Amiri the subway guy

46 minutes ago, R32 3838 said:

At the time they thought they could fix the R44s issues. The R44s had very good MDBF compared to the other fleets. Its when they saw how bad the body rot was down to the frames is when they made the decision to can the whole fleet. If this was done one year earlier, A chunk of R32s and R42s could have been saved. The r160B option order 2 only replaced half of the R44 fleet since the rest of that order replaced the majority of the R42 fleet and R40M fleet. Half of the R179s fulled the void of the R44s that weren't replaced. The only reason why they got away with losing half the r44 fleet without replacement was because of the being cut and replaced with the . The only required about 3-4 extra trains thus the reason why the R42s had to stay. Then the 2nd ave subway opened 7 years later and everything was spread thin since the needed extra trains. The R211 if all options are taken will fill the car shortage issue unless they sideline 70% the R68 fleet if ridership don't pick up. The Base order R211As will full that void the R32s left ( the R211s replacing 110 R32s, The R179s replaced the other half along with the R42s.) and replace a handful of R46s with option 1 killing off the rest of the R46s. Option 2 is for fleet growth.

Now I used to be in support of all NTT after the R211s arrive but I now view R68s as needed to stay until at least 2030. Well after the  was eliminated a whole bunch and I mean like the 45% 50% of the R46s went to the  

15 hours ago, R32 3838 said:

 

They knew about the R44 problems while they were reefing subway cars but they didn't care and thought they could fix the issue until late 2009 when they fount out that the body rot was very bad.

 

The Phase II R32s were retired because they didn't want to spend money on modifying them and etc. At the time they thought by getting rid of them after the CI R42s and R32 GE's was a better choice since their mentality was that all the 60 foot SMEEs were going bye bye and these had worst MDBF vs the Phase I R32 which were planned to be the very last fleet to retire in 2010 but we all knew how that went (They will retire 13 years later) . 

 

R38's had bad roofs, R40 slants had bad roofs and rot, R42s were still decent but the CI rebuilds were very unreliable. The R40Ms were very reliable and were in decent shape. 

 

They did this whole retirement thing so ass backwards and it bit them in the ass. in 2009 they were retiring Phase I R32s with the R40/42s which was even dumber because they ended up getting rid of about 60 phase I cars that could have been for the instead of using the R42s which they thought they were going to get rid of in 2010 until the going up 6th ave screwed that up. TA wanted the R42s gone even in 2012 when they finished the R32 SMS. They thought by sending 50 R32s to ENY, They could retire the R42s but that didn't go to plan since they R32s MDBF didn't improve even after the SMS. So the R42s stayed on for 8 more years without a proper SMS. Some cars about 24 got a light SMS for the shuttle back in 2017 while the rest didn't.

 

 

Thanks for your answers. I believe the R42s were is even worse state just look at the Rust the R42 had on top. I figured you just needed to replace the R38s roofs. Maybe we could’ve let a few small amounts of R42s but my only problem with this is that it would require a expensive SMS. The fact the MTA Knew the R44s had issues but didn’t do anything about it was beyond UNACCEPTABLE. This is the literally definition of “Get rid of the oldest train fleet no matter what”

The MTA original  intended to replace the R32’s with the final R160 option orders and send the R44’s to cover for them on the C until the R179’s arrived. this was one of the dumbest ideas the MTA could’ve hatched, it was known in 1992 when the R44’s got GOH’d that their carbon steel bodies had been damaged from acid baths in the early 80’s. Heck body had literally been rotted away underneath the white stripes. The R44s were screwed the moment when they were assigned to run exclusive to the A train and exposed to sea air.  The smart idea would’ve been to to have the R46s be assigned to A train instead while the R44s go to queens blvd instead they would’ve been perfect since the R train short turns during late Nights and it would have been even better for the V train since that was a weekday only route think of the rest time those R44s could’ve have during Weekends and Late Nights or maybe even keep a few more R30’s on property and in service in the early 90’s to stop the R44 body rot from working . By 2009/2010 they were on their deathbeds and the R32’s who were probably built the best out of all the B division SMEE equipment was still on property and able to fill in the R44 voids

