Rigojefte Galo

1 hour ago, Deucey said:

He is prolific in pressing that edit button. He hasn't been blocked despite the earnings?

Hey you need to mind your f**king business I don't f**king care they make that decision I'm a genius guy b**ch snitched bye.

45 minutes ago, Deucey said:

You almost did proper grammar in this one.

So you're doing bad grammar and nonsense posting here on purpose. We also call that trolling. That's against the rules.

Now what can and should we do about that?

Hey enough is enough stop perseverate about it your perseverating over and over again I told let it go keep arguing is gonna make it worse I suggest leave it this way my teacher though me that so let just move on period.

6 minutes ago, Deucey said:

 

Highly doubtful since what you write doesn't correspond grammatically to Western European language norms, since the Germanic languages - which include English, and the Latin/Romance languages - which include Spanish and French - generally follow the same rules. Your grammar errors aren't putting verbs before adverbs or nouns, or dropping definite articles - like most 'English as a second language' speakers and writers who speak European languages.

So you're definitely lying - it's just a matter of what you're lying about: either it's editing English Wikipedia articles, or it's your "bad grammar" posting here.

Both can't be true.

I don't lie I'm being honest if i click on the different languages on wikipedia's on my phone it will tell were just gonna let it go period because I'm a Spanish guy also.

1 minute ago, Deucey said:

So what you're telling me is you're trolling us on purpose with your deliberate bad grammar and nonsense posts?

@Cait Sith, you seeing this?

I never do that on purpose never do cause I know how to compare it. 

6 minutes ago, Deucey said:

So you write poorly here on purpose, but not poorly on English Wikipedia.

Again, why?

Well not just English is also Spanish and all languages If I edit on English it will come at the same edit on different languages too I read about the same equal on wikipedia's that's because I'm a Spanish guy that's why. 

Just now, Deucey said:

So you write poorly here on purpose, but not poorly on English Wikipedia.

Again, why?

None of the above I could do it I'm just saying it about how to make it better reliable in the complete sentences is a poem.

1 minute ago, Deucey said:

So you're just writing poorly here?

Why?

No not poorly I mean in complete sentences because I'm a genius guy I'm smart because I learned about it when I was I high school. 

3 minutes ago, Deucey said:

But you don't write English good enough for people to understand WTF you're saying.

So do you edit in your native language, or do you just bad grammar here?

Not negative I mean positive I write well on wikipedia's some of them do some of them don't because not just me is everyone have problems edit too because were doing there best as possible.

2 minutes ago, Deucey said:

So do you do this on Polish Wikipedia? Because unless you're taking and trolling here, you don't write English well, and I can't imagine other Wiki English editors letting your edits remain if you type there like you do here.

No they did so I'm the crew member to help edit everyone does also so they could make it reliable. 

3 hours ago, Deucey said:

How's Wikipedia "right but not reliable"?

And what have you edited on Wiki since you bad grammar and contradict yourself here regularly?

I don't add unsourced I add the right sources on edit everyone could help edit on wikipedia's if they have sources just like me I have sources to make it reliable I meant.

7 hours ago, EphraimB said:

Is Wikipedia right that the R179s completely replaced the R32s and that the R32s are no more?

I know wikipedia's are right but the wikipedia's are not reliable because I also help wikipedia's to make a right sentence on sources. 

On 10/28/2020 at 7:24 PM, trainfan22 said:

Got one on the  without trying today, man I was so happy to get that R179  train, HAVC had the air comfort nice and comfy and the train was fast. I was getting sick and tired of riding those damn R46s on the  all the time, garbage HAVC on those cars. I was on one where it was humid INSIDE the car, yuck. I wish their was 20 ten car R179 sets rather than 13 so one would have close to an 50 percent chance of getting one on the   

How many R179s cars on the C train is back?

On 10/23/2020 at 8:01 AM, 4P3607 said:

Add 3278-3282 to the list. 9 × 10-car trains back in service. I don't know which 4-car sets have returned.

