Grand Concourse

1697 1698 1699 & 1700 have their LEDs interior/exterior

hem, seems strange just one car is missing them.

Isn't supposed to be 1696-1700? Or is 1696 a single?

it is a 5-car set, i was wondering if it was just the first car or the whole set that was missing the led displays. And it seems it was just the one car. By now the only singles left are the 1900s with 1960 and below.

What about the other 4 cars of that set?

Since we are talking about mergers, i would like to think the b100 would be moved to fb depot since the line runs in front of the main entrance. I dunno if there is a need to have both the b2 and b100 running west of flatbush av. I would think the b2 would be kept, but instead of going down toward the mall, duplicating the other lines, maybe it could go up utica and then turn onto fillmore and continue on in place of the b100.

Personally, I find the down the IND Fulton to be the best option. It's the original plan (I think?) and will do much good for a growing population along that corridor. It will also send the to Lefferts, and will improve headways along the entire line.

But even if you tied the sas into the ind fulton line, you may as well build the utica av spur and run the T or C there to maybe kings plaza. People are not going to agree to the C replacing the A. Why would anyone give up a one seat express for a local? People are just going to get off at rockaway blvd and cram onto the A. That would just mean more empty C trains heading to euclid. The A should have one branch renamed as a different letter and for the most part left alone.

I still doubt the sets from the 1 are staying on the 6. It is too early to say when there are still r62as still on the 7. Also there will be more trains coming back to the mainline because the 7 has 8 brand new trains as well as the additional insert cars. 2,4,5 lines will probably get a few extra trains via displaced trains. 4 will probably send a few r142s to the 2/5 and the 4 will take on some r142as from the 6 (and may as well take all the r142as since there will be a handful left. Send back a few r142s to the 6 in return). Also the 1 will eventually be all r62as again and can then give back the r62s to the 3.

What i don't get is why not give the 6 the 1800s if westchester was keeping a set permanently. I also understand the point about the led signs, but i don't think it should be that hard to either install new ones on r62as that didn't have them before or take them out of the sets going to the 1 (sets in the high 2000s to 2150s) and putting them on the ones going to the 6.

As for the singles, i dunno why a set isn't linked up yet. Perhaps it might soon? Aren't there plans to reconstruct the times sq S platform so it can handle 5-car trains and eliminate the need for 3 and 4 car trains?

Another rumor is that Bombardier is using the good scrapped parts from the original pilot train onto the 2nd version. I have not been able to confirm this ethier.

what rumor? And sorry, but you haven't posted accurate info in the past, so i am skeptical about this claim.

Most likely what runs R46's now: .Wouldn't count out one showing up on the or the getting all R211 and the getting old R160s

I'm sorry but decades of the MTA screwing over Bay Ridge has me thinking cynically here...

 

 

So its 20 4 car trains for SIR?Or will they use 5 car sets like the mainline (16 trains)?

 

ENY ,do you know if the SIR ones will show the destination on the front like now or show just the SIR "bullet"?

i would think they could push out the r160s at jyd to the A. That way jyd would have all the r211s. If there's another line that gets the shaft as far as old trains, it is the A line.

 

Since the sirt runs 5 car r44 trains for the rush hours, i wonder if they would run a 6 car r211 train? If they run 2 car r44 trains at night, would they run a 3 car r211?

7200s-7500s have an insert car in the 7900s. The 7800s for the most part are 11-car consecutive sets (or at least they used to be before now being broken up into individual 5 and 6 car sets). I just hope they don't accidentally run a 12-car train by accident. Imo, they should have made them all new trains in sets of 10 numerically with the 11th car a different number so trains will still be 10 cars and an 'insert'. Easier to remember things when the car set ends in:1,5,6,0. As for c cars, they are next to the a cars. All the inserts are c cars, but some of the b cars of the r142as were converted to c cars iirc.