As for fleet shortages the B division had been in one sort of fleet shortage since the MTA made the incredibly stupid decision to get rid of every R30’s 1993, when the R160’s arrived that situation was almost rectified but then once again MTA got scrap happy  with the 1960s fleet not paying attention to how awful the R44 structural issues were getting. The R40s R40Ms and R42s bodies were also slowly dying just look how bad they had rotted  The R38s weren’t that bad some parts do need to be replaced but they could still run for another decade so in my opinion only the half the R32s that were too problematic to continue operating and the R38’s that are in the absolute worst condition should still retire while the rest of R38s should’ve been retained to easily run in mixed sets with the remaining half of R32’s. But the MTA would’ve done better keeping anything even a small stockpile of  R40’s and R42’s because once the R44’s were gone and the R179’s were almost a decade away there was most definitely a fleet shortage felt the hardest on the Eastern Division of the BMT.as  for the G the MTA total screwed that over especially with the way G ridership was increasing you could’ve easily increased service and the amount of cars on the G if the MTA didn’t get SMEE Scrap happy. If anything the MTA would’ve been smart to keep 324 R32’s to be fairly split on the A/C G and  J/Z trains and 116 R38’s to mainly operate on the G train but maybe sometimes on the A/C line in the early 2010’s if the MTA hadn’t been as rigid with fleet assignments on the M the ENY Yard fleets could’ve been more fluid, and if the 50 R42’s were still needed even with an influx of 38’s than let it be.

The Forum where you are permitted to ask anything about older subway cars

So did y’all know that the  Might have considered deinterlining dekalb avenue but didn’t cause they didn’t want riders to lose one seat rides

5 hours ago, subwaycommuter1983 said:

I agree with you 100%. I've seen this on YouTube. NW people are acting like spoiled brats. They need to relax and suck it up with the SMEE's for the next 7 years (which is less years than the A/C riders who for a much longer time had to ride the worst performing cars in the system). They had NTTs before and will get them again. At least the r68's are in better shape than the r46's.

The rollsign issues on the N/W can easily be fixed with more people at Astoria to change the rollsigns.

The only CIY train that needs to be 100% NTT is the B. As for the NQW, it's a numbers game. It all depends on how many r160's gets displaced from Jamaica.

Ya wanna spoiled well look no further to the goddamn  riders. They complain about EVERYTHING. The real why they got rid of the R32s R42s and R46s on the  was due Malcolm Smith and the Whiny Springfield and E riders. But to be fair it makes more sense to just get extra R211s to replace the R68s cause they getting more expensive to repair

Off topic but here some questions I had 

So we all know that originally the R160s were supposed to replace every train car build in the 1960s like the R142s did. But ended up replacing all R38s R40s as well as all NYCT operated R44s but most of the R32s and R42s. Both of the remaining R32s and R42s would eventually be replaced by the R179s. Here’s my thoughts the R32 surprisedly lasted very long and the steel was very strong but the R38s R40s R42s which were all newer than the R32s was in even worse state of Despair than the R32s which is older why that’s.

Was the R44s as bad as the R46s in the 1970s and 1980s. If the R44s lasted longer and were better taken care of by the MTA and replaced by the R179s as planned what would the R211 order looked like? And if the R46s and R44s were identical why didn’t the R46s had the same structural integrity issues that plagued the R44s?

I heard rumors about a train car shortage after the forced premature retirement of the R44s which lead me to wonder if the MTA could’ve kept some of the R40Ms and R32s phase II until the R179s arrived you know like (44 remaining R40 Mods and 72 of the R32 Phase 2s). 

Would it even be a good idea to scrap the R68s And R68As entirely and replaced them with extra R211s I’m asking this cause the R68s  and R68As are getting old and having to maintenance them will become more expensive to repair and CBTC is coming so that limits how many trains routes they could operate on and the R211s might be up to 1612 cars   940 will replace the R46s meaning that the 672 remaining ones can replace the R68s and R68As. And they are say to retire 2025–2030 so yeah?