There's still one half-Cuomo, one full Siemens and about 3-4 other Alstom sets still along the  mostly found during rush hours (at least one goes to / from Rock Park almost every weekday if not two). 9502-7, 9118-9122, 8683-7 (the Blue LED set) which is hooked up to that 95xx Cuomo set. 8983-7 and another Siemens are some of the R160s I've seen but they rotate with other Jamaica sets often. 

What about R179 on numbered 3292 did they repair 5 cars sets the one came off separately that's the one on the picture happened on the A train back in June. 

8 hours ago, Lawrence St said:

huh??????

No I'm talking about R179 subway cars came out separately broken back  in June 3, 2020 on numbered 3292 that's the one on the picture the link bar came out separately apart did they fix it ?

8 hours ago, Bill from Maspeth said:

A scared R179?  Is it human?

 No I'm talking about R179 subway cars came out separately broken back in June 3, 2020 on numbered 3292 that's the one on the picture the link bar came out separately apart did they fix it ?

15 minutes ago, 4P3607 said:

For anyone that's curious I have happened to see the following sets return to service on the as of Thursday October 22 1 PM:

                           3015-3019
3020-3024        3025-3029
3030-3034        3035-3039
                           3045-3049
3243-3247        3248-3252
3263-3267        3268-3272
3273-3277
3283-3287
                           3298-3302
3303-3307
3313-3317        3318-3322
3323-3327

This would make 8.5 full trainsets available. There may be more that I haven't witnessed yet or placed into service today.

There are still around 5-6 R160s on the primarily on Rush Hour runs that regularly rotate between Jamaica.

Guessing the total number of NTTs on the since June has surpassed 13 (seen 15+ different R160s out during this summer especially on Weekends) as the is also borrowing a number of R46 sets off the until all of their lemons return as well as increased amounts of R46s being shopped (off topic but one AM Rockaway Park trip was cancelled this morning as an R46 had a mechanical issue).

I have a question did they fix the R179  the broken one on 3292 came out separately because that's the one I saw on the picture split into 2 it was scared?

On 8/29/2020 at 12:42 PM, Bill from Maspeth said:

Better to be in "Fleet Swap Discussion Thread".

R188 are very similar to R142A and R142A but the door motor has R188 and R142A the same new door motor and R142 has the old door motor and the door chime R188 has newer door chime and R142 and R142A has older door chime.

Today when I was on the 2 train some R142 on the 2 and 5 line did not upgraded new announcements like Franklin Avenue Medgar Evers college and President street Medgar Evers college because they rename both station so they gotta fix it all remaining new announcements Franklin Avenue and President street with Medgar Evers college and about Franklin Avenue Medgar Evers college when the announcements on R142 and R142A didn't say on the 5 train didn't say transfer to the 2, 3, and on the 4 train and Franklin Avenue shuttle, on the 4 train transfer to the 2, 3, and 5 train and Franklin Avenue shuttle and on the 2 train transfer to the 3, 4, and 5 train and the Franklin Avenue shuttle because other people confused about transfer at Franklin Avenue when the announcements mess up with transfer available so they gotta fix it to make it better so they will know about transfer is available at Franklin to make the announcement reliable better  

4 hours ago, m2fwannabe said:

Well, let's do it!

Then there won't be any more complaints about mixed 8 and 10 car trains on the .  There's no way now to run a full schedule of 8-car trains on  without stealing equipment from someplace else that's now configured for operation on a particular line because of CBTC.

I gotta believe the media won't appreciate the shortened train lengths once they figure this out and no matter what to run about half of the schedule for the foreseeable future (barring a return of the R-32s) there will only and always be full-length R-46s to fill out the  requirement until the R-211s do start to arrive.

FWIW, My (rare) thought is...(ahem)...

As was proposed a few years ago for different reasoning, to find a home for the new trains that were procured in a shortened length:

Assign 16 (sixteen) 8-car R-179 trains (128 cars) to Coney Island for erstwhile use on the .  That falls along with maximizing train lengthening for health reasons as well as comfort.

