m2fwannabe

According to AM New York, the full CBTC cutover on 7 is now delayed until "spring." That's probably June of 2018. Looks like those 3 R-62A trains (as of last Friday) will be hanging on for a little while longer. The quote below explains how things have gone so far in the greatest detail I've seen to date. Lingering hardware and software issues have plagued the project — now about 91 percent complete — though the MTA has begun incrementally using the new signals. It began relying on them during overnight hours between Main Street to 74th Street stations in February, and expanded to daytime off-peak hours in June.

Understand that ex- R-62A's 1921, 1922, 1925 have finally "resurfaced" on . Not linked, just coupled. Reported that about 1/3 of seating removed but a conflict on whether its got the Cuomo Wrap.

Coming S-O-O-N....

The R-142A's were originally intended to be fully overhauled and receive upgraded propulsion as the R-188 contract was originally drawn up, but this was later eliminated to cut the extremely high cost (at one point it would have almost as made as much economic sense just to get 380 wholly new cars built) and quicken the turnaround time for delivery. When finished the Converted R-188's didn't even get any body work or floors (or anything done to remediate 15 years of wear & tear!). Check out those "tired" MTA logos! Ergo, the original and "crude," 1997-vintage ADTranz systems remained, and are now intermixed with the newer Bombardier versions on the R-188N's and the 7900-series single cars (C1). You should try to run a train of R-142A's on the 6 in the snow--"fun" (not!). I'm sure this issue is also prevalent now on the 7 and the L's R-143's as well (slip, slidin' away). The R-179's have the same package as the R-188N (7811-7898) and the 7900-series C cars. The R142's and R-160's (excepting the Siemens cars at Coney Island) all have the incredibly smooth and responsive "Onyx" propulsion system as provided by Alstom. Again, hopefully, the merger with Siemens won't derail the further development and production of the Alstom propulsion package.

Not to mention that Bombardier has a production plant in NYS (one of four such companies I know of), which counts for a LOT politically. Hopefully the merger with Siemens won't compromise the Alstom facility in Hornell; hopefully BBD can survive and keep the Plattsburgh plant going.

44 R-62A's were still assigned to Corona as of September 29. 2146-50 went back to 6-- Not just 1939 but also 1921, 1922, 1925 and 1959 to Livonia. Future uncertain (as in possible Work Service?). No R-62A's on 7 the PM rush of Monday, October 2. The rest of the R-62A's may be moving on at any time.

Isn't that assuming the Alstom Onyx system disappears? Will all Alstom products now go away?

Interesting. We may soon be seeing the final removal of R-62A's from Corona to 6, me thinks. It's looking like much of the IRT fleet in general is being re-jiggered this week, including cars of 2, 4, 5, 6 and 7 lines.

Probably not at all, though I wouldn't be surprised if the old "Alskaw" alliance winds up being the winning consortium, maybe under the new name "Siekaw."

R-179 Test train on the Brighton Express this past Saturday? Saw personnel and an R-160 train (10 cars) hanging around but "the star" (R-179) was not there as heavy rain began. Any idea what transpired?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YL0AKyYhzMU R-179 Propulsion sounds similar to this clip of an M-8 decelerating. Same stuff under the hood, I do believe. Looks like a full-length train will be testing by Christmas, eh?

Well, the first field reports aren't too good. The skinny, October 18: On-board electronics were shutting down over third rail gaps. A vague explanation was "bad auxiliaries." 3010-14 were last observed sitting outside the barn at Pitkin Yard today (October 21). This may indicate "dunce cap" status as NYCT won't waste interior pit space for rectification of a problem for which it doesn't have a fix and neither, evidently, does BOM. Second set delivery of 3015-19 will likely be delayed accordingly. Back to the drawing board...