On 6/2/2022 at 1:13 AM, R32 3838 said:

 

Again, The isn't getting R179's. The is back at Jamaica Yard and Jamaica yard isn't getting the R179's. The R179's would stay where they are. The Only R179's I see moving are the 130 10 car units to 207th st to push out the 8 car units back to ENY. Thus Pushing out the R160's for 8 car service. By then the R179's should have CBTC in them meaning the could use the R179's. This would allow the R179's to be at 2 yards instead of 3.

CI isn't slated to get these cars, The will stay at CIY and would probably be R160's since it's a part time line. Those R160's if they get 580 back would be shared with the with only a few R68's being on those lines with the being all R68's.

 

is likely to get a chunk of this order to prepare for future CBTC.

 

has to be fully tech by 2026 at the latest

 

Jamaica would get a piece of this order due to the fact these cars would have open gangways (if they go through with it) and larger doors. These would be mainly for the

 

The lines aren't the priority for tech trains right now as the IND lines are the main focus. Astoria CBTC has been brought back on board so it's possible that the R160's would be shared with the   but by the time Astoria CBTC is completed, The newest order of cars will likely be in service by then.

 

 

 

 

 

That may be true but again. They deserve new trains too. Further more REROUTE HAPPENS. So  need CBTC train cars to allow for that to happen 

2 hours ago, Storm said:

What are you proposing we do?

the  should get gangway trains, while the  should get the “A” variants.

The fleet of the  would be around 70-80% NTT, 20% R68/A, with the  being 100% SMEE.

Hopefully with the LaGuardia extension and the SAS phase 2 we can get ridership on broadway up. 

The  should get the R160s instead.  And the  R211s are needed for the   

I’m working on a R220 train car concept art that would totally replace the R68s. But realistic the R211s must get extra orders. To get rid of all R68/As they gotta go. 

 Here’s a idea I got to extend the  to lefferts blvd without causing much inconvenience. Extend the  to Brooklyn and then build a new crossover between court street and Hoyt street. The  runs local to Euclid Avenue and the  is moved to the express tracks and is extended to Lefferts Blvd. All  are diverted to far rockway and rockway park. The  is weekdays only so

weekends 

 no service use  

 local in Brooklyn shorts turns Euclid Avenue 

 also goes to lefferts blvd 

Late nights 

 no service use  

 no service use  

 Fully local all diverted to far rockway. (lefferts shuttle)  

The  is a much better option to go to Fulton street line. So once phase 4 is finished a new tunnel will be build bring 2nd Avenue trains to Euclid Avenue.

 short term

 long term
 

The  would use the court street museum to connect to Fulton street line and run to Euclid Avenue via Fulton street local. 
 

late nights

 local 

 shuttle bettween Euclid Avenue and lefferts blvd 

 only runs to Hoyt Street

weekends

 local in Brooklyn shorts turns Euclid Avenue 

 also goes to lefferts blvd 

 only runs to Hoyt Street

On the Wiki it says that they will remain in service until 2025–2030

4 hours ago, subwaycommuter1983 said:

The B and D will get NTTs before the NQW.

R68's cannot stay on the B and D due to 8th Avenue and 6th Avenue getting CBTC. Plus, they have higher ridership than NQW. 

I'm so glad that commuters in the Bronx and upper Manhattan are finally getting new trains and hopefully better service thanks to CBTC. People who live in the Bronx and upper Manhattan pay the same fare as the people in Astoria. Therefore, the MTA should not be catering only to commuters who lives in good neighborhoods.

Makes sense to scrap the R68s R68As they are pass their prime. We need 100% NTT

Here’s my prediction 

The R211s are definitely going to the trains thats a guarantee.   

People are saying that the R211s should also go to the trains well I could see why people are saying this. It cause they have R46s. However I believe that it’s more likely that the trains will receive the R211s and the R160s will return to the N/Q/W trains.       

People might call the swaps dumb and unnecessary but it would actually be justified reason. A subway line having the oldest train car fleet doesn’t immediately guarantee that they will receive the newest train car fleet right away. 

What’s determines the train car fleet assignments. 

CBTC 

Crowding

What fleet in the worst condition. 

