BelieveinMe

Question for the board. Can someone please explain the B53. Is it supposed to go into service at the same time the Queens reroute,or the Brooklyn reroutes?

I'm so sorry. I did exactly what Bill said.. and realized that when I double checked. Again, wrong board (next time I'll make sure to have my glasses on 😀!)

Never was a "that person",fella. Always had a name. Not to mention, but I will anyway, that things change with the MTA as much as SOME of Us change socks and underwear. The Third Option Cars WERE a thing, but a certain individual in charge of the overall system decided to make drastic cut across the spectrum of the system. The 179s were being Planned for both the subway And SIRT..as 75ft cars. Because of the service and budget cuts, the whole program was tossed under the bus, just like the 3rd option order. When the 179s order was finally let, the proposal was completely different. 60ft cars, the majority of them were 4 car sets. I believe I've gone through lengths to explain this, so repetition is unnecessary. In any case,it doesn't matter what happens you choose to believe, simply because I don't care. Doesn't matter. I Only addressed the situation because it Needed to be Addressed. Thank you.

I know that, Bill. I asked Here, because the B53 was and Is part of the Queens plan,as proposed And presented there First. Good to see you too.

Yes. There absolutely Was suppose to be another contract extension, except it was cancelled by the hatchet man the made the very worst service cuts ever. He cancelled bus orders, train orders, commuter car orders,bus service, and everything else within reach.

Nope. As I said, the cars were originally the Third Option order of R160s. Budget cuts moved the cars further up the timeline, and the purpose of the purchase was changed due to a Federal Government edict. The MTA had to adjust Everything,even the specs(car Were 75ft, now 60ft,one for one replacement of R44s , even the Staten Island cars) The number of cars were budgeted at 300,to replace the cars that had to be retained due to the FTA. Meanwhile, the MTA told the public that the R44s were "replaced_" by the last option order R160 cars. However, the truth was that they were essentially in a situation now, with a serious car shortage in the B Division, time constraints and other factors wrecking havoc. This was when they Should have stepped up, and made a proper decision, instead of stop gap measures. The needs of Service dictated the purchase of around 650 cars or more. MTA choose to push the issue further down the road, continuing the Catch Up game plan. They were absolutely sure that the current program concerning car maintenance was enough, and if that wasn't enough, then public be damned. This is the reason why there are so many missing interval runs..lack of equipment,lack of spares,far too many cars out needing repairs. This is the situation we are in Now. Even with the incoming 211s,there will not be enough cars until they fill the gap. At least 550 cars are needed to meet that goal, and they know it.

Yes, with that being the case many times,as seen on the A for many years until the 179s. The Southern Division has received new equipment that was designated for the A and C since the 80s, starting with the R68/68a contract. The R55 would have been "the cars built directly for the A line", but the cars were sidelined because of the defects found within the 44 and 46s, which the cars were based on. The TA grew cold feet, redesigned the cars into something they were more familiar with, and renamed them R68. The MTA never seemed to understand,or care about the costs of its callousness. It has always been a "taker", not a Giver. Not a big surprise, looking back on its track record. Another issue is how the TA favored the Queens Blvd Express services during the "lean years", placating the whining of Donald Manis and the rest of the Nimby types. He killed himself when his corruption was discovered, and others were involved.. but everything seemed to be buried. The new R68 cars were given to the south, while the 68a were given to the Concourse shops. It's ridiculous to think that there wasn't a new subway car order of any large number between 1988 and 2001, but That's exactly what happened,as the TA believed it's GOH program saved it some time and money replacing equipment. Whatever the excuse was,these decisions put the NYCTA behind the times,in a technology black hole, for years. The MTA had to play catch up, from front of the house, to back of the house...trains shops,yards,depots, management.. signals structures stations tracks ROW..top to bottom. New cars are Always a "big deal", especially to those who benefit from them immediately. However,as with All things, there will always be those who feel as if they are missing out, not getting Their fair share. However, the A line has always been given the "well rounded out" fleets,so the needs of service can be met. The NTTs introduction to the A line was simply a "no choice" situation. The same will be done with the B,D,N, and Q ,as the cars there are either aged out,or at the point of it. It is what it is, sometimes.

Question to the board. When the new Queens Bus design goes into effect, will the B53 begin it's operation too? Will this route replace the current B46 on Broadway, replace the 32, and 24? What of the other routes? Something doesn't add up.

