Roadcruiser1

It was a 12-9...

Just corrected that...

 

So this means the is getting new cars?

 

No. It's the . The sets are not long enough for the .

Painting subway cars are more difficult in NYC than in Philadelphia. We have a lot of people out there that would spray paint and draw on trains. Painting them would require constant new paint coating frequently, and it's not worth it. It's cheaper right now to use the anti graffiti spray and to wipe it off. Painting them would require taking them out of service as well if the vandalism is bad enough. Here we just wipe it off. The train then can go back into service.

Our subway cars used to be painted. The cost of maintaining them was not worth it.

Based off of what Iv'e gathered, according to non-railfanners it sounds more "high-tech". Having said that, it should go on the "Tourist" line A.K.A. The Broadway Line.

There are some ordered for the Q line. It will be needed for it's future runs on the Second Avenue Line.

For those of you that haven't heard MITRAC.

They sound a lot like the R142's, but are much sharper and louder. They would be music to any railfan's ears. It would especially give the NYC Subway a special kick. If the R179's have this propulsion a distinction between the new tech trains would be clear.

I am certain that they are going to the C now.

New C Line Cars Four Years Away

By Kristen Meriwether

NEW YORK- New York subway riders who frequent the C line are one step closer to enjoying brand-new subway cars, after Gov. Andrew Cuomo and the MTA announced an order for 300 new rail cars on Thursday. Riders will have to have patience, however, as the new cars, the R179 model, are not expected to be delivered until late 2016.

 

The C line cars entered into service in 1964 and are the oldest model still in operation. “They are the lowest performer on the system, somewhere in the 50,000 [mile] range between failures,” Bill Hunter, executive director of Permanent Citizens Advisory Committee told the MTA. “But they are still better than some of the cars that we have had in the past.”

 

“They are good cars; they are just old,” Hunter added.

In addition to fewer miles between scheduled maintenance, the MTA has to move the older cars to open air lines with more frequency during the summer months, to keep the air conditioning system cooler.

 

The new R179 will feature state-of-the-art climate control system, as well as digital voice announcements and route signage.

On a 12-month rolling average, the newest equipment in the MTA fleet is running approximately 646,000 miles between failures, said Hunter. “That is compared to what you had in the 1970s, when you had cars breaking down every 7,000-8,000 miles,” he noted.

 

The $600 million contract for the new cars was awarded to Bombardier Transit Corporation, located in Plattsburgh, NY, keeping the money in the state.

Federal funds already in the MTA capital plan, totaling $306 million, will help finance the order, along with pending and future federal grants.

 

“They are overdue, but [there is] not much you can do about it. You can’t buy the cars just off the shelf or the rack, or out of a dealership,” Hunter said. “You have to do it this way, and it takes a long time.”

 

http://www.theepocht...way-212812.html

Well, the C and B are both part time lines, so as bad as it is, some group has to be stuck with the older trains. The older trains have to go somewhere for service and most of the other yards have what they need or pushed out the older cars in the first place. I would think even R46s would be a better option than nothing.

 

Well it's certain that the R32's will be scrapped so the R46's would be sent to the A line for a while.

Meanwhile more news sources seems to point to the C line.

New York MTA selects Bombardier to supply 300 metro cars

30 March 2012

USA: The New York MTA board selected lowest bidder Bombardier for a contract to supply 300 metro cars on March 28. Bombardier's bid of $600m beat a rival offer from a consortium of Alstom and Kawasaki Heavy Industries.

 

From late 2016 the R179 cars will replace R32 vehicles which entered service on the C Line in 1964. The new trains will feature 'bright' interiors, digital voice announcements and passenger information, 'state-of-the art' climate control, airbag suspension and regenerative braking. Maintenance costs are expected to be 40% lower than the current cars once the new fleet is out of its two-year warranty period.

 

The order will be financed by $306m of federal funds which is already secured, and other pending and future federal grants.

