P3F Posted November 2, 2016 Share #3201 Posted November 2, 2016 I bet $5 dollars 3010-3014 end up entering 30 day testing on the because the other 5 cars haven't shown up by then. If only the Franklin Shuttle platforms still had space for 5 cars... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fan Railer Posted November 2, 2016 Share #3202 Posted November 2, 2016 If only the Franklin Shuttle platforms still had space for 5 cars... It has space enough for a single set of AB standards, although it's probably a tight squeeze at Park PL and Botanic Gardens for the doors lmao. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Javier Posted November 2, 2016 Share #3203 Posted November 2, 2016 We can still extend those platforms by using wooden Platforms. The only issue is Franklin Av because we don't have any space to extend them due to the bridge. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eric B Posted November 2, 2016 Share #3204 Posted November 2, 2016 300 feet doesn't reach the bridge, so that's no barrier to 5 cars. (But there is a concrete room in the way at Botanic Gardens northbound) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fan Railer Posted November 2, 2016 Share #3205 Posted November 2, 2016 (edited) Train was out again today... Between 10a and 3:30p or so. Edited November 2, 2016 by Fan Railer 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Javier Posted November 3, 2016 Share #3206 Posted November 3, 2016 I've noticed something. The way how the R179's exterior signs are coded is that the first letter of every word is bolded, like Not In Service. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Around the Horn Posted November 3, 2016 Share #3207 Posted November 3, 2016 I've noticed something. The way how the R179's exterior signs are coded is that the first letter of every word is bolded, like Not In Service. Actually, the bolded part is the same thickness as the current R160 signs. I don't like it one bit. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fan Railer Posted November 3, 2016 Share #3208 Posted November 3, 2016 R179 propulsion is now modeled in the openBVE simulator: Just waiting for an exterior to be created (primarily the trucks). 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fan Railer Posted November 3, 2016 Share #3209 Posted November 3, 2016 From Caitsith810. More R179 porn from yesterday; propulsion frequency changes are clear as day in this one: 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R179 8258 Posted November 4, 2016 Share #3210 Posted November 4, 2016 In my opinion I think the MTA told Bombardier to hold on from sending the other sets for smart reasons because just in case they need to fix anything that's they wrong with the 3010-3014 so they can quickly modify the oncoming car so in turn they can have the other cars rapidly coming in and mostly do a burn-in test and start putting those cars in service lol . Because I find it odd to start testing the 1st 5 without the other sets. Even though it has happen before but still the mind does wonder lol 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tonyboy515 Posted November 5, 2016 Share #3211 Posted November 5, 2016 (edited) I notice the propulsion doesn't have a dip in pitch and is monotone at the end, kind of like the R160 Siemens, and not like the R142A's 143's and 188's. Sent from my iPhone using NYC Transit Forums mobile app Edited November 5, 2016 by Tonyboy515 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fan Railer Posted November 5, 2016 Share #3212 Posted November 5, 2016 So this is a thing... Prelim openBVE R179 BETA preview: 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Priincenene Posted November 5, 2016 Share #3213 Posted November 5, 2016 (edited) Welp, it's been a minute since I've been on here. Drama, work, etc, etc. Anyways, I've faded away from the recent transit trends but I've been catching up with at least the R179's arrival. Now, I want to know when will these sets be testing in the Rockaways? I've seen the videos it was testing at Howard-JFK. Thanks. Sent from my iPhone using NYC Transit Forums mobile app Edited November 5, 2016 by Priincenene 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fresh Pond Posted November 5, 2016 Share #3214 Posted November 5, 2016 Welp, it's been a minute since I've been on here. Drama, work, etc, etc. Anyways, I've faded away from the recent transit trends but I've been catching up with at least the R179's arrival. Now, I want to know when will these sets be testing in the Rockaways? I've seen the videos it was testing at Howard-JFK. Thanks. Sent from my iPhone using NYC Transit Forums mobile app It's been testing out in the flats for about 2 weeks now. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fan Railer Posted November 5, 2016 Share #3215 Posted November 5, 2016 Whenever they feel like it 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Javier Posted November 9, 2016 Share #3216 Posted November 9, 2016 Update on the R179's: As you all know, 3015-3019 was expected to arrive by Mid to late Septemeber/October, however we've come into more roadblocks. 3015 had cracks in its chassis when it was being built, one of the reasons why the set has been delayed. 3016 passed the vibration testing and started having components installed, nearing 87% completion. 3017 passed the vibration testing and started having components installed. 3018 had a "design construction flaw" (I don't know what this means I'm just reading off the email) in the front of the car, delaying it by 2 weeks. 3019 had major software issues and onboard electronic power issues that delayed it by 2 weeks (similar to what 3010 is experiencing.) 3020-3024 was suppose to start construction a week ago, but the delayment of 3015-3019 delayed the who entire construction back by at least a month and a half. If these issues are sorted out, 3015-3019 should be here by mid-December. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LegoBrickBreaker101 Posted November 9, 2016 Share #3217 Posted November 9, 2016 This order is never gonna fully arrive, is it?... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P3F Posted November 9, 2016 Share #3218 Posted November 9, 2016 Are they going to fix 3000-3009 later on? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tech And Transit Posted November 9, 2016 Share #3219 Posted November 9, 2016 Are they going to fix 3000-3009 later on? I think 3000-3009 was the first fully rejected set. They moved the order up to 3010-3019. 3000-3009 isn't part of the order anymore. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P3F Posted November 9, 2016 Share #3220 Posted November 9, 2016 I think 3000-3009 was the first fully rejected set. They moved the order up to 3010-3019. 3000-3009 isn't part of the order anymore. Since the car bodies already exist, why not reuse them rather than letting them go to waste? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tech And Transit Posted November 9, 2016 Share #3221 Posted November 9, 2016 Since the car bodies already exist, why not reuse them rather than letting them go to waste? The car bodies were the issue. They had structural defects. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jdog14 Posted November 9, 2016 Share #3222 Posted November 9, 2016 Since the car bodies already exist, why not reuse them rather than letting them go to waste? They can scrap them and rebuild them. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bstar1 Posted November 9, 2016 Share #3223 Posted November 9, 2016 This will take forever to send the rest to MTA and we only have 5 cars being tested. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Javier Posted November 9, 2016 Share #3224 Posted November 9, 2016 3000-3009 (ironically) had to get rejected due to the cracks found in the car body. Now, 3015 and 3018 are experiencing the same issues for some unknown reason. My guess there's a design flaw in both the A and B cars, or they're not building it correctly. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eric B Posted November 9, 2016 Share #3225 Posted November 9, 2016 (edited) So there was a 3000-9? It looked like they were skipping over those numbers because of the 110B's, which would have been silly since they're totally decommissioned. Edited November 9, 2016 by Eric B 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.