The R46s are getting old yes. But see the MTA will likely want the newest train car fleet operating on Queens Blvd right away to allow for the Queens Blvd CBTC system to be more effective. The N/Q/W are crowded but that’s nothing compared to the E/F/R trains. 

Queens blvd is extremely busy especially during rush hours so the Queens Blvd line will need all of the extra capacity the R211s will offer. And if the MTA approves of the open gangway train car, they will definitely go to the most overcrowded train routes with are the A E and F trains. At least 50%-70% of the R160s currently operating the Queens Blvd line will be reassigned I personally believe that the Siemens sets will be the first few R160s to leave queens blvd. 

But don’t be sad N/Q/W train riders. Cause the R160s will then return to the Coney Island yard to replace the R46s heck if there enough R160s then maybe they could also replace the R68s R68As and operate on the trains.   

If they approve of a special 4 car R211 order. I believe it would go the L train and while the R143s and R160s get reassigned to the train.   will be needing extra trains to run more service as they are pretty packed and would definitely benefit from the wider doors and maybe open gangway. 

The G train will likely get the displaced R179s from the A/C trains. 

The and    trains are extremely unlikely to receive the R211s 

I say there is a high probability of R211's going to Jamaica yard because QBL has a pretty high ridership and could benefit from the wider doors and open gangway.

Rockway shuttle and SIR R211s definitely 

Franklin Avenue shuttle Either R160 or R211
For the R262s

The 6 train and 42nd street shuttle getting the R262s is a guarantee. The MTA would want the newest train fleet operating on the Lexington Avenue line for the CBTC project it’s very likely that the entire R142/A fleet from the 4 train and at least 50%-60% of the R142 fleet from the 2/5 trains will be reassigned to the 1 and 3 trains. 

The R142s and R142As on the 4 train would be sent to the 3 train 

The R142s on the 2/5 train would be sent to the 1 train. 

4/6 are fully R262s. The 2/5 are mostly R262s but some R142s would remain there to save money. 

I mean the R262s are replacing the R62/As right. But again the newest doesn’t always necessarily directly replace the oldest train fleet. 

And the 2/5 is the most heavily used train route in the Bronx so again needs the extra capacity that larger doors and open gangway offers. 

Or maybe something like this the IRT expresses get the R262s  are all heavily used and crowded and the MTA would likely want the newest and hopefully most reliable train cars operating there. The displaced R142s and R142As would go the Mainline IRT locals the  
Maybe the could get some to allow for more trains per hour but it’s very unlikely the R188s are doing excellent on the 7 train.  

And the reason for these swaps is to better address the needs of each route per subway line based off of ridership and CBTC projects. So the swaps would’ve be stupid. The R142s and R160s delivery caused a whole bunch of fleet swaps 
So the same is likely to happen with the R211s/R262s

Question if the   Skip stop service is so “useless” then why didn’t the MTA get rid of it like the ? Why did the community oppose its removal in 2010 but in all seriousness would having the  by peak way express all the way from Jamaica center to Marcy Avenue or at least from Broadway Junction be more realible 

Ok I got bored so I made a few service alterations scenarios. 
 

IRT White Plains Road 

Wakefield closure 

 rerouted to Dyre Avenue line.  late night service is suspended. 
 

dyre closure 

All  rerouted to Neried Avenue again late night service suspended  

IRT Eastern Parkway line

Clark Street tunnel closure 

 Dyre Avenue - South Ferry operates local between 34th street Penn station and south ferry

 cut back to 14th Street 

 extended to New Lots Avenue and runs local in Brooklyn at all times

 extended to Flatbush Avenue all times

Joralemon Street Tunnel Closure 

 runs local in Manhattan at all times and cut back to Brooklyn Bridge City Hall

 cut back to Grand Central 42nd street

 extended to New lots Avenue on late nights 

Quick question Should we just get a new voice actress and remake the entire announcements Ok so I wanna know what you think about this. I personally because anything would be a huge improvement over that spliced abomination. I meant come on MTA I completely understand if y’all couldn’t get Annie Bergen back to update the announcements but you should’ve gotten someone else to replace the old set instead the current announcements sounds absolutely horrible. I would say had Velina Mitchell or the actresses that voiced the PATH PA-5 and/or LIRR M9 Announcements. Any other ideas to fix the   announcements.  

