R179 Discussion Thread

[R179 8258]

9 hours ago, Fan Railer said:

 

R160 are officially hasbeens 😭

[LGA Link N Train]

Caught one R179 set today on my way home and by the time I reached 121st Street I saw the other R179 set on its way to Manhattan on the

[Frankie12345]

I caught this new R179 on the  for the first time yesterday on Friday while I let home to the work before payday. It's so clean and shine.

[Fan Railer]

Just a reminder, photobucket doesn't play nice anymore lol

[FLX9304]

Ok. here is my question here. Now since the R179s have done their test and their practice sessions with passengers, who or where will 3050-3309 go now? Bold predictions by you guys are accepted.

[Bosco]

21 minutes ago, FLX9304 said:

Ok. here is my question here. Now since the R179s have done their test and their practice sessions with passengers, who or where will 3050-3309 go now? Bold predictions by you guys are accepted.

Most will go to the  and some will probably go to the to make 480' trains.

[JayJay85]

51 minutes ago, FLX9304 said:

Ok. here is my question here. Now since the R179s have done their test and their practice sessions with passengers, who or where will 3050-3309 go now? Bold predictions by you guys are accepted.

Some of the cars (3050-3309), the order was modify to include more 5car units.

[MysteriousBtrain]

The 5-car conversion is still a rumor and not confirmed. That said, I can see R179s to either ENY/Coney Island ( ) or ENY/207 ( with R160 )

[subwaycommuter1983]

58 minutes ago, FLX9304 said:

Ok. here is my question here. Now since the R179s have done their test and their practice sessions with passengers, who or where will 3050-3309 go now? Bold predictions by you guys are accepted.

If some of the sets are modified to 5 car sets,  then they will still go to the A and C trains as originally planned. 

[Calvin]

I don't mean to go off-topic but when and why does/did photobucket remove the linking of the image to this/other site?

[Around the Horn]

48 minutes ago, FLX9304 said:

Ok. here is my question here. Now since the R179s have done their test and their practice sessions with passengers, who or where will 3050-3309 go now? Bold predictions by you guys are accepted.

My guess would be:

 3050-3113 (64 cars-8 trains) 

 3114-3259 (136 cars-17 trains) 

 3010-3049, 3260-3309 (reconfigured ten car sets) (100 cars-10 trains)  

[LGA Link N Train]

21 minutes ago, Around the Horn said:

My guess would be:

 3050-3113 (64 cars-8 trains) 

 3114-3259 (136 cars-17 trains) 

 3010-3049, 3260-3309 (reconfigured ten car sets) (100 cars-10 trains)  

I agree with this, I think the R179 should be CBTC ready (if not already) in case a set or 2 need to go to QBL

Edited January 13, 2018 by LGA Link N train

[Gong Gahou]

2 hours ago, Calvin said:

I don't mean to go off-topic but when and why does/did photobucket remove the linking of the image to this/other site?

It started on June 26 of last year, and it was done because they needed to cut costs. There was harsh criticism (and rightfully so) on how Photobucket rolled out the change without any prior notice.

Official Facebook post, June 30 | Petapixel's article, July 1 | Photobucket's blog post about the change, July 6

Edited January 13, 2018 by Gong Gahou
changed some info after closer look at article

[R32 3838]

1 hour ago, Around the Horn said:

My guess would be:

 3050-3113 (64 cars-8 trains) 

 3114-3259 (136 cars-17 trains) 

 3010-3049, 3260-3309 (reconfigured ten car sets) (100 cars-10 trains)  

I would just give the 136 R160A-1's and have ENY get 200 R179's this way only 2 yards would maintain them and have CIY have the 8 car R160's 

 

Or you can still have the R179's on the but give the 10 car sets to the lines instead of the and

[S78 via Hylan]

20 minutes ago, R32 3838 said:

I would just give the 136 R160A-1's and have ENY get 200 R179's this way only 2 yards would maintain them and have CIY have the 8 car R160's 

 

Or you can still have the R179's on the but give the 10 car sets to the lines instead of the and

Both of these would actually work.

[subwaycommuter1983]

2 hours ago, Around the Horn said:

My guess would be:

 3050-3113 (64 cars-8 trains) 

 3114-3259 (136 cars-17 trains) 

 3010-3049, 3260-3309 (reconfigured ten car sets) (100 cars-10 trains)  

It may work.  The A, C needs NTT and  that  is the reason why a lot of these sets have been possibly modified into 5 car sets.  Yes, the C needs longer trains, but it also needs NTT.  It's pretty unfair that the A and C trains always have to stick with the oldest fleet in the system.

