Art Vandelay

9 minutes ago, LGA Link N train said:

The order HAS BEEN Updated. Bombardier is giving us 16 free B cars. However, the fleet numbers are to be decided so whoever typed those numbers up, then sorry you're wrong. R68's and the R110B already have those numbers taken

R110Bs are retired- The 4 remaining on property can be renumbered if needed. R68s do not fall within this number scheme. 

(I am not saying that the post is correct- I am nearly certain it is not, but it would not be impossible. )

46 minutes ago, LGA Link N train said:

@bobtehpanda if RBB is "not worth their money" then what is it worth?

 

As transit? 0. 
If it were somehow suddenly ready to be used, it would just be abandoned again. 

PATCO. Technically outside of Philly, but the metropolitan area. 

34 minutes ago, bobtehpanda said:

That's a stupid mindset. Everything costs money. Some things, like RBB, are not worth their money.

 

Every time someone brings up this stupid topic it gets annoying to bring up the examples of subway lines running next to a railroad.

In Boston, In Washington, In Philadelphia. 

That said, TriboroRX Would probably have to be FRA compliant, as it would likely share tracks with the freight line, not just the ROW. 

43 minutes ago, subwaycommuter1983 said:

I just saw the video and it mentions that all r179's will be CBTC and they're forecasting a delivery completion by February 2019, 2 months before the Canarsie tunnel shuts down.

Fingers crossed!!!

CBTC Ready, not CBTC equipped. The car requires no modification for CBTC outside of the installation of the actual CBTC equipment. 

49 minutes ago, Calvin said:

Is the actually losing their R160s?

Yes. 

20 minutes ago, Bosco said:

Between the fact that the  isn't happening for a LONG time (at least at the current rate of things), and the need for more trains for CBTC installation on existing lines, I doubt that the R68s would be touched with the current setup.

Doing the math, and assuming 160 R32s remain after the shutdown, 160 + 940 (for the R46s) = 1100, leaving 512 expansion cars.  Remember, the goal is to expand the current fleet to allow for a better spare factor, and to keep up with service requirements.  I doubt the  will go back to OPTO even after the shutdown, and I wouldn't be surprised if the frequencies on the aren't reduced by much one the  train is restored.  So it's safe to say every line will see more trains in some way.

Even if you wanted to replace the R68s, you would need 625 • (5/4) or 782 more cars, ignoring additions.  While it is something that should be considered in the future, we are a ways from there and a lot can change in terms of technology and requirements.

Also remember- 80 of those are going to Staten Island. 

I think that is what would actually happen- R moves to 36th street, T to Jamaica. 

That is the Q, not the T. The T isn't happening anytime soon. 

Put the R32s on the B, move R68s over to the N/Q/W, move R160s over to Jamaica. 

1612(R211)+300(R179)-222(R32)-50(R42) -940(R46) -80(R44)= 620

You could start to retire the R68/R68A fleet if all the options are taken. Yes, you could probably find space for most of that equipment, although you might have to start getting creative.

My guess is:
Option 1 is intended to finish the retirement of the R46
Option 2 is intended for SAS Phase II/other growth. 

I don't believe there is any consideration of ordering more than 1612 cars. Where is anybody getting a higher number from?

23 minutes ago, U-BahnNYC said:

It's pretty easy. Make them into "married pairs" and two together to make a 4-car set(s) for the Eastern Division.

IINM A cars can only be coupled to B cars. Married pairs can't be created of NTT cars. 

17 minutes ago, U-BahnNYC said:

Yeah but what are you going to put on the ? Once you take the 7 R46s from the F the only ones you can take are from the . This goes back to the central dilemma at hand... not enough 600-foot trains without some rearrangement.

R gets R160s from Coney Island. 

1 minute ago, NoHacksJustKhaks said:

Staten Island won't take up much of the R211 fleet (if those numbers turn out to be even true), only 60-80 cars are needed. 

75. 

48 minutes ago, LGA Link N train said:

Doing some math I realized.

 

If we have 575 R211's we could replace ALL R46's

We'll have another 230 to replace the R32's

And another 50 to replace the R42's

So we need AT LEAST 850 R211's to replace the older fleets.

Including the SIR order fleet, we should expect at least 925 R211's  to replace the aging fleet.

Then (knowing Kawasaki) we should expect another 500-1000 or so.

Let's see what'll happen

Your math is incorrect. It takes 940 cars to replace the R46 fleet. 

Also remember- Some portion of the R32/42 will end up being replaced by the R179. While they may not be retired immediately, at least some of them will not be needed after the Canarsie Tubes reopen. 

2 minutes ago, Daniel The Cool said:

The  actually uses 18 trains during the AM Rush.

That is correct, but in the AM rush the A only uses 38 trains, so the total at that time is 56. That C becomes an A for the PM rush, so it is included in the total I listed. I used the PM totals as they are one train greater. 

A requires 40 trains. C requires 17 trains. That is 57 trains total.
There are 93 and 3/4 trains worth of R46s. 