Don't know anything about a video, nor do I care what you do, but for my part I try not to let misinformation get "out there" if it can be helped. Than again, the heat of discussion is what these "forums" do, I suppose, and relative anonymity is a necessary element to that. "CBTC Ready" doesn't mean CBTC is installed and functional. It just means there is necessary provision to install the system at a later date. NYCT has developed more than one CBTC operating system so far. Best of my understanding (again) is the original analog data processing of 2001 that was employed on L in 2007 has given way to an all-electronic version that was retrofitted on the R-143's and R-160A's, and is still (presently) being installed on the R-188/nee R-142A fleet for use on 7 in 2017. Corona's "guinea pig" consist was 7371-80 plus 7915, but several more consists have had or are having a working system installed since that time, with the temporary, resultant fleet shortages requiring continued use of a handful of R-62A's (34 assigned) on 7. The 8-car test train of R-160A's mentioned (8313-16 and 8377-80) is in dedicated use (ie has been TEMPORARILY withdrawn from revenue service) by Engineering for ongoing development of the "3rd" Generation CBTC that will be used on Queens Blvd. and lower 8th Avenue since 2014, a project with a "contract" completion date of 2021. That train is based at Coney Island, and its test bed is the otherwise unused express tracks between Church Ave. and Bergen St. within F and G, where they can often be seen on weekdays. Whereas the R-211's now can't even start delivery until 2021, at least , the original deadline will likely be long past before QBL implementation is actually achieved (perhaps more like 2025?). (Please note: the R-211's will be required to completely implement CBTC on the appropriate portions of the A, C and R; all [pre-existing] cars used on the the E, F and M lines must also posses functional CBTC by the same time.) CBTC as a technology will continue to evolve in the meanwhile, so there is currently no way to really know how the operational system will be configured by then. Therefore, while it will be possible to install functional CBTC (in-house) as part of the Pilot R-179 testing and acceptance regime, that doesn't mean it will be ready for fleet-wide application as they are delivered in the 2017-2018 era. Given that a portion of the R-179's are slated for assignment to East New York, SOME might receive current-day CBTC as they are delivered to enable operation on L, but that depends on a service needs judgement by NYCT (more exactly DCE). In point of historical fact, at ENY just 64 of the 372 R-160A's originally assigned there (8313-76) were actually retrofitted with CBTC in response to added service requirements on L that had developed between the 2001 R-143 acquistion and the arrival of R-160A's by 2007-08. No matter; all of East New York's New Technology rolling stock (be it R-160A or R-179) will eventually receive CBTC equipment as part of the QBL implementation at whatever time it becomes necessary, in whatever upgraded form it by then posseses. Whenever the R-211 order is finalized and Engineering develops a satisfactory, evolutionary version of CBTC that will be applied to the QBL project (about 2019 maybe?), appropriate (electrical) hardware will finally be acquired and installed on the R-160's and R-179's that might be assigned to those services in that time frame. Depending on the status of CBTC's evolutionary technology and the installation process at whatever time R-211 deliveries do begin, they may be delivered as "CBTC Ready" (ie later installation) or with functioning CBTC installed during construction. The latter would indeed be a first; all cars equipped since 2004 or so (starting with the R-143's) have had the system hardware installed by NYCT forces at the operating facilities (that is, East New York and Corona). Therefore, I would surmise these future new cars would be delivered with the necessary electrical apparatus installed, but subject to final assembly, testing and certification by MTA NYCT personnel. As planned, the QBL CBTC expansion will bring Pitkin, 207 Street and Jamaica into the "full CBTC" fold, which in turn will create two segregated car fleets on the B-Division until the R-68/68A's are eventually replaced by an even later acquisition. I do hope this clarifies things a bit.

C retains 8-car, 60-foot trains because the Inspection & Maintenance portion of the 207th Street facility was opened in 1932 and can only handle 8 cars per track, not 10. That means the shop has half the pit space it would need to maintain individual 5-car sets. This can make for interesting equipment juggling when the R-46's (and formerly R-44's) need to visit the wheel truing machine inside, as one 4-car (75-foot) link hangs out the door as it moves through. The 75-footers used on C for the Summer Swaps (2010-14) were still based at Pitkin. Back when the TA tried to run "newer" SMEE's (R-40, 40M, 42) on C in 2008-09, they discovered platform positioning problems with how the "punches" along the way. That's why those 8-car trains used the 10-car stops before management gave up and put the R-32's (and then also R-38's) back after just one month.

Best of my understanding the R-179 will NOT be operationally compatible with the R-160's; certainly not the CBTC-equipped ones as they provide for, but do not have, CBTC equipment. Reread the above quote. The R-179's are most definitely N-O-T, NOT equipped with CBTC, but have provision for later installation. One of the R-179's acceptance milestones is compatibility for CBTC, as in cabinet space and (presumably) electrical provisions. The R-160's were the same way. Actual CBTC installation would be in-house after a pilot program, way down the road when the Queens Blvd./8th Avenue (3rd Gen) system is finalized. 8313-16 and 8377-80 have been the guinea pigs for this project since some time in 2014.

The R-179's have a "slightly beefed up" version of the R-142 truck (the one with the "Balloon" air bags vs. the Kawasakis (and later Alstoms) with the side dampers). They also are equipped with Bombardier's own propulsion system, which is advanced off the former ADTranz version originally employed on the R-142A and R-143. AFAIK, it's basically identical to that of the (New) R-188's, 7811-7898 and the "C1" cars (7899-7936). Best of my understanding the R-179 will NOT be operationally compatible with the R-160's; certainly not the CBTC-equipped ones as they provide for, but do not have, CBTC equipment.

