, B46, and B82 SBS combined. If room is needed, the B46 Local could be split with Grand Avenue, which could probably handle more buses without needing to move another route.

    In the Bronx, the Bx41 was moved to Gun Hill for a similar reason (multiple SBS from one garage)---and in Manhattan, all of the SBS routes except for the M15 (using the same fleet since it started) are assigned to Quill. (The Bx6, being in the southern Bronx, could not be so easily moved except perhaps to Mother Hale, but since the Bx6 uses primarily CNG artics, what newer diesel artics could be swapped for the Bx6, especially since there doesn't appear to be any obvious choice to replace the M15 SBS fleet?)

    Returning to the Belt Parkway, Spring Creek Depot could also use the Belt Parkway to deadhead for the B100, BM3, and BM4, and JFK could use the Belt Parkway for a Q8 deadhead.

    As for the Bronx, I have to wonder if it would be smarter to move the Bx39 to West Farms (less complex deadhead to and from Kingsbridge) and split the Bx36 between West Farms and Kingsbridge. For the Bx39, driver changes could be done at Tremont Avenue, which is just down the street from the garage, and southbound final trips could terminate at Morris Park Avenue, with at least some runs starting from Morris Park Avenue as well.

    The B82 is nowhere near Flatbush depot. The B82 can go to Ulmer Park but it’s not arctic ready 

  5. 5 hours ago, Mysterious2train said:

    No article yet, just the committee meeting materials: http://web.mta.info/mta/news/books/pdf/190122_1400_CPOC.pdf (pgs 8. 9. 22 and 25)

    Obligatory disclaimers that I can't see the future, I don't work at the MTA, I don't know what kinds of technologies could appear in the future and there's little point in speculating about a fleet that currently doesn't exist. But for the sake of discussion: 

    As long as the (2) and (5) maintain their current routings, it's probably safe to say they will share a fleet to keep things as simple as possible. (And putting aside logistics, why would anybody want 7th and Lex to have their own uniform fleets? It'd be a bit dull seeing all the routes on a trunk line use the same fleet exclusively!) 

    Once CBTC on the Lexington Av Line starts, I assume every car assigned to the (2) would have to be CBTC-compatible in case they show up on the (5). There aren't enough R142s and R142As to completely fill the (2)(4)(5)(6), so it seems we have little choice but to wait before a sufficient amount of R262s enter service before Lex CBTC can start. (If there's something I'm missing in this regard, please let me know!). 

    If the R262s come with wider doors and open gangways like the R211s, I assume they would go to the lines with the biggest dwell time and crowding issues. That sounds like the (2)(4)(5) to me, with any leftover cars going to the (6). (Keeping in mind that the MTA put the R62As on the (6) to keep them off of the (4)). Which would mean that the R142s and R142As would go to the (1)(3)(6) - though which of the R142/R142As end up on which of those three lines specifically is irrelevant to me. 

    Since the R142/R142A are being upgraded to CBTC wouldn’t it make since just to keep the 

    (2)(5)(4) - R142

    (4) - R142A

    (1)(3)(6) - R262

    its save a lot of time and work from transferring train fleet between yards and all IRT lines would have fleet with CBTC

  6. 57 minutes ago, Bosco said:

    The 5-car sets needed (and possibly still need) extensive modifications.  Even the original spec for 3050-3057 was different from the newest spec, which is why 3058-3065 was the first set to enter service.

    Are the R179s on the (C) a permanent thing or temporary until enough R32s are pushed out?

    We don’t know MTA probably changed plans and not telling the public what’s going on. Just gotta see until April

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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