Cait Sith

14 minutes ago, Transit Fans said:

It’s doesn’t matter it’s not a production set which means it has to go through a 30 day revenue test. 

 

Neither do you 

lol you're all the way in Florida, you definitely don't have a clue about much.

And it does matter, prototype cars are basically test fleets, ala R110s.

The R211Ts are prototypes to determine to see whether or not the MTA will even consider ordering more open gangway cars. Nowhere in their presentations or memos did they state that they are running a 30-day test. Just because you say they are, doesn't mean they are. The R211A was the baseline for the R211Ts, since the internals are virtually the same except for the gangways and some other minor differences, hence why a 30-day test isn't necessary.

Like I said, source your claims and stop spouting nonsense before you end up getting the boot.

16 minutes ago, subway guy said:

Does anyone know if the flat spots were taken care of on the 211S?

Flat spots are a common thing out in Staten Island. Whether or not it gets taken care of, it'll happen again, especially with leaves and such on the rails.

1 minute ago, Transit Fans said:

Look R211T and R211S both are pilot sets which means they have to go through a 30 day test no matter what. That’s how the MTA if they are able to run well just as the same process they did with the pilot R211A. Do you even know how a pilot train works. 

Considering that you cant even source your claims, it's evident that you have no clue what you are even talking about.

4 minutes ago, Transit Fans said:

You are aware that R211T is a pilot set which requires a 30 day revenue test. Only production cars are not required a 30 day. Also R211S are exact same as an R211A too and they are doing a 30 day revenue on that’s one in March next month. 

It's not a pilot....it's a prototype, there's a very big difference.

1 minute ago, Transit Fans said:

If that’s the case then R211S don’t need a 30 day since they all part of the base order. The MTA mentioned in the last conference introduction the R211T saying it’s doing a 30 day to see how it does before they order more of them. 

Source your claim that they said that.

As for the R211S, you're assuming that they'll even do a 30-day test.....things are ran differently compared to the subway.

Staten Island is a completely different situation considering that this is Staten Island's first new fleet in many years....they'll have to do quite a bit of testing and training before they run those cars in passenger service.

5 minutes ago, Transit Fans said:

Again incorrect the memo states the R211T is doing a 30 day test same as the R211A. If it was that case they wouldn’t do a non revenue test for over a year. 

Chief, I'm looking at it right now....there is no mention of a 30-day test.

I don't know who told you that it's doing a 30-day test, but there's literally no mention of it doing so.

12 minutes ago, MJHmarc said:

I heard same reports that the T model is not doing the 30 day test just being dedicated to the C line at this point and just see how it runs there, anyone with more knowledge can update this 

As far as I know, there is no 30-day test.

16 hours ago, FLX9304 said:

They have it strictly on Weekdays only. 

Definitely not true.

The only time it's not running on weekends(or in general I guess) is when there's a GO that would send the C line express along the express corridors that were of concern, which are from 125th to 59th in both directions, and from Hoyt-Schmerhorn to Euclid in both directions.

8 hours ago, FLX9304 said:

The reason for Alstom R160A/Kawasaki R160B intermix is because of the same Alstom traction, Alstom trac R160A/Bs cannot intermix with R160B Siemens, even though they tried it in 2019. 
 

as for R211A/T intermix, we’ll just wait and see how the R211Ts run first. 

What are you talking about? They've been doing that every now and then. About a month or so ago, there was an Alstom/Siemens mix on the R. They've been mixing sets on and off since 2008.

18 hours ago, FLX9304 said:

And 5299 was renumbered 5252 after it was finished. As Caith mentioned, buses can be saved because of its good parts and these buses haven’t reach 10 years yet. How can a bus travel at high speeds and hit an illegally parked truck? That’s the question remains 

Operator apparently fell asleep.

8 minutes ago, Lex said:

I'm pretty sure that was meant more to prep JFK for its own artics than anything else.

I think the highlighted 4 was supposed to be a 6. Touch screen shenanigans, perhaps?

Nah. He's right.

Those first batch of D60s had a ton of problems when they got to MTA Bus that they ended up being swapped out for the 2002-2003 batch.

1 hour ago, NewFlyer 230 said:

Wasn’t that whole thing just some political ploy to get the RTS’s to retire? I thought it bogus because each borough got its fair share of new buses between 2011 and 2019. 
ENY at the time already had a ton of XD40s, Jamaica already had 2015/2016 LFS’s, Ulmer Park had XD40’s and Quill which also had RTS’s had routes run through a lot of wealthy neighborhoods and were running on routes like the M66 and M72. 
Meanwhile nothing was said about ECH getting hand me downs for years. JFK & LGA collectively retired out a couple of fleets since takeover. Does anyone remember when JFK received the 1999-2001 D40HF’s and because they were in such bad shape they had to be transferred back to the city? But if those D60HF’s were known to be in bad shape why transfer them over? 

