Jump to content


Attention: In order to reply to messages, create topics, have access to other features of the community you must sign up for an account.
East New York

R179 Discussion Thread

East New York

Program Update effective 2/20/19

E70AE3B5-BCC7-4242-8958-215EA3B3E968.jpeg

2A3D4B44-9846-4D37-8FFE-88142B572B51.jpeg

844D9F11-6BFF-4B1B-A0AA-CEEF1E3D444B.jpeg

D143F871-E911-4F90-BF83-14B590D436A2.jpeg

018FCF27-0E25-47C4-8133-9E14E0160D65.jpeg

FCAB8EC7-FC4C-45EB-95CC-8F213A2E4F1E.jpeg

Message added by East New York

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, bstar1 said:

Its about time they make (C) longer never understood why they are shorter trains.

Same. Sadly we can't extend the (C)'s length until the R211's arrive. Unless we use R46's

Edited by LGA Link N train

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, VIP said:

No, the (C) is getting the R179’s. Where are the surplus cars going?! The (G) ?! I strongly doubt that. 

That wouldn't be far from the truth if things go to plan haha

  • Upvote 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Dj Hammers said:

That wouldn't be far from the truth if things go to plan haha

Their sources that order was change to mostly 5car units for full length of the (G)(C) can happen to increase the fleet size overall, we got to wait and see if it's true.

Edited by JayJay85

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, JayJay85 said:

Their sources that order was change to mostly 5car units for full length of the (G)(C) can happen to increase the fleet size overall, we got to wait and see if it's true.

It might be true.  And perhaps it may be another reason for the delays on the r179's in addition to mechanical issues. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If that was the case, it would've been mentioned in the many MTA board meetings that have occurred since the R179 order began.

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly, and I don’t think we’re going to see 600-foot (C) trains for the foreseeable future, at least not until there are a significant number of R211s in service. Or unless the run R46s on the (C)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, T to Dyre Avenue said:

Exactly, and I don’t think we’re going to see 600-foot (C) trains for the foreseeable future, at least not until there are a significant number of R211s in service. Or unless the run R46s on the (C)

It will happen before the R211s come in. You will see R46s on the (C) in all likelihood.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And what exactly is the (A) going to use? R32’s and R42’s from East New York ?! Because there’s gonna be a R179 four car set Surplus...

Edited by VIP
More details

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, subwaycommuter1983 said:

Set 3058-3065 was testing on the J 

 

I wonder if anyone has noticed the longer windows and longer benches. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, 125thstreet said:

How much more testing need to be done? This is ridiculous.

As has been mentioned numerous times, any failure resets the clock and pushes the revenue date further back ...

In any case, the burn-in testing is a good sign.  If not this Saturday (as has been rumored), hopefully the revenue test will start by the end of the year.


 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Union Tpke said:

It will happen before the R211s come in. You will see R46s on the (C) in all likelihood.

We can thank the governor and mta chairman for the (C) going full length, the R179 4car units could go to the (G) instead of the (C) for (L) shutdown if that's the case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, T to Dyre Avenue said:

Exactly, and I don’t think we’re going to see 600-foot (C) trains for the foreseeable future, at least not until there are a significant number of R211s in service. Or unless the run R46s on the (C)

Only if the (MTA) would have rebuided the montague tunnel to allow r32's to run thru...Then the (B) and (C) could have made an even swap....to allow longer trains on (C) service...My opinion 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, 125thstreet said:

How much more testing need to be done? This is ridiculous.

This is the  first time we've seen  this type of testing on this set 3058-3065.

Most of the burn testing were done on set 3050-3057 on the C train. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So I’m getting more messages on the R179 in service date, or, more accurately, the legitimacy of the in-service date that I posted a few days ago. 

I’m getting an alarming number of texts saying that the date is not a possibility, while others aren’t ruling it out. 

My personal thoughts are mixed, the final burn-in tests are a good sign, but the lack of any advertisements on the train troubles me. 

I guess we will know on Friday, when we should get the simulated test. Let’s hope! (And yes, I stand with my original statement.) 

Edited by R42N

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, R42N said:

 

I guess we will know on Friday, when we should get the simulated test. Let’s hope! (And yes, I stand with my original statement.) 

Hmmm, what's different about a "simulated test" vs a burn-in test?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Burn in means having simulated passenger weight + testing the passenger info system.

 

Simulated Stop testing just means that, it's operating in service, not in service by opening the door on the wrong side to make sure nothing is glitching.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be fair, the R179 did the same type of testing back in May and it didn't correlate to the imminent start of passenger service.

We shall see I guess.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, subwaycommuter1983 said:

I have a feeling that the 3 sets of r179's will enter service within the next few weeks and it will happen simultaneously:

3010-3019: A train 

3050-3057: C train 

3058-3065: J train 

I’m hoping that you’re right. We really need those cars in service and we need them to work. And hopefully, speed up the process a bit by putting three trains in service simultaneously.

Share this post


Link to post
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.