Good show, everyone! Well done to all. If all works out the rest of the set should be on property by next Monday night. After they get put together and ogled by every passer-by (inside the 207 facility that is), the (1/2) train will be forwarded to Pitkin for more ogling (this in addition to the schooling), prodding, probing and picking before it gets plugged in (via house electrical), lights up; charges up (via house air), and assuming there are no indeterminate, confounding hissing noises, accomplishes its first subway car-like act: Going BIE! A "stah" is Born!

Well, 3014's on the way from there to there. Should be coming down I-87 to 287 to 80 to the GWB. I believe the trucking contractor is Silk Road Transport, who arranges for the permits and a private escort. If as past NYS and NJ State Police might also join in, with PA guiding it across GWB to Amsterdam Ave. Private escort up to the NYCT Gate (NO Trespassing!!!!) at W 215 Street. One reason for slowness is the truck has to be in certain transport time windows and wait for the officers to escort it.

Transport confirmed for the first two of set 3010-3014 (3014 and 3013). If past experience is prologue, the probable route is I-87 to 287 to 80 to the GWB. Numerous permits are required plus an escort. 3014 might be sitting by the GWB Toll Plaza all day Tuesday waiting for its turn to move. 3012, 3011 and finally 3010 will follow, probably one or two per night. They are shipped rather like new automobiles, with some partial protective wrap and some components loosely packaged inside. They will get marshaled at 207 Street by the MAC and when all five are on hand, get linked together in proper sequence before a diesel haul to Pitkin for service prep. Being these are the pilots, there may be some variance in the procedure (i.e. a longer stay or even assembly at 207), but by some time next week their presence should definitely be known. Don't know if there will be a media event attendant to this. The pilot train will consist of cars 3010-3019. There are supposed to be three more 10-car trains (3020-3049), but they may not appear for a while. Depending on testing status of the pilot train set, no other R-179's are slated to appear before the second quarter of 2017. Most likely by the time they do show up the Myrtle Viaduct project will be underway (and the MK R-42's perhaps already in storage...).

OK everybody....Head's up! First car (3014) is due at 207 Street on Tuesday next (September 6), late evening. Probably followed by one car a day until the first, then second, 5-car sets are on the property. Same process as the R-160's: Delivery to 207, prep at Pitkin, Static, then Live (Extended) Testing, then? Have a GREAT Labor Day Weekend. It will probably be our last peaceful interval for a while. Here goes nuthin!

But, the R-32's won't do any good for the Canarsie Tunnel closure unless they run on the G, which uses equipment from Coney Island. Is that the planned strategy, to send R-32's to Coney Island to expand the fleet until they are later replaced? If used on G, would they be assembled as 8- or 10-car trains? Also, is there a comfortable margin of spares in the existing fleet for Coney Island to provide the necessary extra equipment for the coming Q to 96 Street and W restoration? Finally, the R-142 trucks have zero in common with anything now in use on the B-Division. Different parts, different procedures. Won't be electrically or mechanically compatible with R-160s or anything else over there, as the R-142 and R-142A have already proven since 2001.