They didn't at first. Their problems arose months after. Their reliability tanked and the breakdowns just kept coming. Then, they started sending better buses from that batch. Reliability got better for a while, then it went back down again. It was around January-March of 2014 where things got much worse, which then prompted the swap for the 2003 D60HFs.

3 minutes ago, RSMG106 said:

Only reason for that is because 7507 and 7548 were sent to Northeastern Bus Rebuilders for repairs. NEBR didn't repair those buses as of now, which is why 7548 was sent to Eastchester scrap.

Again, anything can happen.

5299 was the same way when it slammed into the building and the subway entrance at 14th Street after a truck hit it, basically demolishing the entire front of the bus, they did the repairs in-house.

37 minutes ago, RSMG106 said:

7548: Jamaica to Eastchester Scrap. Unable to be repaired.

Never say never, they have fixed buses that have been badly damaged before.

29 minutes ago, TyBusLover1 said:

Just my opinion …

Whatever 🤓

Exactly my point .

That's not what one would call an opinion, especially if you're presenting it as a fact.

On 1/27/2024 at 3:28 PM, TyBusLover1 said:

Because they are not that good.

Says who? The OGs have a worse MDBF than the NGs.

4 minutes ago, limitednyc said:

Isn't aeb artic electric busses.  If So then why would ch be getting  artics?

No, that's just their talk for all-electric buses.

38 minutes ago, MysteriousBtrain said:

It should be noted that as of today's bus committee presentation, it's said that the 60 AEBs (4965-5024) is underway for acceptance for 4 depots. That means there is another cut besides Jamaica depot. Most likely the cut depot is Charleston or ENY as the other 3 have tested a kind of XE bus, the latter I'm going with bc I'm not sure ENY finished with construction with their own projects there yet.

As of 6 days ago, the deployment is still at 5. Whether or not it stays that way remains to be seen. All five depots are currently scheduled to get them, Jamaica not included.

It might also be the wording in the presentation that makes things sound iffy, but lets wait and see.

One of the XEs did visit ENY recently as well.

4 hours ago, Ex696 said:

Something I never thought about until recently, what's with trying to reroute buses from around the Queens Plaza area to the Hunters Point Ferry? I know Long Island City is the second biggest CBD in the city, but the proposed Amazon HQ was canceled. Has the ferry become more popular over the years or is there something else amiss?

That LIC ferry has been popular ever since it began, and it hasn't let up since, even with the fare increase to $4.

5 minutes ago, TyBusLover1 said:

Random but is it true that they are getting rid of the Q101bus ?

.....you should probably look through the drafts before asking questions.

Here's your answer.

1 hour ago, SubBus said:

According to MTA.info, the QBR was updated as of Tuesday, 1-23-24...

I didn't notice anything usual....

Just because the site updates doesn't mean there's anything new being added. It could just be minor things.

10 hours ago, 40 to 241st said:

Are these new xde40’s supposed to be the suburban configuration because the routes that you said there on are usually assigned to the Orion V suburban.

No.

32 minutes ago, R142A-6-Train said:

Well, if I were to cut the  back to 145th, then it would be too short. That's why I used the Concourse line to give it extra stations. Perhaps having the  do the job during late nights would be a better solution. Rush Hour service remains the same due the middle track between Kingsbridge and Bedford Park having a weird pattern that I've had trouble trying to explain, so I'll just put it right there.

Credit: Vanshnookenraggen

And for the , I'll have to agree with you. It actually makes no sense to make it a circle and send it to Lefferts. I actually found it weird seeing the  split into two branches. Perhaps having the  terminate at Euclid Avenue would've been a better solution.

The C being "too short" means absolutely nothing, especially when it serves its purpose being the Fulton Street & 8th Avenue Local line. Sending the C to 205 and cutting back to the D to 145 doesn't make much sense, as the D will end up going to 205 anyway under this idea of yours. Might as well keep the D to 205.

2 minutes ago, R142A-6-Train said:

So I've been wanting to do this ever since like... Right now. I've also been wanting to talk about it what I would like to see is...

 207th Street to Far Rockaway (Service will be unaffected, although service to Lefferts will be replaced.)