Yes, there are enough R46s to fully run the A and C. 

14 hours ago, MysteriousBtrain said:

In case anyone didn't hear:

There will be 36 1/2 trains for Service, which means 40 ten-car sets and 260 eight car sets. Did the math which meant 4+32.5, which makes 36 1/2 and also means the order was not modified.

Rumor debunked.

Any source will say that today. That is true regardless of whether the order has since been modified. Has no effect either for or against the veracity of said rumors. 

21 minutes ago, N6 Limited said:

 

We know that NYC Bus service slow.

Try riding outside of rush hour

Actually, the Q52/Q53 are pretty damn fast. It is a stunning improvement. 

Yes. Every line has capacity outside of rush hour. But what is the point of building a connection that can't possibly be used in the peak or the shoulder? 

 

2 hours ago, N6 Limited said:

There is a lot of undeveloped land between beach 60 and beach 36th street they could line the Rockaway Freeway with high rises and advertise the ocean and views of the metro area and quick access to JFK and if the RBB is built quick access to LGA as well.

If all of it were to be fully developed to the greatest extent possible, The Rockaways might come close to justifying the service they have today. 

2 hours ago, N6 Limited said:

The QBL goes to LIC and Connects all lines in Queens  (and the Mall) There is more benefit than just a trip to Manhattan if the RBB is reactivated.

And for that very market... We have the Q52/Q53!

2 hours ago, N6 Limited said:

The QBL has capacity I ride it every day I've been on virtually empty  and  cars.

Empty E and F? Are you doing a stand-up routine?

Gentrifying the Rockaways doesn't make the RBL more feasible. There really isn't that much land there to provide enough population to justify more trains. 

1 hour ago, LGA Link N train said:

OK so now that we covered the fact that the area is not a transit desert, it's still has some potential to be a rail. Let's not forget, it may be useless now but ridership as a potential to see increase whint years. (Basically the story of the train)

The L goes through neighborhoods which are much closer to Manhattan and had a much higher potential for growth/gentrification. The L also actually goes to manhattan and had the potential to grow in capacity. The Queens Boulevard line has no capacity to take in  these riders either. 

 

1 hour ago, D to 96 St said:

It may not be needed now, but the Rockaways will demand for it like 50+ yrs from now. Plus Arverne and  other neighborhoods are currently being developed.

Most of the city needs more transportation TODAY. In 50 years, they'll all still need more capacity than the Rockaways will. 

1 hour ago, LGA Link N train said:

At the very least it's being stidied. And you have potential to create a new trunk south of liberty, apparently the noise issue was the same case with the  Laguardia Extension which never came to be because of NIMBY's. RBB is different. It'll supplement to Q52/53 SBS and (hopefully) takes cars off the road. And who cares if it's right in front of their back yards. The LIRR is literally a block away from where I live and the noise doesn't bother me at all.  Same case with the and the entire line. So yes, that's BS

? My brain is being a little child after having to take 5 tests today. So what you're saying is that @bobtehpanda's statement is incorrect or something?

It is only being studied because a few politically connected people want it to be studied. 

The difference between an LGA connection and a RBL reactivation is that the LGA connection actually has a potential market, with an airport which does not have an existing rail transit connection, running through dense neighborhoods which do not have adequate transit. RBL has an airport which is already connected to Manhattan- VIA 4 LINES! It would go through neighborhoods which would go through less dense neighborhoods which ALREADY HAVE TRANSIT (and underutilized transit at that). 

IF the RBL was already built and connected on both ends, the first thing the MTA would do is abandon it. It is truly a useless line.

13 hours ago, U-BahnNYC said:

When 8th ave will be CBTC nobody knows... it'll be at least a decade, well after the R211 delivery. I wouldn't be surprised if MTA decides to put R211s on QBL first, as that will get CBTC a bit earlier.

Besides, r211s are not required for CBTC. All the 160s/179s can handle it, too.

Queens CBTC will start with R160s, prior to the delivery of the R211 order. 

That said, there is nothing stopping the R211 from going there once they come in, bumping the R160s to the additional 4 lines requiring CBTC equipped trains once 8th has CBTC installed as well. 

1 hour ago, Union Tpke said:

Except that some of the R211s will be CBTC-equipped for Eighth Avenue CBTC as multiple MTA documents have shown.

Yes, but R211s don't have to run on 8th avenue to enable Eighth Avenue CBTC. If you put the R211s on the D E F and half the A, you can move the R160s currently on the E and F to the rest of the A and the B/C. (ETC. I am making a hypothetical, the numbers don't perfectly work out. My point is that you need to have the R211s for 8th ave CBTC, although you don't actually need to run them on 8th ave. )

1 hour ago, LGA Link N train said:

Speaking of CBTC. I don't get why is slow with this (to me it's not the answer to improving our signals.) Not sure about Ultra Wideband though. 

The signals need replacement. Replacement is the answer. Thales Seltrac and Siemens Trainguard MT are the specific systems used so far in the necessary replacement, both of which are forms of CBTC.