 

The cars are to built at the Plattsburgh factory in New York State, where Bombardier is developing a Transportation Center of Excellence. This will be equipped to undertake the complete production and assembly of stainless steel bodyshells, which previously used components manufactured elsewhere in Plattsburgh.

• After a four-year hiatus MTA and the Poetry Society of America are reinstating the Poetry in Motion programme to display poems on trains. 'Our customers tell us again and again that even a small investment in art and music underground makes a huge difference to them,' said MTA Chairman Joseph J Lhota. 'It can really improve the entire experience of riding the subway.'
  

 

 

http://www.railwayga...metro-cars.html

There is no doubt in my mind that even though it doesn't say it exactly the R179's are going to be on the C.

So basically all the R179's are just a slightly updated model of the R160's to replace all the 60' SMEE's...to be honest not really suprised, but the thing i am suprised about, is that they awarded bombardier the contract.

 

It's quite possible that the MTA saw that Kawasaki had their hands full, and that is why Bombardier won by default.

It's seems like the C would probably only run 480 foot long trains. Maybe the MTA believed that demands aren't high enough to warrant for 600 foot long trains.

It is still possible that the C line will get the R179's. Sadly if that happens the A line will get the hand me down R46's.

While everyone is talking about this in NYC the people in Plattsburg is extremely happy to have jobs to build more subway cars

MTA buying subway cars made upstate; protects jobs

By MICHAEL GORMLEY Associated Press

ALBANY, N.Y.—New York City's mass transit system will get more than 300 new subway cars in a contract that is expected to be a big economic boost for upstate's Plattsburgh area, where the deal will preserve 500 jobs.

 

Gov. Andrew Cuomo announced the $600 million contract with Montreal-based Bombardier on Wednesday. The Metropolitan Transportation Authority contract will provide stable, higher-paying manufacturing jobs for several years.

 

Cuomo said says the deal will keep 300 manufacturing jobs workers busy and support 200 more jobs from suppliers.

"We are one state and this shows how different regions of our state can support each other," Cuomo said. "We will continue to rebuild New York's vital infrastructure, creating jobs for hard-working New Yorkers and generating economic growth in all corners of the state."

 

The contract will provide work until late 2016, when the cars are due for delivery in New York City. Bombardier Vice President Robert Furniss also announced plans for a new Plattsburgh assembly plant.

 

"This is great news for a great workforce and a tremendous economic boost for Plattsburgh and the North Country Region," said Sen. Elizabeth O'C. Little, a Republican representing the North County.

 

The contract is part of two major statewide initiatives.

Earlier this week, Cuomo and legislative leaders agreed to fully fund the last three years of the MTA's five-year capital plan. The MTA plan will provide $13.1 billion for four massive projects now under way. The projects include new subway and rail cars, new energy-efficient buses, station rehabilitation, enhanced communications and signals, new rail yards, elevators and escalators, as well as major projects such as the Second Avenue subway.

 

The new "R179" cars will replace cars on the C Line that have been used since 1964. The new cars will have brighter lighting, better heat and air conditioning systems and digital voice announcements.

 

The average age of a subway car is 22 years; it will drop to under 20 when the new cars are operating.

 

The Bombardier contract is also the type of infrastructure and manufacturing objective planned for Cuomo's New York Works program. The plan pools capital borrowing and funds from state agencies and authorities, like the MTA, to focus on major regional jobs-producing plans.

The MTA deal will also be funded in part by $306 million in federal money.

 

Earlier this month, the state Labor Department released data that shows New York in a continued, but slow economic recovery. From January 2011 to January 2012, the number of private-sector jobs grew by 1.7 percent in New York state and by 2.3 percent in New York City. At the same time, unemployment rose from 8.2 percent to 8.3 percent in New York state and from 8.9 percent to 9.3 percent in New York City.

http://www.yorkdispa...e-protects-jobs

This acts as confirmation that the C line will be getting the R179's. That means the A line will get the R46's until they get replaced by the R211's.

Second Avenue Sagas mentions that the C line will have the R179's, and the will use the R46's until their time is up and they are replaced with the R211's.

