Jump to content

R179 Discussion Thread


East New York

Recommended Posts


  • Replies 10.2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
26 minutes ago, Elfamoso2020 said:

A lot of conductors and T/O hate the 179. 

Thought you knew that already. But if you didn’t, that’s alright. 

15 minutes ago, trainfan22 said:

Why?

From what I heard, they complained that it’s just, overall uncomfortable. I don’t really know for sure. Maybe a T/O on this site can shed some light for us here. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Elfamoso2020 said:

A lot of conductors and T/O hate the 179. 

I don’t Know why... it’s the same functions and who you heard this from ? because this statement sounds like a rumor. The conductors on the (J) don’t have an issue with the cars. The only thing that I can conceive is (C) crews getting used to the new technology. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, VIP said:

I don’t Know why... it’s the same functions and who you heard this from ? because this statement sounds like a rumor. The conductors on the (J) don’t have an issue with the cars. The only thing that I can conceive is (C) crews getting used to the new technology. 

I heard from operators that the cab seat is very uncomfortable "stiff as a board" and that the cab window kind of rests against your chest in an uncomfortable position when your trying to observe the platform. Other than that idk.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, VIP said:

I don’t Know why... it’s the same functions and who you heard this from ? because this statement sounds like a rumor. The conductors on the (J) don’t have an issue with the cars. The only thing that I can conceive is (C) crews getting used to the new technology. 

With the (C) they do have the R160s so I can’t imagine there being a tremendous difference between the two. 

 

Its cool to to see the (J) back to mostly NTT’s again. They still have R143’s on the line which I was surprised at because, 

I thought by this point they would be off the line too. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, NewFlyer 230 said:

With the (C) they do have the R160s so I can’t imagine there being a tremendous difference between the two. 

 

Its cool to to see the (J) back to mostly NTT’s again. They still have R143’s on the line which I was surprised at because, 

I thought by this point they would be off the line too. 

I think management puts R143’s on the (J) as rotating spare factor while some R179’s rest or go into inspection. They run the hell out of those R42’s -which is a bad idea. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, VIP said:

I think management puts R143’s on the (J) as rotating spare factor while some R179’s rest or go into inspection. They run the hell out of those R42’s -which is a bad idea. 

This will probably continue to be the case until all the ENY R160s are back (at least) or until after the (L) shutdown. Still not enough NTT cars at ENY to allow the full (J)(M)(Z) to be fully NTT and spare factor is still low.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, VIP said:

I think management puts R143’s on the (J) as rotating spare factor while some R179’s rest or go into inspection. They run the hell out of those R42’s -which is a bad idea. 

Originally I thought the (J) had R143 for mileage reasons but I guess that’s not the case. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/27/2018 at 12:48 PM, R179 8258 said:

3190-3193 3194-3197 is undergoing burn-in-testing on the (C) just pass spring st headed toward Eucid 

 

23 hours ago, Coney Island Av said:

3202-3205 is the next set to be delivered. 3204 and 3205 are coming in tonight while the others probably tomorrow. 

And that puts us at about 13.5-15.5 trains for the 8 car sets if I’m not mistaken? I’m unable to do the math right now.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Around the Horn said:

3198-3205 would put us at 19 trains since 3070-3073 is AWOL

12 trains are on the (J)(Z)

4 trains are on the (C)

2 trains are burn in testing

1 train is being delivered

So what's left to be delivered??

6 1/2 8 car trains and 11 10 car trains.

Also, I have been riding the C a few times this week, but I haven't seen any r46's running on the C, but I have been seeing a handful of 8 car r32's, which is odd because there are very very few r32's left at ENY and 10 car r32's can operate on the C.

I guess only time will tell if the plans for making the C is simply delayed or secretly scrapped by the MTA. Let's see what happens.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, subwaycommuter1983 said:

I guess only time will tell if the plans for making the C is simply delayed or secretly scrapped by the MTA. Let's see what happens.

I have a feeling it's the latter, which, truth be told, is good because the (C) never really had to be full length anyway. What matters more is frequency and with more rolling stock a greater headway can be achieved, if desired.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, U-BahnNYC said:

I have a feeling it's the latter, which, truth be told, is good because the (C) never really had to be full length anyway. What matters more is frequency and with more rolling stock a greater headway can be achieved, if desired.

Good f*cking luck handling the Hoyt crowds when Canarsie goes down without full length (C)s. You can't (well, you can, but let's not get into that) increase frequencies beyond 26tph through there, and if a third of your trains are running only eight cars...you have an issue. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, RR503 said:

Good f*cking luck handling the Hoyt crowds when Canarsie goes down without full length (C)s. You can't (well, you can, but let's not get into that) increase frequencies beyond 26tph through there, and if a third of your trains are running only eight cars...you have an issue.  

The (A) is more frequent in the rush anyway. Hopefully, by April, the (A) will consist of mostly 60-foot cars (R179s, R32s or R160s).

Besides, the (G) will be a "full length" of 480 ft, not any longer than a standard (C) train.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, U-BahnNYC said:

The (A) is more frequent in the rush anyway. Hopefully, by April, the (A) will consist of mostly 60-foot cars (R179s, R32s or R160s).

Besides, the (G) will be a "full length" of 480 ft, not any longer than a standard (C) train.

The (A) is already packed, and the (C) increasingly is too — remember, they have to absorb crowds along all of Fulton and then deal at HS. You need those 600’ (C) trains, or you simply will be unable to load the additional riders.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, RR503 said:

You need those 600’ (C) trains, or you simply will be unable to load the additional riders.  

Well, with every passing day that I see more random 480-ft trains placed on the (C), the 600' scenario is looking less likely. I don't know what else to say. And why the hell isn't the MTA saying anything about progress with the fleet exchange as it regards to the shutdown. Like, shouldn't this be public info already?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, U-BahnNYC said:

Well, with every passing day that I see more random 480-ft trains placed on the (C), the 600' scenario is looking less likely. I don't know what else to say. And why the hell isn't the MTA saying anything about progress with the fleet exchange as it regards to the shutdown. Like, shouldn't this be public info already?

There needs to be transparency, yes, but the multitude of 480s being placed on the (C) are generally a result of slow 179 deliveries and the need to familiarize 207 shop forces with the 179s before the 5 car sets hit the (A). Unless I'm missing something big, plans about the (C) going full have not changed. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, RR503 said:

There needs to be transparency, yes, but the multitude of 480s being placed on the (C) are generally a result of slow 179 deliveries and the need to familiarize 207 shop forces with the 179s before the 5 car sets hit the (A). Unless I'm missing something big, plans about the (C) going full have not changed. 

I agree. I rode the r179 twice and I noticed a lot of differences in the interior between the r179's and r160's. I don't have any knowledge about operating trains, but it's possible that the "train conductor/operator " room may be different as well, so it makes sense that A and C train conductors do become familiar and comfortable with the r179's.

The C will eventually become full length. If it doesn't happen during Canarsie, it will definitely happen with the r211's.

The reason why the G is getting 8 car trains is because the G is the only line outside ENY that can accommodate 8 car trains and ENY doesn't need all 8 car r179's, r160's and r143's. Hopefully the G stays full length once the Canarsie tunnel reopens and hopefully the G can be extended to Forest Hills during the weekends once QBL CTBC is done. The R shouldn't be the only local train along QBL.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.