I again submit: The R-179 order in its original form for the NYCT of 2012 was fine at the time, but the operational landscape will have changed so much by 2017 that it is very much worth altering the content as conceived in a significant way. Unforeseen and unrelenting ridership pressures now abound as have been widely publicized and there are (or should be) higher priorities at this point than simply getting rid of aging equipment for its own sake. That is why the R-32's and R-42's are BOTH currently receiving life extension SMS of various kinds, and MTA is disposed to invoke a moratorium on car dispositions until these issues are sorted out. --Ridership is the heaviest its been since at least 1948 and show no sign of abatement, with necessary, planned service expansions yielding little, if any, wiggle room for fleet reduction. --The R-179 quantities as originally configured do nothing to fortify the existing B-Division fleet against the abruptly added requirements (8 10-car trains, at least) that loom with the "extension" (really truncation) of Q service at 96 St./2 Ave. They also add nothing to the existing fleet that protects against pressures from the potential doubling of the equipment (8-car trains, 10 if 75-footers) that will be required on G by the time the Canarsie Tunnel project commences in 2019. There's simply no way any OTHER new equipment will be on hand before 2022 (assuming the R-211 acquisition proceeds smoothly, that is) to address these issues. Another big factor is the unique technological nature of the R-179, which will make it operationally incompatible with the R-160s. Again that will engender separate stocks of parts (probably not all but some) and also require separate Car Inspector familiarization and procedures. For example, from what I can see in the photos they appear to have a truck design of their own. What parts are then interchangeable with the KRC models that currently abound on all the R-143's and R-160's now in service? Fleet standardization, with few exceptions, has been a key and historically-enforced technological linchpin across the long history of NYC Subways. Whereas the R-179's are not compatible with the R-160's, best if they are confined to service from one barn, if possible, and not spread to various routes from several facilities (ie A @ Pitkin, JZM @ ENY and C @ 207). Another consideration is CBTC, which in time will prevent the ready interchange of equipment between Jamaica (where ALL cars will have to be equipped for Queens Blvd. and lower Eighth Avenue) and Coney Island (where all lines will have old-fashioned ABS for the foreseeable future). Assigning part of the R-179 fleet to C and the rest to J/Z and M just to replace the R-32's and R-42's leads into a later need to retrofit only SOME of the R-179's to provide for C. This would work greatly against any operational flexibility that may be required to meet ridership trends that would dictate the two fleet portions be freely interchanged between 207 and ENY. All cars used on C (new or existing) will have to receive CBTC as part of the eventual R-211 acquisition, though if contract date of 2021 holds the CBTC would already be installed well before the next generation of rolling stock arrives. This also means that ALL cars used on M will require that CBTC be installed, which impacts the fleet at East New York as well. With so many "moving parts" to the planning process, it would (again) make a lot more sense to confine the "unique" R-179's to one facility, where their exposure to the overall system and the necessity of sharing multiple routes would be minimized. The best way to meet this multitude of challenges, again, is to use the R-179 contract as a means of producing the additional 10-car trains that the NYCT of 2017 needs for its imminent expansion, and not the few that the NYCT of 2012 required for A. As well the R-179 contract is a paramount opportunity to produce the added 8-car trains that the G will soon need. All 300 of the "non-standard" cars could then stay at these original assignments (G, N, Q, W out of Coney Island) on a permanent basis, which would make whatever quantities of R-160's are needed for CBTC installation available elsewhere, thus standardizing their use on C, E, F, M and R for the longer term. It seems pretty obvious that the non-CBTC R-46's on A will be completely replaced by CBTC R-211's whenever in time they will be delivered.

And the linked sets: 1929, 1945, 1946, 1950, 1951, 1953

No R-62A moves for quite a while. It looks like none will be forthcoming for a while either. For those keeping score, here's where they were as of August 5: 375 @ 240 Street for 1: 1826-1830, 1841-1900, 2156-2220, 2226-2345, 2351-2475. 395 @ Westchester for 6: 1651-1825, 1831-1840, 1911-1925, 1943, 1944, 1947-1949, 1961-2070, 2076-2080, 2086-2090, 2096-2155, 2221-2225, 2346-2350. 65 R-142A's are also leftover. 34 @ Corona for 7: 1901-1908, 1910, 1926, 1934, 1938, 1939, 1942, 1954, 1957-1960, 2071-2075, 2081-2085, 2091-2095. There's still one or two a day running Mon-Fri. Plus the 20 Shuttle cars, of course! (1927, 1928, 1930-1933, 1935-1937, 1940, 1941, 1952, 1955, 1956)

The quantities of 4 and 5 car R-179's have to be arranged far in advance through car equipment and service planning because they are permanently arranged in 10 car trains suitable for certain lines, and 8-car trains, which are only suitable for certain others (i.e. C and the ENY lines). The ONLY equipment on the system now which can make up flexible, customized train lengths at a moment's notice are the old married pairs, the R-32's and R-42's--for better or worse. That's one of the main reasons for their medium-term retention, until the depth of future service needs is more clearly defined. New Tech Trains thus get trapped on the routes for which they are built. Ergo, it won't be (easily) possible to switch R-179's at will between the A and C or ENY. Once they reach their pre-determined assignments in packaged quantities they have to remain. Two other observations, FWIW: One is that the R-179's, as designed, are technological outliers which won't be functionally compatible with the R-160's. They'll have their own parts and CI procedures which will further entrap them at whatever facility they wind up at. Also note that lengthening the C to 10 cars is off the table as an option (Best of My Knowledge), because of the capital requirements to upgrade or replace the inspection shed at 207 Street, which can't house 5-car units. How's this idea for size? NYCT will have to move a significant quantity of R-160 equipment from Jamaica to Coney Island this fall to provide for Second Avenue Q "Extension" and restoration of the W. This involves tightening spares almost across the board, particularly of R-68/68A's and R-160's, which will also inhibit NYCT's ability to effectively increase service anywhere for some time (that is, until new equipment can be delivered). To counteract this need, swap the quantities of 5-car R-179's vs. 4's around to reflect the greater, more urgent need for 10-car trains that will very shortly exist. As for the 4's which ARE built, produce a fleet of sufficient size for captive assignment to the G, where they can be run in 8-car trains ahead of the Canarsie Tunnel closure and stay there "forever" afterward, like the R-143's on L. This would release the 52+ R-68's that have been used on G, which can be used as (true) "full length" trains on several lines using 8 75-footers (B, D, N, soon to be W?) to fortify what's out there now and will be in years to come.