Edited January 13, 2018 by subwaycommuter1983

[LGA Link N Train]

1 minute ago, subwaycommuter1983 said:

It may work.  The A, C needs NTT and  that  is the reason why a lot of these sets have been possibly modified into 5 car sets.  Yes, the C needs longer cars, but it also needs NTT.  It's pretty unfair that the A and C trains always have to stick with the oldest fleet in the system.

I guess that only half of those riders don't even care, I'd put some R68's there with NTT modifications. Some of them would be displaced from the

Edited January 13, 2018 by LGA Link N train

[NoHacksJustKhaks]

33 minutes ago, subwaycommuter1983 said:

It may work.  The A, C needs NTT and  that  is the reason why a lot of these sets have been possibly modified into 5 car sets.  Yes, the C needs longer trains, but it also needs NTT.  It's pretty unfair that the A and C trains always have to stick with the oldest fleet in the system.

Older fleets are more understandable for the , the  has the oldest fleet's since it's ridership (especially in the Rockaway's) and station dwell times are very low and also since the Queens segment is above ground. The  on the other hand totally does need NTT, it's ridership is increasing, and it's working with the R160's, but due to failed proposals to extend it's trains and potential NTT requirements for the , the R46's (and maybe R68's?) are likely to become more prevalent on the . 

Edited January 13, 2018 by NoHacksJustKhaks

[Around the Horn]

2 hours ago, R32 3838 said:

I would just give the 136 R160A-1's and have ENY get 200 R179's this way only 2 yards would maintain them and have CIY have the 8 car R160's 

 

Or you can still have the R179's on the but give the 10 car sets to the lines instead of the and

I like that second option... That could also work.

[JayJay85]

2 hours ago, R32 3838 said:

I would just give the 136 R160A-1's and have ENY get 200 R179's this way only 2 yards would maintain them and have CIY have the 8 car R160's 

 

Or you can still have the R179's on the but give the 10 car sets to the lines instead of the and

I can see ENY getting 3050-3129 for 80 cars in 4car sets.

3010-3049, 3130-3309 to Pitkin and 207th for (some cars modify to 5cars) this could push some r32s to Coney island for services.

[Jemorie]

4 hours ago, NoHacksJustKhaks said:

Older fleets are more understandable for the , the  has the oldest fleet's since it's ridership (especially in the Rockaway's) and station dwell times are very low and also since the Queens segment is above ground. The  on the other hand totally does need NTT, it's ridership is increasing, and it's working with the R160's, but due to failed proposals to extend it's trains and potential NTT requirements for the , the R46's (and maybe R68's?) are likely to become more prevalent on the . 

That's BS. The is a full-time line and has more ridership than the . I think you just pulled that out of your ass lol. There's a reason why the has a 7-8 minute headway off-peak instead of 10 minutes like the . Hell, it's way more frequent than the during rush hours too and generally all times of the day.

Edited January 14, 2018 by Jemorie

[subwaycommuter1983]

2 hours ago, JayJay85 said:

I can see ENY getting 3050-3129 for 80 cars in 4car sets.

3010-3049, 3130-3309 to Pitkin and 207th for (some cars modify to 5cars) this could push some r32s to Coney island for services.

Yes. It's the most logical option.  The original plan was to for the r179's to run on the A, C, J and Z trains.  Any modifications to the order will allow this to happen and all 5 sets of r179's need to run on the A, and C, especially the C.

Notice that the C train has improved in terms of reliability due to the r160s. That's why the C in particular needs NTT whether it's the r160s or r179's. 

[subwaycommuter1983]

5 minutes ago, Jemorie said:

That's BS. The is a full-time line and has more ridership than the (C). I think you just pulled that out of your ass lol. There's a reason why the has a 7-8 minute headway off-peak instead of 10 minutes like the (C). Hell, it's way more frequent than the during rush hours too and generally all times of the day.

Both trains need NTT regardless of which runs more. Both lines will have increased ridership when the Canarsie tunnel shuts down next year. 

[Jemorie]

2 minutes ago, subwaycommuter1983 said:

Yes. It's the most logical option.  The original plan was to for the r179's to run on the A, C, J and Z trains.  Any modifications to the order will allow this to happen and all 5 sets of r179's need to run on the A, and C, especially the C.

Notice that the C train has improved in terms of reliability due to the r160s. That's why the C in particular needs NTT whether it's the r160s or r179's. 

Lol, but the has always been reliable no matter what car type it uses...the on the other hand...

[Jemorie]

2 minutes ago, subwaycommuter1983 said:

Both trains need NTT regardless of which runs more. Both lines will have increased ridership when the Canarsie tunnel shuts down next year. 

Except more and more riders will pass the local up for the express lol.