It can still happen. At the moment maybe the 1800s were not ready to be moved over to the 6 yet. As for the cars the 6 will get: they will need at least a few 2000s since 1900s will still be needed on the S. And the 7 has 400+ cars to return back. The mainline lines will get some extra trains since the 6 is giving up fewer trains than it will take back because the 7 had at least 8 brand new train sets and all the insert cars. Some r142as on the 6 is going to be pushed out to the 4 so the 4 can push a few r142s over to the 2/5.

It seems they are waiting to transfer the single R62A cars to the last. When they do, I'm sure they will convert a few more cabs to full length and keep them on the end of 5-car consists.

Of course they are going to convert them it would make no sense to send them to the and not convert them into full width cabs they should be easier to operate that way

there are other 1900s below 1961 used on the shuttle. Ideally they could trade some cars coming back from the 7 with the shuttle, but the S needs full width cab ends and they may probably have to leave a few trains of non consecutive units to run on the 6. That is until/if they ever rebuild the times sq end of the shuttle so it can run a 5-car train and no longer need 3-4 car trains. Some said the cars on the S are linked and i dunno if it would be a simple matter of unlinking them. I think there are the 1920s numbered cars still wit the red stickers that could be put together as two consecutive 5 car sets. They ran on the 1 few years ago, but were out of sequence. I would've figured they might've linked them since they had the lower 5 cars together.

 

There is nothing stated all trains going to the 6 must be full width cabs, but i do understand there might be a preference from the crews to have full width cabs.

Wasn't the plan for 10th Av to make it side platforms?

 I think it was to be side platforms or will have to be with the track close together the whole way. 

By the way the tunnel looks, they didn't leave no shell or space for the proposed station.

 And it was a shame. They cry it made the costs too high to build the extension and they dropped 10th av entirely with no provisions to start the station with a shell. To build it now, they will have to spend even more which makes me feel 10th av is going to be very doubtful.

I couldn't agree with you more. I feel like 10th Ave would have seen more usage than 34th street does now just because it is in more of a residential area so people will take it to head to Time Square, Grand Central and on Game days Citi Field. I was trying to look out the window to see where the station would be. Someone said on here before the MTA planned to leave the space for a 10th Ave station at another time but I couldn't see a spot with a big gap between tracks and I don't think the station would only have side platforms because all the other stops in Manahattan are island platforms.

The L at 3rd av and 1st av are side platforms. I don't think 10th av had to be island platforms since they would probably build a mezzanine above it and you can get to the other platform if you were to accidentally end up on the wrong platform. The other option would be to go to the next station and switch on that platform. But yeah, the 7 extension doesn't do much for people west of 8th av. They will still need to rely on the poor m42 service or walk as they currently do.

Took a visit to the new station this past weekend ridership looks very low especially on the weekends I hope that they can create more jobs on that side b of Manhattan so ridership can grow that's the purpose of the station anyway, right?

they have still yet to build that deck over the lirr yard for the towers to go over it. For the moment the station is usuful for getting to the javits center, but 10th av was the station that would've really justified the 7 extension.

Well, true, but the battery thing might take up some space though*. Not sure how many ogs they want to convert to lithium ion batteries. I still think rtss makes more sense as eny still has them and to increase the fleet age. But if jam sends over the ngs, then so be it.

 

*do they usually change the batteries after a while or are they changed somewhere else?

I don't see why eny would get ngs. That doesn't really help them regarding the many types of local buses they have to maintain. You just trade the lfs for ngs which still leaves them with the xd40s, rtss, and o7 og buses to deal with. At least if eny gets rtss back in return, they will be down to just 3 types and it better balances out the fleet age as they are young enough already with all the new buses they have and pushing out the oldest rtss to mta bus and queens.

They haven't forgotten to link 1961-1965 lol. In due time 1926-1965 will be linked from what I have understood. 1901-1908, 1910-1925 will be for the 42nd st. shuttle.

 

1906-10 could be left for just track 4. Ideally they should rebuild the platforms so they can hold a 5 car train. 1906-10 could also be left out as singles for work duty since they can't run as a 5 car set.