 168th Street to Brighton Beach (Extended from 145th to 168th.)

 205th Street or Bedford Park Blvd to World Trade Center (Revival of the Pre-1988  service pattern; Service to Bedford Park Boulevard during Rush Hours, Other times to Norwood-205th Street.)

 205th Street or 145th Street to Coney Island via West End (Service cut back to 145th Street; Rush Hour service via Peak Direction will be unaffected.)

 Jamacia Parsons/Archer to Lefferts Blvd (A huge change I want to see! 8th Avenue Service will be changed Express. It will become a more rounder line than the .)

What do you think? Do you have any ideas you would like to tell me, or do you strongly agree but have some questions?

The C, D and E ones don't really make much sense. Why would you send the C to 205 when it doesn't run 24/7, and why cut the D back?

And why send the E to Lefferts Blvd? That in itself doesn't make much sense when the E serves its purpose primarily on the QBL corridor.

12 minutes ago, Brillant93 said:

Thanks for clarifying, because I thought 12 years was too short but never took into account the wear and tear buses went through. But why does the MTA make orders for buses to be replaced when the orders will be completed and its time to replaced the buses they just purchased since the orders take long? 

I feel like that question needs to be worded better because it can mean several different things.

It largely depends on the use case of the fleet planned to be retired. There are some instances where fleets were retired before an order arrived due to reliability and mechanical problems. There are other times where fleets remained in service while their replacements were coming in because they were holding up well and were reliable. The RTS is probably the greatest example of that. The MTA is not the only one that does this, a lot of agencies across the US does this as well.

6 hours ago, Brillant93 said:

Does anyone think the MTA retiring buses after 12 years is very short and probably more expensive in the long run? I don't really know the logistics and even the financial situation of transit agencies fully enough but just seeing how they are retiring buses that were delivered a little over a decade ago while we still have fully functioning train cars that are 20-50 years old just doesn't make sense to me. 

Yes and no.

For one, you can't really compare subway cars with buses. Subway cars don't have to deal with potholes and other things buses do that gradually increase the wear and tear on the fleet. Subway cars are also far more heavy duty than buses and are built much differently.

12 years is the average age of a bus. Federal regulations require that a bus is retired after 12 years minimum of service, or 500,000 miles accumulated, but for agencies like the MTA and NJT, the 12-year mark usually tends to be over that. There were some fleets that were unjustifiably retired early such as the 1994 TMC RTSs(8600s), as those had a lot of life left in them and were in great shape, but were retired early because of the Next Gen Hybrids. There were other buses that were retired early due to reliability and mechanical issues.

Is 12 years too short? In my opinion, yes. San Diego, for example, is currently retiring their 2013 XN60s at 10 years and replacing them with more XN60s due to them accumulating 500k miles, however, San Diego resells their fleet too after they are retired, and those XN60s are in amazing shape.

Is it more expensive in the long run? Definitely not, as they can get parts from those buses and use it on their existing fleet.

4 hours ago, Ex696 said:

Is there any specific reason they had it end at Briarwood over Union Turnpike? There must be, because I don't see any logical reasoning behind why the MTA would pick that as a terminal over Union Turnpike, which is around the same distance from the Union Tpke-Main St intersection as Briarwood, and has more service than 75th Avenue.

The turnaround and layover space. Briarwood has a much easier turnaround. It'll utilize the little loop-ish street behind one of the station entrances that allows it to go back onto Main Street easily.

Queens Blvd & Union Turnpike will also have several more routes using that spot, it'll be too much bus traffic going through there.

If you're talking about Main/Union, there's simply no logical turnaround routing that would make sense.

On 1/9/2024 at 4:40 PM, VIP said:

I’ve been saying this for years “ya’ll divulge too much information on these forums and expect users to be diligent and not go out and vandalize or joy ride”

there needs to be moderation on the information leaked on these forums much more than the pointless questions or petty insults thrown between two 14 year olds on here. 

Whatever that is deemed to be too much info or whatever, hit the report button and we'll take a look at it. Us mods and the admins aren't around all the time to look at everything on this site, but the reports notify us.

And as for the second part. It's not just forums where information is going around like wildfire, its places like Facebook/FB Messenger, Discord groups(which has become extremely popular among these teenage fans), facebook groups and more. And I do have to side with @R32 3838on the statement that employees do tell these kids sensitive information in various places on the internet, as a lot of these kids always try to make friends with employees for their own gain(which is especially true on Instagram).

Social media, and the internet as a whole has become a hunting ground for information for these kids, not just transit forums like this one.