j express

35 minutes ago, GreatOne2k said:

Running the  normally would mean the  gets cut back to 12 minutes (like before when the  had more priority) and the  would have to run local to help the .

That was during Clark st weekend closures.

2 hours ago, RR503 said:

Not exactly. They did that because they needed all trains to be off the local tracks in whatever direction at W4. On 8th, that's easy --  via express. On 6th, the Chrystie-induced lack of a B1/B3 crossover south of W4 disallows simply sending the  via 6th Express, so while the  could remain normal, the  was forced over to 8th -- onto 8th express, which would then carry  and  trains. In clear water running, those 4 would all fit (8+6+5+5 = 24, which is <30), but the fact that 8th express was being flagged means that there only was 15-16tph to go around. Thus, one line had to be cut. The simplest line to cut -- given that it doesn't serve Brooklyn -- is the , so they sent that to Whitehall via 63rd, solving the 4 lines on 8th exp issue while also adding back service at 63rd St stations which were losing the  to 53/8th that weekend.

Finally, to compensate for the loss of the  on 53rd,  trains in the direction unaffected by W4 work were sent that way -- which, I believe, also had to do with the fact that under such a plan, both tracks at 57 would then be open for ESI work. 

I have seen IRT lines during flagging G.Os have a combined 17.5 to 18 tph. I wonder why the B division runs slighty less tph combined during  flagging G.Os.

There are 4 car  conductor boards on Culver now. I wonder why

On 7/29/2018 at 10:06 AM, FlushingExpress said:

I just love how people keep bringing up this dumb rumored swap, yet never provide a reliable source for it, and no, what comes out of a transit worker's mouth is not a reliable source. They are not psychics and cannot see the future

Yeah, I still avoid riding the R42s as much as possible due to my strong hate for them. Thankfully there are only 50 of those rusted tin cans and will be retired once all R179s are in service.

"Those lines don’t have the volume to justify 60’ equipment" Oh really? ride them yourself and you will they have way more ridership than the A, C, J/Z, M and R, especially on the Astoria Line, they will not want their awesome R160s replaced by fat old junks.

They will as CBTC on Queens Boulevard will not be ready for another 5-6 years. I love how everything thinks it will go off without a hitch, yet CBTC on Flushing and Canarsie were well over 4 years behind schedule. If the ultimate goal was for Jamaica to be all R160s, someone please explain why Jamaica has been persistently giving Coney Island its R160s over the past 7 years?

Yep, hence it's dumb to give the fat R46s to the N/W when they have way more ridership than the R, though I would call an R46 on the W "Wario" because he wears yellow and has a black mustache (like the W logo) and is incredibly fat like an R46. Non CBTC equipment can still run on CBTC activated lines, hence it is not really urgent for the R to get R160s right now anyway. The F uses about 7-8 sets of R46s right now, so the five-car R179s can go to Coney Island, who will send enough R160s to Jamaica to make just the F all R160s.

 

R142s to the 6 and R62As to the 2? That would be a blessing considering how horrible the 6 has been since the crappy R62As took over.

 

If Coney Island gives R160s to Jamaica, it better get all the five-car R179s in their place as the NTTs are the only cars that can handle the heavy loads along Brighton and 2nd Avenue on the Q, not to mention no SMEEs have the 96th Street rollsigns or programs and R46s cannot run on the northbound local track of Brighton due to residential complaints about noise and vibrations. I just love how people are such hypocrites, saying 60 footers are badly needed for the A because of crowding, yet 75 footers will do well on the more crowded N and Q trains, or how R68/68As will do well on the Q because it has the same terminals 24/7, but are horrible on the G even though it too has the same terminals 24/7. Reminds me of the time R32 3838 said on Facebook that when the G was transferred to Coney Island in 2011, it should have gotten R160s instead of R68/68As, which would have been dumb as the N needed the R160s more, being that it has way more ridership than the G and allowed Astoria to maintain a full R160 fleet. If all what he said is true, Coney Island would have too many different car types to handle. East New York has been complaining about that issue, which is why they are so happy the R32s and R42s will soon be off the J/Z. 

Okay Car Assignment Planner Thai. 

Anyway, 3074-3077 and 3126-3129 is at ENY doing burn in testing. 

4 hours ago, trainfan22 said:

I seen a 313x set in service today hooked up to a high 312x set, I think two of the cars was 3134 and 3127, never seen that set might before so that might be another 179 set entering service.

