Jump to content

R179 Discussion Thread


East New York

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, trainfan22 said:

I ridden 160s on the CPW express when they had that (C) trains go express in both directions in Manthattan G.O, it was quite fast.

 

 

 

 

Can't wait to see them on the (A) as operators always go slow on the 46s. Hopefully CPW and JFK-67th/90th will hit higher speeds (50-55 mph)

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Replies 10.2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
3 hours ago, Dj Hammers said:

The very first passenger run of the R179!

It's nice that everything looks new and polished, but other than that still really bulky, and looks messy like the R142. The R142A/188 and the R143/160 look much nicer IMO Hopefully when I go back on Tuesday I can catch it for myself and see what it's like.

Edited by IAlam
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Cait Sith said:

Safe to say that they did pretty damn well on their first day, outside of the train hitting debris(i think a milk crate or something) causing it to go BIE.

Let's hope that it stays that way.

I saw them heading to the yard from Jamaica Center around 7:45pm.

 

It got taken out oos due to an issue later on after the 1st incident. The train was supposed to run until 12am

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, IAlam said:

It's nice that everything looks new and polished, but other than that still really bulky, and looks messy like the R142. The R142A/188 and the R143/160 look much nicer IMO Hopefully when I go back on Tuesday I can catch it for myself and see what it's like.

I thought I was the only one who thought that. The Bombardier NTTs seem to feel/look different from the other ones (more bulky). It's minor differences (window frames, red light for doors) but it really does make the train feel a lot different than other NTTs. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, <6>PelhamExp said:

Based on the videos that I've seen on the forums and YouTube... It seem that the door chime on the R179 are a bit different than whats on the R160s. Correct me if I am wrong, but the door chime sounds very similar, if not the same, to the door chime that is on the R142?

sounds lit that to me.

4 hours ago, R188 7857 said:

I thought I was the only one who thought that. The Bombardier NTTs seem to feel/look different from the other ones (more bulky). It's minor differences (window frames, red light for doors) but it really does make the train feel a lot different than other NTTs. 

the other NTT's like slimmer and sharper. While everything here looks wider and fatter. Idk why but it makes it feel more like a knock off. I guess it's because I'm so accustomed to the other trains. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, <6>PelhamExp said:

Based on the videos that I've seen on the forums and YouTube... It seem that the door chime on the R179 are a bit different than whats on the R160s. Correct me if I am wrong, but the door chime sounds very similar, if not the same, to the door chime that is on the R142?

Sounds the same to me, but for some reason they changed it to play BEFORE the doors closed compared to it playing while the doors are closing

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Fresh Pond said:

Sounds the same to me, but for some reason they changed it to play BEFORE the doors closed compared to it playing while the doors are closing

That’s correct, which means that it’s now more of an advanced warning compared to a door-closing chime. I do wonder if this extra 2 seconds of lag time is an issue, though. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, R42N said:

That’s correct, which means that it’s now more of an advanced warning compared to a door-closing chime. I do wonder if this extra 2 seconds of lag time is an issue, though. 

With the way the announcements seem more dragged out along with it, it could be down the line

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, I’m going to propose something that is so stupid, I fully understand if you want to shoot it down, but take a look at these clips.

First, here is the R142A: (Specifically watch at 1:19 if it doesn’t take you there) 

Notice how the “This is a” starts immediately when the door opens, maybe before the doors fully open, and “the next stop is” immediately follows without pause. Stand Clear is called, and once Charlie says “Please”, the door starts to close with the fantastic R142A Double Chime. It takes from 1:21 until 1:34 for the train to be in the station, exactly 13 seconds, which is all it should take when there are no crowds.  

Now watch the R179: (:28)

It takes from :29 to :44 just to do the formalities up until stand clear of the closing doors, and from :51 to :56 with the now are door warning chime (it comes before the closing doors) no longer a door closing chime. That’s exactly 20 seconds devoted to announcements, and I’m being generous by excusing the 7 second gap in the middle that held the train. 

I know one might say I’m making a big deal over a 7 second difference, but the difference between a 13 second announcement and a 20 second one is 35% increase in announcement time, which is a huge unnecessary increase. 

So, if Bombardier and the MTA can’t get the chime to go with the closing doors, (which they should absolutely do, as it’s an extra indicator to watch the doors as they are closing) you might have to axe the chime for the R179 order. That would cut out 5 seconds, and reduce dwell time to something comparable to the 142 and the 160. 

Again, option one should be coordinating it with the closing doors, but if they can’t do that, then they might have to consider this. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Around the Horn said:

If what I'm reading on Twitter is correct, they have way bigger problems than malfunctioning doors on their hands...

 

Well, that was tweeted out prior to Sunday’s commencement, so while scary, I feel like the MTA thinks they can deal with it. 

Edited by R42N
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Um. Systems all over the world have open gangways (so ZERO access in this area) and this isn't seen as a critical safety issue. Even NYC is ordering open-gangway cars, and the MTA (finally) seems enthusiastic about it.

Further, it seems like this change makes it far more difficult for someone (passenger or employee) moving between cars to fall under by accident. So it's far safer for far more common scenarios. 

So maybe this is just a trade-off we're going to have to accept, and perhaps should even welcome? 

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.