Question why did it only took 2-3 years to repair the north side Manhattan bridge but over a decade to repair the south side Manhattan Bridge. 
 

I found a pretty cool proposal. Mystic Transit made a video about how a potential throggs neck subway being built as a branch off of the IRT Pelham line .To avoid another A to Rockaway or Lefferts confusion this route will be called the . The  would start off on the Throggs Neck line the stop it would serve  

Throggs Neck Harding Avenue terminus my addition suggestion stop

Miles Avenue local

Randall Avenue local

Balcom Avenue local

Brush Avenue Shopping Center express

Castle Hill Avenue local

White Plains Road local

Soundview Avenue local

Boynton Avenue local

Then Hunts Points Avenue would be upgraded to a duel level station with the Throggs Neck trains using the lower level. The would then join the pelham line on longwood avenue. And then it would then operate the same way the  does. All are local. The    remains the way it is. On manhattan the runs Lexington Avenue local and heads to brooklyn bridge city hall. A even longer term would be to try to built a new city hall terminus to allow much like the south ferry station to allow more trains per hour but we will have to deal with what we hae now. The benefits is that it would help out throggs neck and reduce cowdings on Bx40 and Bx42 buses. And double up service on Lexington Avenue local and the underground section of pelham line. And Speed on service throughout the existing routes. The will share its fleet with the . Hence any fleet the uses the uses too. Currently that R62As but they will be long gone by the time the expansion is finished being built so. I would have the R262s be assigned to the with the displaced R142s/R142As going to the The does have potential ridership but the level realistic won’t reach the levels of that of the Lexington Avenue Express lines. It’s yard would be Westchester Yard, as I believe it would be quite redundant to get a new yard cause the R142s R142As rarely has issues this ain’t the 1980s anymore and on Brooklyn Bridge City Hall the 6/8 R142s R142As would switch route designation much like the     Flatbush Avenue and on Astoria Ditmars. It a yard really necessary the most I would have it is be a small yard made just for storage and minor repairs pretty similar to the   Lenox Avenue Yard and Fresh Pond Avenue Yard. Trains would have to deadhead at either 3rd Avenue 138th street or upper level Hunts Points Avenue. The throggs neck line should be three tracks for emergencies.                   

 Im still wondering if the route should be elevated or underground. The This route is weekday only. Late Nights and Weekends The would be a shuttle and short turn at hunts point avenue. Reason late nights the l operates local and ridership is very low. On Saturday and Sunday the ridership is much lower than Monday-Friday levels so the extra service likely wont be needed. Ans But what do yall think. Again make sure to thank and give credit to mystic transit for the cool idea   

1 hour ago, LaGuardia Link N Tra said:

You'd have to rebuild the Stienway Tubes and expand the tunnels below 41st/42nd Streets? Is it really with it. 

 

#1 how would you connect it with the Montague Street Tubes with these hypothetical Express Tracks?
#2 There's no space for a 3rd Pair of Tracks around Grand Street.
 

Upgrading the BMT Eastern Division to be on par with the rest of the system will help do wonders for the subway system as a whole although ENY, Fresh Pond and Canarsie Yards would need to be rebuilt/expanded although that doesn't seem like a priority at the moment for the . SAS has no business in Williamsburg. If you wanted that, I'd suggest looking into a Bowery-Grand Street Transfer between the  and Lines (granted that a Cross Platform Transfer is provided). As for SAS-Fulton Street, seems like the easy way out but I'm personally conflicted on that one given the IND's Bad connection and integration with the rest of the system. Something the certainly wouldn't help with all that much.

Need I remind you that in the IND second system map it shows that they were planning to sent 2nd Avenue routes to Williamburg?  Further more routes doesn’t need a thousand transfers to be realible. The culver  doesn’t have that much transfers yet it overused. The Fulton street  doesn’t have that much transfer yet it’s overused. Why does the 2nd Avenue need to have a lot of transfer anyway it won’t make a difference. PS East side demand is low on BMT Southern Brooklyn. The 2nd Avenue subway will certain be underused and empty. Because the  are extremely crowded and it will be idiotic to remove popular services for useless services. Want east side. The  are right there. The  via Fulton allows the  to be move to the express tracks and be extended to Lefferts Blvd. while all  can be diverted to Far  Rockway. 