I think that set is 3134-3137 and 3122-3125. 

36 minutes ago, VIP said:

All these R32 transfers from ENY to 207th and still only 4-5 sets of R32’s on the  ... 

I have seen 9 sets of R32s on the A last Monday

8 minutes ago, MHV184 said:

What are the current plans with the R32s?

It’s off topic from what the post is focused about. There is a thread for that specfic question. 

48 minutes ago, LGA Link N train said:

Huh, what are you talking about, the  and share the same fleet

What I’m trying to say is that, you probably didn’t check the  put ins out of ENY yard. I was at Broadway Junction during the pm counting the  put ins in which 2 of them were R32s. 

4 hours ago, VIP said:

There’s literally only ONE R32 set running on the  today.

Your forgetting the  put ins. 

On ‎7‎/‎7‎/‎2018 at 4:44 PM, R32 3838 said:

Plus that R46 can run on the B,N or W if they wanted to but its likely that its staying on the

I could see it popping up on the  more likely. But it all depends where that C.I R46 is.

3122-3125 and 3134-3137 doing burn in testing on the  now. 

Saw a YouTube video of 3106-3109 and 3118-3121 in service. Which means we now have 64 R179s in service at ENY

Imagine running the  on weekends, when they close down one track on CPW on weekends. That means longer waiting times for the  on weekends. 

Also 3074-3077 was delivered this week to 207 St from a photo I saw on another transit group.

Saw 3106-3109 and 3118-3117 doing burn in testing on the  today. 

5 hours ago, Lawrence St said:

Who's idiotic idea was it to have both the and the be out between 137th ST/168th St and their normal terminals?

I The  is running to 207 st today like normal. 

4 hours ago, trainfan22 said:

3109 and mates and 3118 and it's mates are at ENY.

That means 3106-3109 and 3118-3121 is about to do burn in testing soon. 

10 hours ago, EphraimB said:

Where can I find a audio file of the automated announcements for the  line?

YouTube 

11 minutes ago, EphraimB said:

That MTA employee told me that the 5-car R179s will only be enough for 4-5 trains.

There are 120 R179 cars that are going to be in 5 car sets. The spare factor for the newer subway cars is around 10-20 percent. Ideally, there would be 100 R179 cars in service during the rush at most which equals to 10 trains. I honestly think you are being told incorrect information by that MTA employee. 

2 hours ago, EphraimB said:

According to an  employee, the R179s are NOT coming to the . All the 5-car R179s are going to the  to replace it's remaining R46s. The R32s and R46s are shared between the  and  to help with crowding on the . The  is NOT going to 10-cars.

That is very good to hear. 

On 5/25/2018 at 4:12 PM, Dj Hammers said:

Hey, you can believe whatever you want - I don't think its a worthy use of time to argue over the nuances of how emergency MOW work is scheduled and communicated. I thought it would be nice to provide some clarity on what actually happened for those who may have appreciated the additional information. Unfortunately, I guess that comes with a nice dose of accusatory harassment on the side. Sorry, I guess(?)

 

My response was in regards to the work being done on the 23rd. Obviously, I could have mentioned that there was indeed postponed work that was scheduled for the 16th that could have been (mistakenly) construed as completed on the 23rd, but that wasn't really relevant to the conversation. Why would I mention the details about work that was done the week before if the focus of the conversation was on this week's emergency GO?

 

Furthermore, to my original point, if the work at 18th Ave did turn out to need to be done with a GO, an emergency GO would have been scheduled for the earliest moment possible with no precipitation, not the Wednesday of next week.

Perfect explanation from someone who actually knows what they are talking about and knows what really goes on behind the scenes unlike some of the people here. 

I notice the R179s don’t have Bluetooth installed. Looking at the  line on Subway time, I saw a 30 minute gap in SB service this afternoon but as I rode the NB  I saw two R179s in the gap which means the R179s aren’t on SubwayTime. Anyone notice this?

Don’t worry you will all see R142/As on the  again. Just have to wait and see for one specific weekend G.O to occur again. 

1 hour ago, m2fwannabe said:

Has anyone confirmed that the Myrtle Shuttle R-42s have reentered J & Z service?

Last Friday, I saw 5 sets of R42s for rush hour  service. So you know what that means