I have been away for a bit and didn't know fb got back the rtss they sent to eny. 5141 to wf is a strange move. Couldn't they have just given wf an o5 instead? I also read some 4200s from fb were sent to gun hill? Is this just a summer loan or something more? I would figure it makes sense to bump off that batch of ngs now since they've been at fb for a while now and racked up a lot of miles as well as to balance out the fleet age with all the xd40s they have and will get. The age would be balanced nicely with the return of the 5100 rtss.

Oh no I'm always calm im just saying that it would have made sense for ENY to get more XD40's. Is there some type of story behind ENY getting LFS's?

i do agree, I don't understand why they are giving cs a large number of xd40s making it the oddball of the queens depots as they are set to get the lfs. At least if eny got the 30 xd40s, cs could be split with xd40s and the lfs. And for cs they already have the lfsa, So technically they should have the parts to cover them too. Giving eny the novas means they have 4 types of local buses unless there's a plan where eny gives up their ogs? This whole fleet moves stuff is making my head spin.

That's wasteful, that means Meredith is just a parking area for the other two depots

I think that was the point for meredith. The whole point was to ease the burden on then cas and yuk as the only depots handling the whole borough's fleet.

Yeah, it seems stupid when you look at the LED on those R62As, but with or without the Corona-Westchester-Jerome swap I mentioned, eventually Jerome would see 3 different types of cars again.

I agree with the reasoning of your opinion, just saying that the Corona-Westchester-Jerome swap was another option that could was looked at.

Why would jerome see 3 types? If you moved all the r62as back to the 6, the 6 still needs a few r142as to meet the needs. If anything the 6 might push out a few r142as to the 4 and then the 4 pushing out a few r142s to the 2/5 so all the lines will absorb the surplus of trains once the whole r188 conversion stuff is complete. The 7 is getting new cars in the form of inserts and 8 brand new 11 car trains. That is more than enough for the extension to 34th and cover for the current r62a singles they have now. Hell to make things even simpler, the r142as left on the 6 could go to jerome so the 4 has all the r142as and the 6 takes a few r142s. Either way there is no reason why the r62a needs to go to the 4. As others said, keep it simple as a 6 and 7 line fleet swap and keep the other lines out of it.

 

As for the 2200s or whatever on the 6 now, they are on loan since the 6 needs anything it can get as r142as are getting converted for the 7. I do agree that eventually when everything is settled, the 1600-1900s (non single units) and 2000s should all go back to the 6 and the 1 takes back their sets and take on the 2100s in trade for the 1800s. I have noticed some of the trains on the S now has cars grouped within a range of 10, ie: 1950s in one train and 1930s in another. I dunno if this was already done long ago or recent, but once more of the singles comes back from the 7, they could probably arrange more singles into consecutive 5 car sets. The lowest 1900s in 5 car sets i've seen are in the 1960s group.

Wow, 6 pages worth of posts on the R143 in the last 12 hours.

 

I guess I shouldn't have been so surprised when a CCY R68 ran on the on Monday and the conquestors got so excited that they SET THE TRAIN ON FIRE (or last year when an R32 was on the and they decided to steal the rollsign box from THAT train).....I can only imagine what kind of damage is being done to that R143 set right now....

Lol, yeah I don't get this hype about the R143 on the J. They are ntts and are basically the same with the R143s having a strip map and a single door storm door. It isn't that vastly different like R32s on the J. Then again some still make a big fuss over an R68 on the N when it ran on the N for decades before it became entirely R160s. 

 

I can understand the hype about the R68 A train as R68s have never been on the A before. At least not regularly as far back as i remember from the late 90s. 

=

As for R142As on the 2 and 5, call me jaded, but I didn't feel any difference. R142as ran on the 2 maybe 9 years ago when R142s were undergoing sms? So the 2 borrowed some sets from the 6. Eventually by the time they were working on the sets on the 4, the 4 borrowed some R62As from the 1 and 7 lines iirc. Now that was interesting to see since the 4 was all R142/As.