The R160's have that too. Once the TO's start the car they can't stop holding onto that switch because if they let go the train stops.

How about using the …? The and are the only routes using the 8 Avenue local tracks (the is express), and it's not doing much anyway. 8 Avenue is already quite efficient this way too, so a switch somewhere along the Worth Street branch from the local tracks wouldn't hurt this efficiency much; World Trade Center would be closed and there would still be only two merge points along the entire length of local tracks. Both the 2 Avenue and 8 Avenue branches into Staten Island would have connections to 6 Avenue anyway.

Well the World Trade Center station isn't really useful since Chambers Street is right nearby. I think it might work.

How would your track connections look? Both the 2 Avenue line and 6 Avenue line have a lot of switches and connecting tunnels in the area. I think it'd reduce efficiency at both ends of 6 Avenue.

Two tracks will come off the local tracks east of the Broadway-Lafayette Street Station, and runs underneath the Sixth Avenue Tracks, once it get's close to the proximity of Houston Street it turns south and merges with the Second Avenue Subway.

I appreciate that. Thank you very much.

 

CeeSin, I also love the idea of the going to Broadway Junction. I always thought Utica Av was an odd terminal....but then again, that also might put tremendous strain on the 4 train. I would imagine that by the time a Woodlawn Av train left Utica Avenue, it would probably already be packed!!

 

I will put up my Manhattan rough sketch soon....there is nothing different from the system now except I extended the L train to Columbus Circle and drew the SAS....My SAS is almost identical to yours except a few stations are different and I have the going along the to Broad St in Lower Manhattan. I thought it imperative that this train stop at the Fulton St station to take pressure off the 4 and 5 trains since this is a major transfer point. I think it also imperative that it goes to the Bronx and make connections at The Hub (3rd av 149th st) and 3av 138th st. St Barnabas could use better transportation. So could some riders...The T goes to the Bronx and terminates at Gun Hill Rd on the . I do not have an East Bronx Branch.

 

This is a radical idea, but for the Lexington Av line, I always thought the train should serve the entire length of Manhattan (24/7) going down to Bowling Green, making stops at Wall St, Fulton St and Bowling Green, but ON ITS OWN TRACKS. It would loop around Bowling Green. I always thought this would help the and trains BIG TIME. I don't know if this can be done, but it's just a thought.

 

I also extended the E train past WTC to stop at City Hall (for transfers to the 4, 5,6 J and soon to be T train), Chatham Square (Chinatown) and end at East Broadway on the . You would not believe how difficult it is for people in that part of Manhattan to get to City Hall and the West side other than relying on the M22 and M9 buses, which can be unreliable. This would also take pressure off the and lines and give people more transfer points to the 8th av line in case of emergencies and/or reroutes.

A suggestion why don't you just make the run somewhere into Brooklyn? There is a lot of room for improvement in Brooklyn. Red Hook is an example.

The rings add an interesting perspective.

 

I agree that there needs to be more crosstown lines and lines that parallel the rings. That is one of the great failings of our transportation network.

There is no reason why if I live in Bed Stuy that it should take me over an hour and a half to get to say Woodside when it is only less than six miles away. That to me is ridiculous.

 

I firmly believe that at the very least, the "Triboro RX" needs to go up, or at the very minimum from Flatbush to Broadway Junction to help workers get to their jobs easier and take a tremendous amount of pressure off the B6 and B103 routes and also indirect pressure off the B8 and B82. That line could serve as an shuttle train. The ridership would be tremendous.

But if it even went to just Queens blvd/Roosevelt Av, that would be outstanding.

 

Another idea I had was to try to extend the to Queens Blvd/Roosevelt AV from Metropolitan Av...it would be like a loop. To lessen confusion, maybe this could be a seperate line terminating at Myrtle Av (like the current M shuttle) with a different line designation or just a simple .

