Fan Railer

Caught around 9:20p headed north.

Do we not know how to count? Testing started on 2/10, therefore it ended yesterday, 3/11, assuming no resets.

3214-3217; last night.

1 hour ago, East New York said:

Full program updates can now be seen at the top 👆of this thread for your convenience. This way everyone can keep current or reference something without having to go back and find the information in a previous post or page. As mentioned elsewhere, this will be rolling out across all major threads in all forums. 

Thanks. Just a note; page 19 is posted twice lol.

Just now, Lawrence St said:

Since the R46 and 68's are 75 feet, how come they manage to not hit each other on the 36th St curve into 9th Av on the (D)? 

This is getting unrelated to the 179...

But to answer your question, literally because they measured the clearances throughout the system before they bought those cars and determined where they could go.

Just now, Far Rock Depot said:

The standards have more of an "overhang"-and a shorter truck center difference. 

Also a narrower storm door and no recess between the door and the actual end of the car. There's literally nothing to grab onto once you step outside of the storm door on those cars lol.

1 minute ago, Far Rock Depot said:

The R110B was never locked. 67ft is the maximum length allowed to be unlocked. The swing isn't too extreme.   I asked this in New Car Engineering and again in School Car. 

Not so true for the Standards, it seems.

11 minutes ago, mine248 said:

Wow. I’m surprised at this (like if this is the case, then why don’t they just lock them by default?)

8 minutes ago, Far Rock Depot said:

Only on 75 ft cars. So it literally is an issue. 

Storm doors are required to be locked on 67 foot cars and up due to the swing of the cars when navigating tight corners and switches, and they are. 46, 68, and 68A doors are locked, as are the storm doors on the BMT Standards when they are used for Museum services, but from my understanding can be opened by the crew in an emergency. There's no rule requiring their locking on shorter cars, and I think until recently, it was not illegal to move between cars that way (hence the installation of pantograph gates on the 40 Slants. Hell, back 40 years ago before air conditioning, storm doors were clipped open to improve airflow in the cars.

The only reason I see for this rule (it being illegal to pass between cars using the storm doors in the absence of an emergency) being implemented in our time is the lawsuit happy nature of our society. Back in the day, if you f**ked up and injured yourself or died, it was understood that you were at fault. Nowadays, every idiot around the corner is trying to make a quick buck, and will sue anyone and anything for whatever they can get.

7 minutes ago, mine248 said:

And yeah, if y’all play around with the doors too much, the MTA will lock it (as I heard). So if that train god forbid gets on fire, you can blame those fools for messing with the storm doors

Storm doors can be locked and unlocked remotely from any operating cab. This is LITERALLY a non-issue lmao.

From today:

Quote from another forum by a user who critiques this author's take:

Quote

I would criticize "The trains are extremely long" comment on the London tube comparison. The subsurface and deep tube trains are tiny compared to the A and B division trains of the NY Subway. Also he didn't mention that the Tube is extremely expensive.

In addition, the Istanbul comparison says something about the Istanbul metro + commuter rail will grow from 169 km (105 mi), which I don't even think that initial number is correct, to over 1000 km (680 mi) by 2030. I don't know where that goal came from but I doubt they will be opening over 800 km of new rail lines in the next ten years. 

There are many valid criticisms for the NY Subway but if you are going to report on it, the comments should at least be informed, factual and valid.

1 hour ago, Union Tpke said:

I got it at 111th. I am on it at 207th. Likely the first railfan on it.

LOL...

0645 Euclid to Lefferts was the first revenue run. You were DEFINITELY not the first foamer on the train.

7 hours ago, Lawrence St said:

Um...dosent he work for MTA?

12 minutes ago, Jemorie said:

What are you literally implying with that statement "doesn't he work for the ?"... 

Actually, my understanding is that he doesn't.

17 minutes ago, Eagle Railfanning said:

By any chance can I know what facebook group you’re referring to? I dont see it on TNPV.

I said Facebook, not Facebook Group. That being said, a set of photos was JUST posted on TNPV about 5 minutes ago from 181st Street.

The original photo that sparked this latest discussion was taken at West 4 and posted on someone's personal timeline.

17 minutes ago, Lawrence St said:

Apparently the 10 car R179 is now in service on the .

16 minutes ago, MysteriousBtrain said:

Source?

The picture on Facebook is of a test train that ran tonight signed up as an A train. It is NOT in service.

15 hours ago, Around the Horn said:

3206-3209 are reportedly on their way to NYC

15 hours ago, m2fwannabe said:

The delivered and unaccepted list is only showing cars up to 3205.  Has been for like a month.

So these new delays push first delivery of the 5-car sets to end of March, probably their revenue service well into April, maybe May 2019.

The final delivery now projects into September.

AtH is correct. Deliveries are resumed as of yesterday.

3 minutes ago, Around the Horn said:

I was reading about the S stock trains in London (after Byford name dropped them at yesterday's meeting) and I noticed that they're part of the Movia family of trains.

I guess this would be something only certain employees or higher ups would know the answer to but is the R179 also part of the Movia family or not?

Yes and no. The R179 uses the same technologies, but is customized for NYCT to the extent where it does not completely fall under the umbrella of the "Movia" family of vehicles.

9 hours ago, Lawrence St said:

Not sure if anyone posted this but the M9's have a new ASI system installed and the new announcer sounds like shes half asleep.

someone already posted the video earlier in this thread

3 hours ago, trainfan22 said:

Nice, I guess that means were aren't too far off from seeing M9s in revenue service..

 

Speaking of M9s, I read on another forum that one of the M9 option orders will be motorless coaches for the DIESEL fleet.. pretty interesting development. Basically M9s without traction motors being pulled by DE/DMs..

Sounds like an unfounded rumor. There are a LOT of false rumors going around about the M9 order. Believe nothing unless it is officially announced by the MTA.

13 hours ago, ABOGbrooklyn said:

When was that confirmed? 

Clearly you didn't get the joke.

16 hours ago, ABOGbrooklyn said:

Nice, now we just need a replacement for the fat ass R68/As

Yea, the R297......

5 minutes ago, Eric B said:

"Someone" involved with the actual design of cars, or just some fan imagining what it might be like?

Some foamer. Pay it no mind lmao.

12 hours ago, RR503 said:

Those timers were GT25s. The only thing that changed is that their CBTC equivalent is calibrated properly. Those limits from TSQ to 5th also predated the system, but only as speed signs. 

I am aware of both facts. The point is that with CBTC, the actual train speeds through those areas have changed, regardless of what the posted limits etc were before.

On 11/29/2018 at 9:51 PM, XcelsiorBoii4888 said:

Can someone upload a continuous action video of the 7 line with the new CBTC operations? I wanna see if things sped up. Preferably Grand Central or Times Square. 

Timers between 5 av and GCT gone, speed up to 20-25 mph, I think, but conversely, there's now an ATC enforced limit of 20-25 between TSQ and 5th av.

On 12/17/2018 at 8:52 AM, OverlyObsessed said:

What if they ran the Second Train on the I.R.T? Maybe the TOMC on the 7th ave line, like they did in 2004?

First choice would be to go with older pre-war cars for the Holiday Train. So if there was an IRT train, it would be using the Lo-Vs.