1 hour ago, bobtehpanda said:

Transfers. Fulton St has very poor transfers in Downtown Brooklyn and SAS transfers in Manhattan are worse. Compare that to Atlantic Terminal.

Also speed. The main point of SAS is to relieve the  . This is a little difficult if the SAS makes more stops than Lex express, so the idea is that by skipping downtown entirely via Manhattan Bridge you can be much faster that way.

The Sixth Av situation doesn't have to be so bad if the transfer at Grand St is cross platform.

What about this. The  runs express on 2nd Avenue and runs via montugue street tunnel. And the  runs local to Bay Ridge 95th street. PS it also skips Chantom Square and Seaport.

What with the Obsession with sending the 2nd Avenue via Manhattan bridge and rerouting the 6th Avenue express to Williamburg. Where did the idea frost came up 
 

I asked this because many people on the transit NYCT forums plan to have the 2nd Avenue line take over service on the Manhattan bridge and reroute the 6th Avenue route to Williamburg and removing Nassau street service. Questions why that? I don’t see what benefits come from a change like this.

They are a whole bunch of south Brooklyn riders that use 6th Avenue service you know. It will be a expensive project would eating up resources for no valid reason. And it take long causing delays for all routes involved. Where did this proposal idea came from anyway. Besides the J L and M traina is ok. But we could sent 2nd Avenue routes there instead it won’t make a difference. And people on Williamburg use Nassau street to get to Williamburg. For east side access in Brooklyn the 4/5 trains are there for that, more train should come but demand for east side isn’t even that high in southern Brooklyn . And it make Broadway more crowded than it is. Now people won’t like that would they. Think of it your removing two heavily used services in Brooklyn via Manhattan bridge for two likely underused services in Brooklyn via Manhattan bridge 

If you wanna improve Williamburg than expand to 10 cars install CBTC and expand 2nd Avenue service to Williamburg. But the 2nd Avenue should definitely go to Fulton street

There is a way to do improve Franklin Avenue service here’s how. Connect the Franklin Ave Shuttle with the Crosstown Line and create a Queens crosstown to Coney Island subway. A new lime colored  route would be created and similar to the line but this time it would branch off at Bedford/Nostrand Ave and recapture the Franklin Avenue shuttle and end at botanical garden. The Franklin Avenue shuttle stations would need to be expanded to 10 cars and a 2nd track would need to be build. If possible then it could potentially be extend to Brighton beach or even Coney Island. The  would certainly benefit from additional service. Such a connection would immediately address a major problem with Brooklyn transit: it would give commuters from southern Brooklyn a faster and less congested alternative to northern Brooklyn, Queens, and into Midtown by avoiding the need to go and transfer to downtown Brooklyn and lower Manhattan (a Select Bus Service has recently been introduced along the Bedford/Nostrand Ave corridor from Sheepshead Bay to Williamsburg which illustrates the need for such an subway route)

On 4/17/2022 at 6:26 PM, Wallyhorse said:

I have noted before I would extend the Franklin  platforms to 600 feet and returning to two tracks after Botanic Garden  with the idea of it becoming a new crosstown Myrtle-Brighton line that would be a "Black " that would run from Metropolitan Avenue-Coney Island as a 24/7 Brighton Local, absorbing the current Franklin (S).  This would include rebuilding the upper level of Myrtle Avenue-Broadway as well as short stretch of the former Myrtle EL with a stop at Tompkins Avenue from the old line and then to most likely Bedford-Nostrand to allow for transfers to and from the and then head to Franklin and the existing shuttle line.   In this, the and would switch roles on Brighton, with the  a second Brighton Local to Coney Island while the   is full-time Brighton Express to Brighton Beach with nights and weekends extended to Coney Island as well.  

Why’s switch the  and