No.this is incorrect. The 179s were Originally the 3rd option order for R160s, until the funding was pulled by the Hatchet Man the MTA hired to make the draconic cuts agency wide. However, the majority of his cuts only affected the NYCT, subway and bus system, and certain neighborhoods the routes served. This was pretty much confirmed with some restoration of the eliminated services, and the sudden "retirement" of that MTA chairman after the deed was delivered. The R179 was the direct response to cuts, matching car for car the intended retirement of the Remaining R units intended to be replaced by the 160s. The FTA threw it monkey wrench into the works, by ordering the 44s into retirement because of structural defects. In any case, the 179s were Not intended for the Q line,(assumed because of the Second Avenue Subway opening). The cars Were now intended for 8th avenue service, replacing all R32s that remained there. The R32s were moved to the J and Z line, with some still in A service. The C was given the majority of the J line's 160 fleet. So because of circumstances, the 179s were given to the Eastern Division, and the 8th Avenue line simply because they ran the oldest cars in the system at the time.

53rd st had a 30tph headway Built into the old system. With CBTC, whenever they actually finish the entire set up,trains will be able to travel closer together. The reason Why service was reduced was due to CBTC work being carried out east of Kew Gardens. As far as the local services being cut off from the G line, this is the MTAs fault for removing the G from QB in the first place. The M certainly needs an upgrade,as shown during the late night SAS service pattern, with riders packed on up to 2 am when the service went to bed for the night. 24hr M service would actually work out better in the long And short run. The Current E and F services are down to 12 tph each, with no 179 E service. Trackwork/CBTC within the 63 st tunnel played into the CURRENT SERVICE PATTERN, and that's what we are dealing with CURRENTY. Im wondering why they needed to rebuild an previously "rebuilt tracked" so thoroughly...

Uh oh. I know that type of talk. Your PERCEPTION is geared in favor of GCM, not Brooklyn service. You seem to believe that regulating Brooklyn to "connector service" is a good thing? Like You said, you might be the minority operationing under a bias. Care to elaborate,or am I just speculating?

If the car deliveries are steady, then there's a distinct possibility that there will be enough to at least move some R46 cars to the Southern Division,to beef up services there. Hopefully, some 46 assignments for C services will be done away with... and some 179s could possibly sub. Let's remember that the entire goal is to have a uniformed fleet for the A and C... making the cars interchangeable.. any set can be used for both lines to make service. That's the plan, and I hope they stick to it...so Yes.. the summer is looking good for a change.

I know the idea has been floated around, but I'm going to say this anyway. Flipping the F and M East River crossing would make sense here. The F using 63rd st practically bypassing a key section of LIC hasn't worked for a large demographic. One way this could be solved is moving the F back to 53rd st... running the M through 63rd st as the Queens Blvd Local. The M would essentially hit the neighborhood stops between 71st Ave, and Lexington,via 63rd st establishing true connectivity to the "city", the upper Eastside, and the Second Avenue Subway via the Q line. The E and F will do what they are supposed to do,carry express riders to/through the heart of Midtown,the R would serve Queens Plaza, and Lexington Avenue (a direct connection to the Lexington Avenue subway).. Let's face it. All subway line within the B Division interact with one another directly or indirectly. What the MTA has done was make the best of bad decisions it has made in the past. The choice to route express trains through 63rd was to reduce delays, and make the route useful. The glaring missing link is, of course, the Queens Bypass route, that was essential to the 63rd st Tunnel's very existence. The F was a compromise for the missing services, but never managed to live up to expectations. The Night service is backwards also... however, the length of the F line makes over night express service necessary for crew comfort. The M line has become a vital service, needing a service enhancement at both ends of the line.

I take this as a sign that the E-Wing trucks are fixed, and finally working as they should. This is spectacular news. Kawasaki did what they were supposed to do, tackled the problem at the root(at manufacturing), so we won't have to deal with something like that in future. Im Really surprised that something like that was able to slip by Quality Control... however, that could have been a "let's just get them out,deal with any issues later" situation. All new equipment goes through teething stuff, so this isn't exactly a New Thing. But the fact that nobody else has complained about the new truck kinda drives my point. During testing, the EWing did Great, so why would they fail during full operations? I think we pretty much have the answers.. It was Kawasaki's issue,lack of proper oversight. Rushing to get the product out, so not to incur fines for delivery deviations..as they were incredibly behind schedule. In any case, I am happy that everything has cleared up, definitely for the better. Trains are arriving steadily now, and with the summer fast approaching, the A line will be choice to ride. Hopefully by the turn of 2024, the route will be all NTT finally, and the C can get it fair share of new equipment also. I believe the target date for build out is 2025.. I have a question for the board. Is Kawasaki using both American manufacturing sites for the base contract,or did they split it, with Yonkers handling the 211s, and Nebraska handling the 211A? The only reason I'm asking is due to seeing a few at Yonkers,as I was passing by on Metro North. Again, you guys are tops.

Fantastic. The MTA is pretty serious about at least getting a significant amount of new equipment in before the summer heat draws in. Kawasaki is pushing the cars out, trying to catch up to the schedule they proposed for deliveries. With close to 200 cars now in the system, there is still plenty of work to do. I appreciate the hard work RTO does, the fans keeping track of delivery and train spotting. You guys are the best.