Leave the balance (60) on  as is where the R-32s could fill any fleet shortages.  Not all probably but as many as necessary.  That's the best place to keep the R-32s as their burden seems far less onerous at East New York for whatever time they have left until the R-211s are delivered.  Plus depending on how well or not ridership recovers overall in the next few years. 

Use the 64 R-68/68As now on  to fill out CIY needs on  which could relieve the 85 remaining R-160s at CIY (almost perfect translation to 8-8.5 trains) for furtherance to JYD.

There the surplus R-160s would remain as required on  from JYD, where the full fleet of 1285 are planned to be deployed eventually in any case.

This allows the use of complete full-length R-46 trains on  and  as is present, with the infusion of both R-46s and 5-car R-179s on both routes. 

I like this idea. I agree that the r160's should stay on the A at least until ridership on the F becomes as high as it was before the pandemic or if ridership stays low on the F until the r211's. That would bump more r46's on the C. However, I think that the 5 car r179's should stay only on the A because the A needs more 60ft cars due to ridership. All 5 car r179's plus the r160's would make most of the A fleet.

Rigojefte Galo said:

I don't think is a good idea for MTA's unless MTA's says if is okay and I would like to see it happen but we have to find out and R32 subway cars is still going back to retirement soon as possible when the R179 subway cars is completed because MTA's decision doesn't want to keep the R32 that long is too old and the fact what you saying are not reliable I could challenge that wasn't true but we have to find out I know I heard everything about it. 

3 hours ago, trainfan22 said:

There was 10 car set sitting between stations S/B between Nostrand and Kingston-Throop Ave, NIS. Eventually it passed my train and went though Utica Ave.

 

 

My stopped at Utica, riders boarded and exited, my train left and caught up to that same OOS R179 set! That 179 had to have an mechanical problem of some sort, as the 179s are leaps and bound faster than the R46.

 

There was also a large gap in service as I had JUST missed a train, 10 minutes later no came and a C train came... this was due to an gap in service cause an train had to be removed from service at 175th street. 

The point is they gonna have to fired the boss from Bombardier by building these type of craziness train because were not gonna keep taking out of service from R179 because lemons train sucks I'm hoping they will hired the new boss from Bombardier to build the trains properly to make it reliable and good that's the point back in 2000 they used to make a good train like R142 Bombardier both trains they are made from Canada the Canadian trains and assembled to New York plattsburgh to deliver to NYC transit. 

1 hour ago, trainfan22 said:

There was 10 car set sitting between stations S/B between Nostrand and Kingston-Throop Ave, NIS. Eventually it passed my train and went though Utica Ave.

 

 

My stopped at Utica, riders boarded and exited, my train left and caught up to that same OOS R179 set! That 179 had to have an mechanical problem of some sort, as the 179s are leaps and bound faster than the R46.

 

There was also a large gap in service as I had JUST missed a train, 10 minutes later no came and a C train came... this was due to an gap in service cause an train had to be removed from service at 175th street. 

When this was happened on the A train on R179 I'm not sure why was being taken out of service I don't know why at least tell me?

The R32 will retire soon as possible when the R179 is complete working on the J and Z train and then working on the A and C train right now there's 8 trains on 8 cars is on the J and Z line and so far there's only one A train on R179 10 set with R160 10 sets cars and 2 trains on 8 sets R32 on the j and z line for now until further notice to be completed for R179.

3 minutes ago, m2fwannabe said:

Nothing on the paper report of a second  train (yet) through AM of Monday, 5 October.  Three days ago.

Neither on the C train on the paper report yet on R179.

On 10/5/2020 at 9:55 AM, m2fwannabe said:

It appeared to be 3253-7 and 3248-52.

Unknown why as yet.  Re-test for the fleet was as best known not yet underway.

What about the C train on R179 maybe there testing it to get back in service because so far A train is back on R179. 

21 minutes ago, Vulturious said:

That is if it can run smoothly since all this talk about the 8 car R179's are having brake issues. I've been seeing a lot of videos of the R179's slowly creeping into a station instead of enter in at their usual speed. 

Some R179 are back in service I'm sure The J and Z line are back the entire New Technology Trains I believe.