trainfan22 Posted December 3, 2017 Share #4501 Posted December 3, 2017 It would be funny if the 179 debuts on the next Sunday forcing railfans to choose between the Museum train and the 179 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoHacksJustKhaks Posted December 3, 2017 Share #4502 Posted December 3, 2017 6 minutes ago, trainfan22 said: It would be funny if the 179 debuts on the next Sunday forcing railfans to choose between the Museum train and the 179 LOL, If that happened, rail fans would split up! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R42N Posted December 4, 2017 Share #4503 Posted December 4, 2017 On December 2, 2017 at 4:04 PM, Around the Horn said: Rumors of the second set going into service on the this week have been swirling around. Can anyone confirm or deny? Doesn’t the first test train have to finish the 30 day test first? The R179 failed recently, and the clock was reset again, so if it does have to finish the test first, we might not see it in service for a few months. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IAlam Posted December 4, 2017 Share #4504 Posted December 4, 2017 17 hours ago, trainfan22 said: It would be funny if the 179 debuts on the next Sunday forcing railfans to choose between the Museum train and the 179 someone would manage to get both 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bosco Posted December 4, 2017 Share #4505 Posted December 4, 2017 14 hours ago, R42N said: Doesn’t the first test train have to finish the 30 day test first? The R179 failed recently, and the clock was reset again, so if it does have to finish the test first, we might not see it in service for a few months. The R179 production cars won't be here until spring the earliest, assuming no other major issues come up. If they were to start the 30 day test on the , it wouldn't be the first time they shifted which line the 30 day test ran on, although it would be the first time a different train was used (we have three test trains in total). One of the R160 test trains (forget if it was 8653-8662 or 8713-8722) started testing on the then went to the , or the other way around. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fan Railer Posted December 4, 2017 Share #4506 Posted December 4, 2017 Latest from the unconfirmed rumor mill is that the R179s are benched for a full software rewrite; no date yet on when that will be done and the cars will be back in revenue testing. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R68OnBroadway Posted December 5, 2017 Share #4507 Posted December 5, 2017 (edited) Which nickname for the R179 is better: R46 2.0 or Rockwell's NTTs Edited December 5, 2017 by R68OnBroadway 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fan Railer Posted December 5, 2017 Share #4508 Posted December 5, 2017 Well, the trucks haven't started cracking yet, so..... 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R68OnBroadway Posted December 5, 2017 Share #4509 Posted December 5, 2017 28 minutes ago, Fan Railer said: Well, the trucks haven't started cracking yet, so..... I mean as in how both fleets have/had major issues that plague reliability. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lawrence St Posted December 5, 2017 Share #4510 Posted December 5, 2017 Rumor is true: R179 out of service until furher notice for a full software rewrite to stop doors opening in between stations. Passenger service for other R179's in the system are on hold as well, no unconfirmed date as to when the issue will be fixed. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coney Island Av Posted December 5, 2017 Share #4511 Posted December 5, 2017 We were partying then this happened... Welp, y'all can't have AMAZING photos of these cars for a 1000 years! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eric B Posted December 5, 2017 Share #4512 Posted December 5, 2017 Saw it in the lower yard with a red flag (not the new putin flags) on it, so it looked like it was out for something. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RR503 Posted December 5, 2017 Share #4513 Posted December 5, 2017 Make of it what you will 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eric B Posted December 5, 2017 Share #4514 Posted December 5, 2017 Oh, OK. When I saw it, it had the larger red flag without the yellow on it, and it blocked the door. (The one shown is what I was referring to as the putin flag). 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JTrainUK Posted December 5, 2017 Share #4515 Posted December 5, 2017 Awww, you almost feel sorry for it seeing it sitting in the yard among its ancestors. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R42N Posted December 5, 2017 Share #4516 Posted December 5, 2017 On January 7, 2011 at 12:15 PM, CTK246 said: Lol what's wrong with Bombardier? Seven Years Later: (Digs up every “Ohhh. I see” meme there is) ----- This latest door software issue is really, really troublesome. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lawrence St Posted December 6, 2017 Share #4517 Posted December 6, 2017 I take it back, bombardier *USED* to make good trains, now they'e just falling apart. Then again, the R142 series are one of the most reliable cars in the IRT class fleet, so it's just the bugs in the start that need ironing out. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danielhg121 Posted December 6, 2017 Share #4518 Posted December 6, 2017 Is it their first time manufacturing a B division fleet? If that's the case, just keep them on A division lol 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe C Posted December 6, 2017 Share #4519 Posted December 6, 2017 (edited) 2 hours ago, danielhg121 said: Is it their first time manufacturing a B division fleet? If that's the case, just keep them on A division lol No,they manufactured the R110B cars. til next time Edited December 6, 2017 by Joe C 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cait Sith Posted December 6, 2017 Share #4520 Posted December 6, 2017 3 hours ago, Lawrence St said: I take it back, bombardier *USED* to make good trains, now they'e just falling apart. Then again, the R142 series are one of the most reliable cars in the IRT class fleet, so it's just the bugs in the start that need ironing out. Outside of the R188s, they are the most reliable cars in the IRT fleet. 3 hours ago, danielhg121 said: Is it their first time manufacturing a B division fleet? If that's the case, just keep them on A division lol That doesn't matter.....the R142s had their fair share of problems when they were brand new. With all of the bugs ironed out, they've become the most reliable cars in the IRT, surpassing the R142A. 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LTA1992 Posted December 6, 2017 Share #4521 Posted December 6, 2017 Seems the R179 is back in service as of this morning. Someone already posted a photo about an hour ago. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eric B Posted December 6, 2017 Share #4522 Posted December 6, 2017 Didn't Bombardier manufacture some of the R160 car shells (like the “A” part of the order, IIRC) in Brazil, and they initially had problems (cracks or something) that slowed down the order? (It was around then that it started becoming evident that their quality was falling). 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bosco Posted December 6, 2017 Share #4523 Posted December 6, 2017 25 minutes ago, Eric B said: Didn't Bombardier manufacture some of the R160 car shells (like the “A” part of the order, IIRC) in Brazil, and they initially had problems (cracks or something) that slowed down the order? (It was around then that it started becoming evident that their quality was falling). Bombardier had no involvement in the R160 order. Alstom was responsible for the R160As and the Brazil-built car shells which initially had poor welds. That said, it was Alstom's first contract for the MTA. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LTA1992 Posted December 6, 2017 Share #4524 Posted December 6, 2017 28 minutes ago, Bosco said: Bombardier had no involvement in the R160 order. Alstom was responsible for the R160As and the Brazil-built car shells which initially had poor welds. That said, it was Alstom's first contract for the MTA. Wasn't Westinghouse purchased by Alstom while the R68s were built? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bosco Posted December 6, 2017 Share #4525 Posted December 6, 2017 6 minutes ago, LTA1992 said: Wasn't Westinghouse purchased by Alstom while the R68s were built? IIRC, Alstom was part of the joint venture that worked on the R68s, but I'm not sure about their involvement. Alstom had also made the propulsion system for the R142s, so they've been involved with the MTA for a bit. What I meant to say was that the R160A was the first rail car that Alstom built on their own. 0 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.