Jump to content

R179 Discussion Thread


East New York

Recommended Posts

I'd like to share my opinion for the (L) train shutdown fleet plans.

Have the (G) use 480' cars (preferably '160's and 179's) with increased service

(C) and (B) swap northern terminals; (C) terminates at Bedford Park Blvd and the (B) terminating at 168 St like ol' times (despite the fact that I was born almost 2 years after 9/11)

(C) uses 600' long cars 46's and 68's from the (A) (F) and (G) 

(A) and (B) should use R32's not replaced

(J)(M)(Z) should use '143's '160's and '179's

Surplus 4 car trains will be either displaced or recoupled to accommodate 600' platforms.

Keep in mind that this is just an opinion and I didn't get this info from anywhere

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Replies 10.2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
1 hour ago, LGA Link N train said:

I'd like to share my opinion for the (L) train shutdown fleet plans.

Have the (G) use 480' cars (preferably '160's and 179's) with increased service

(C) and (B) swap northern terminals; (C) terminates at Bedford Park Blvd and the (B) terminating at 168 St like ol' times (despite the fact that I was born almost 2 years after 9/11)

(C) uses 600' long cars 46's and 68's from the (A) (F) and (G) 

(A) and (B) should use R32's not replaced

(J)(M)(Z) should use '143's '160's and '179's

Surplus 4 car trains will be either displaced or recoupled to accommodate 600' platforms.

Keep in mind that this is just an opinion and I didn't get this info from anywhere

What is accomplished by swapping the (B) and (C) again?  Other than that, most of these are likely to happen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, LGA Link N train said:

To make the (C) 600' long, this will only occur for weekdays if thats what you want 

So? What does that have to do with swapping the terminals? Why does the (C) have to go to Bedford Park in order for it to be 600' long, when it can be 600' and still go to 168th?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, LegoBrickBreaker101 said:

So? What does that have to do with swapping the terminals? Why does the (C) have to go to Bedford Park in order for it to be 600' long, when it can be 600' and still go to 168th?

One word: 

Yards

 

......Or I can scrap that Idea

Edited by LGA Link N train
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, VIP said:

Can anyone bring the TOPIC BACK to the R179’s Please!?!

3090 - 3093 was delivered a while ago if I'm not mistaken 

The '179 on the (J) is doing well 

Not sure about the other 4 or 5 sets

They should put the 8 car '179's on the (G) line for the (L) train shutdown 

Case closed, for now

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, LGA Link N train said:

3090 - 3093 was delivered a while ago if I'm not mistaken 

The '179 on the (J) is doing well 

Not sure about the other 4 or 5 sets

They should put the 8 car '179's on the (G) line for the (L) train shutdown 

Case closed, for now

That’s a strong possibility. Since the (C) is confirmed as not being assigned those  4-car sets. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, VIP said:

Isn’t the (A) based out of 207th Street as well though?!

A few sets are, and I'm assuming they are the Rockaway Park ones as those ones start off at Dyckman. Imo it would be easier to have the 600 ft (C) use R46s, and this would make it easier for 207th as then they would only have to take care of R46s and a few R179 sets.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

According to the Facebook group, 3050-3053 was seen going from 207 to Pitkin.  Wonder when (if) that set will go to the (J).

A general, open-ended question: should we have a separate thread for fleet swaps pertaining to the Canarsie shutdown?  I understand that the possibilities of fleet swaps involve almost all B-division fleets, but I think it's a big enough issue to have its own thread.  Also, doing so would declutter this thread as delivery of the production R179s commences over the next few months. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Bosco said:

According to the Facebook group, 3050-3053 was seen going from 207 to Pitkin.  Wonder when (if) that set will go to the (J).

A general, open-ended question: should we have a separate thread for fleet swaps pertaining to the Canarsie shutdown?  I understand that the possibilities of fleet swaps involve almost all B-division fleets, but I think it's a big enough issue to have its own thread.  Also, doing so would declutter this thread as delivery of the production R179s commences over the next few months. 

We should have a separate thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, R68OnBroadway said:

We should have a separate thread.

LGA Link N train beat me to it: https://www.nyctransitforums.com/topic/51339-canarsie-shutdown-fleet-swap-thread/

 

 

53 minutes ago, R179 8258 said:

So is the (A) and (C) lines still slated to get the R179s ? 

The (A) is a given (the 5-car sets) but the (C) is still up in the air as they test out 600' trains.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Someone try to argue with my pov please....

I would hate to admit this, but I just came up with a theory stating that it could be possible that the (C) would operate the 10 car sets and the (A) gets none, especially with the full-length conversion. Thoughts?

Edited by MysteriousBtrain
Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, MysteriousBtrain said:

Someone try to argue with my pov please....

I would hate to admit this, but I just came up with a theory stating that it could be possible that the (C) would operate the 10 car sets and the (A) gets none, especially with the full-length conversion. Thoughts?

I don't see this happening.  The (A) needs all the newer trains it can get, especially 60' cars; additionally, those 10 car sets will really only replace the R32 and R68 put ins at rush hour.  The MTA really should consider restructuring the R179 order to include more 5-car sets, if it isn't too late; I don't see how they're going to achieve all of this otherwise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Bosco said:

I don't see this happening.  The (A) needs all the newer trains it can get, especially 60' cars; additionally, those 10 car sets will really only replace the R32 and R68 put ins at rush hour.  The MTA really should consider restructuring the R179 order to include more 5-car sets, if it isn't too late; I don't see how they're going to achieve all of this otherwise.

If it isn't too late he says. The order should have been complete 12 months ago. 

So yes. It is. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Any changes to the order at this late stage will delay the order significantly. If the majority of the car bodies have been built to the original schematics for the specified four- and five-car sets, Bombardier cannot make any real changes without deconstructing the entire car, which I imagine is not an easy process. As long as the current order and delivery process continues as it is now and there are no more delays due to mechanical and structural issues, we should be okay as it pertains to the car assignments, even with expanded capacity on the (C) line. As long as nobody promises full-length (G) trains, there shouldn't be any more problems.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, Lance said:

As long as the current order and delivery process continues as it is now and there are no more delays due to mechanical and structural issues, we should be okay as it pertains to the car assignments, even with expanded capacity on the (C) line. As long as nobody promises full-length (G) trains, there shouldn't be any more problems.

Oops...

"G Train To Get Full-Length Train Cars During L Shutdown, MTA Says"

but in reality 8 car R179s and R32s should be enough...

Edited by Around the Horn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder if the expanded service will entice more Culver Line riders to use the service, or if (G) ridership below Bergen Street is going to remain abysmal.

Also, with the longer trains and expanded service, the (G) is going to delay the (F) due to fumigation. Maybe it would make sense for the southbound (G) to run express from Smith 9th Street to Church Avenue? It's the same rationale that results in the current Church Avenue-bound (F) express service.

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.