 

The old Rockaway LIRR branch needs to be reactivated despite NIMBY resistance. I love bikes and want more paths, but to convert that into a park/path seems ridiculous and a waste of infrastructure. People don't account for future growth...in 30 or so years, the population might double.

 

Great stuff CeeSin.

We don't want more (S)'s we want more full subway lines to serve the people that need the service. We need less (S)'s more subway lines like what Censin is trying to point out.

Here. Create a Sixth Avenue Local (I) train that would run from LaGuardia Airport with the where it would connect with the 63rd Street Tunnel. It would run as a local along Sixth Avenue and branch off south of the Broadway Lafayette Street Station and it would follow the Second Avenue Subway all the way to Staten Island before continuing downwards to Tottenville. That would create a West Shore Line.

Hey Censin I think you should design that Sixth Avenue Line proposal I gave you to serve the western part of Staten Island. The entire West Shore to Tottenville. This is because they are going to develop that area and it would be a hassle to build transit there later when the buildings are there. It would serve the offices, businesses, and homes that would come there soon.

 

So basically, this is what it would look like....it is unfinished, but I would extend the A train to Jamaica, full time. The Y train (in Olive) would serve the Rockaways. There would be a transfer to both the Jamaica line and the A train. There is a Utica Av subway terminating at Kings Highway. This would join a rebuilt Broadway line. The purple train is the "8" train mirroring the 7 train but a couple miles south going to the LI border. It would go to Manhattan along 42nd street. I personally think 42st should have 4 tracks and extend to 11th av. There the 7 and 8 trains would run. The 7 train would also extend to Bayside, making only 4 or 5 more stops, though. That would relieve pressure from the bus routes serving Flushing-Main st.

 

Other than that, the map is pretty much the same as it is currently. Other changes: I agree the L train should be extended...that is a no brainer to me. Why? West side access (but along 10th av) and to build a NEW TERMINAL to increase capacity along the L line. People don't realize that the terminal design is a culprit to why the L train can't quickly and easily increase its capacity. The 8th av terminal is not good enough and limits the capacity of the line. I would terminate the L train either at 72st ( 1, 2,3 trains) or probably Columbus Circle (more transfer options).

 

The SAS would only have one line, the "T". It would go into the Bronx along 3rd Av, making only about 10 or 11 stops in the Bx, terminating at Gun Hill Road to help the 2 line. The Bronx would really benefit by it. I would actually not have a 125th street stop, as there is really not much around there. The people who live there live mostly in the housing developments closer to 120th street. Other than that, the 4 train is good enough. It would stop at 116th or 120th st then head straight into the Bronx connecting at 138th street and the 6 line. In lower manhattan, after Grand st (B and D connection), it would head along the J line and terminate at Broad st. The J would probably have to terminate at Chambers st.

Best off creating your own thread.

There is room for a local service on the Sixth Avenue Line. You should create a new service using Sixth Avenue. Maybe it can follow the (U) from Staten Island all the way up to the Bronx as a local. It would have to branch of the Sixth Avenue Line though. It can head up Third or Fifth Avenue, and serve the areas west of the in the Bronx before heading out even farther to serve the western section of Riverdale.

Oh yeah you have a problem. Trains can't use the Verrazano Narrows Bridge since Robert Moses built it like that. It would have to be in a tunnel parallel to the bridge, and I don't thing the subway can use the Brooklyn Battery Tunnel since Robert Moses built that too. It would have to be in a parallel tunnel.

Dude, do you not think at all or is a sporadic thing?

 

Order more R110s. Yeah because it makes perfect sense to mass order a test train.

 

As to the R160s, it wouldn't matter if the 3rd option was ordered or not. The wasn't getting them. Those cars would've gone to Coney Island, East New York and Jamaica with the rest of them.

I mentioned they should have ordered more R160's or more R110's. I didn't specifically say order more R110's.

I am also certain that if more R110B's were ordered they could have had ran on the Rockaways unlike the R160's which can't.

This is exactly why I believe the should have had either increased the orders of R160's, or should have ordered more R110's during the time.