The 5, it was some GO where it ran local on lexington av and it borrowed a set from the 4 or 6.

But is it really okay to do it on an full cab R62/R62A (especially on the back of other subway cars like the 32 or 42s)?

 

 

lol, I'm sorry 'do it'? I hope you mean view from the rfw. And I dunno why the many questions. Just go to the front and watch there isn't anything mysterious about it. Worse comes worse someone else is already standing there or as other said, the t/o has his cab door open and blocking the door.

You can also make the better by splitting it. But would you actually do that? Probably not. The gap between the two lines inconveniences people when they would ordinarily make use of through service to reach stations beyond the gap.

 

In the current situation, the and construction on the Queens Boulevard line are the best reasons to scale back the . Shortening a route always makes it run better (like the ), but it's not a reason for the to be shortened. Otherwise we'd run a bunch of shortened lines whenever possible.

I know i'm in the minority when I say I think the G should go back on QBL for the weekends as the R alone is just terrible. They could run the E local or extend the M as alternatives, but I would think the G makes the most sense (as long as there's no construction going on) since people just takes the local to the next express stop anyway. Yes, the G is half the length, but again, it doesn't matter since people are just taking it a few stops and getting off. Run opto for the G. If the M were extended, it would have to be the full 8 car train and not the 4 car train it is now to Chambers (until the switch at essex is built back).

 

As for the R, I don't see why they can't short turn some trains at Whitehall. Either turn back select Queens bound trains there or the Brooklyn end of the line and then you can improve one end of the line without the entire line being so unreliable. 

Smh, people just can't let it go about the 2/5. Why put r62as on them when it is a pita to roll every single sign on the train if they need to be used on the other line when it takes seconds to select the program for a line on a screen?

9428 to LGA??? Oh shit.........

Not too surprising. They have a bunch of those 8900 and low 9000s. Just a matter of time till mta bus gets 9500 and 9600s if they last that long to get moved over.

Isn't there increased service during the summer?

What increase? I said in the past when redbirds were still running they ran 10car trains because the 11th car had no ac. When the 7 was all r62as, then it was 11 car trains all year round.

I also agree with this. But also:

ENY is sending the 51xx buses right back to FB.

As of recently ENY sent out 6556-6577 over to FP. It would make sense to send the rest of the 65xx-66xx buses to FP and FP send their O7's to FB

I spotted 5142 this AM on the Junction. But also FB is pushing out some their 42xx's over to GH. But the real question is when the summer loans end. Will MJQ return the buses and whatever has left to GH back to FB.

 

I do agree on the ogs to fp, but no on more ngs to fb. We have a bunch of lf buses as it is especially with the xd40s here. Interesting about the fb 4200s going to gh. If gh has o5s, i could see gh just retiring the o5s and keeping the ngs there. I don't see the need to bring those ngs back unless they intend on moving the rtss around again.

 

I totally agree with you. The Novas that are coming in are pushing out the RTS ENY received from FB a few months ago.

yes and a bit sooner than i expected. They were there for a short time like the fp ngs at fb before the xd40s started to arrive.

Two 5 car sets is not a problem. When there were only redbirds on the 7, the summer time they would cut out the R33wf single car (no a/c) and run 10 car trains. With R62As, they can run 11 car trains all year round. The serious issue with a 12 car train is of course being too long, at 612'.

My guess that is just a summer loan. Brooklyn depots like FB tends to lend a few of their buses to other depots because they don't need as many with school out for the summer.
And if not mentioned already: 5171 was on the B44 yesterday. It spent some time (few months) at ENY when FB was getting the xd40s. I dunno if it means eny is pushing out RTSs for the nova lfs and if 5171 is coming back to stay at FB (instead of a summer loan). I would think ENY should be pushing out some of their old gen hybrids so those hybrids can be sent elsewhere to help retire some of the remaining O5s as well as to balance out the fleet age at ENY.