R179 Discussion Thread

[RR503]

8 hours ago, Jemorie said:

Why would any R32s go on the  and  anyway when they not only spend less time outdoors (much less than the  ‘s Rockaway Peninsula outdoor run anyway) but also the fact that they are already going to be enough R179s to cover the entire  fleet plus the Montague Street Tube clearance issue when the former gets rerouted? And the fact that the  shutdown will free up some more cars to run in service on the rest of the BMT Eastern Division. All 222 R32s will either stay on the  or be retired when all is said and done. Point blank.

This outdoors/indoors thing is not how the MTA looks at this. As I and others have said before, the paramount (though, granted, not only) goal of fleet allocation is to minimise road time for old/unreliable/maintenance heavy fleets. The , which doesn't run at night or over weekends (and runs relatively infrequently during middays) is perfect for that goal, allowing the 32s/42s a maximum of down time. Thus, the TA wishes to send them to CI. Now, of course, the 32s/42s are, combined, too many trains for the , so a second assignment had to be found for them. Without spreading the fleet over two yards, the only relatively unintensive, Montague-free option was the , thus they chose to place the balance of the 32s there. 

[Jemorie]

2 hours ago, subwaycommuter1983 said:

but they will run on a very limited capacity (rush hour).

Says who... 😒

They can still run all day and evening long on the ,  or .

Edited June 23, 2018 by Jemorie

[subwaycommuter1983]

21 hours ago, RR503 said:

This outdoors/indoors thing is not how the MTA looks at this. As I and others have said before, the paramount (though, granted, not only) goal of fleet allocation is to minimise road time for old/unreliable/maintenance heavy fleets. The , which doesn't run at night or over weekends (and runs relatively infrequently during middays) is perfect for that goal, allowing the 32s/42s a maximum of down time. Thus, the TA wishes to send them to CI. Now, of course, the 32s/42s are, combined, too many trains for the , so a second assignment had to be found for them. Without spreading the fleet over two yards, the only relatively unintensive, Montague-free option was the , thus they chose to place the balance of the 32s there. 

Keep in mind that any r32's that go to the  will increase service in that line. The r68's will most likely stay on the .

On the other hand, the r68's will be displaced from the  most likely to other lines that uses r68's for fleet uniformity. The r32's will be needed in the  as well as the r160's displaced from the .

[RR503]

26 minutes ago, subwaycommuter1983 said:

Keep in mind that any r32's that go to the  will increase service in that line. The r68's will most likely stay on the .

Incorrect. 68s from the  and  are being displaced to the  so Jamaica can have all NTTs. 

[AlgorithmOfTruth]

6 hours ago, RR503 said:

Incorrect. 68s from the  and  are being displaced to the  so Jamaica can have all NTTs. 

The  gets the boot and goes MIA whenever something happens along 6th Avenue, so that, coupled with the fact that it's a part-time service operating weekdays only, makes it the logical candidate for receiving the historic SMEE's.

[Lawrence St]

1 hour ago, AlgorithmOfTruth said:

The  gets the boot and goes MIA whenever something happens along 6th Avenue, so that, coupled with the fact that it's a part-time service operating weekdays only, makes it the logical candidate for receiving the historic SMEE's.

The  should honestly run as a shuttle from Bedford Park to 145th St or 2nd Av on weekends. The headways on the  are horrible.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

On 6/23/2018 at 3:16 PM, RR503 said:

This outdoors/indoors thing is not how the MTA looks at this. As I and others have said before, the paramount (though, granted, not only) goal of fleet allocation is to minimise road time for old/unreliable/maintenance heavy fleets. The , which doesn't run at night or over weekends (and runs relatively infrequently during middays) is perfect for that goal, allowing the 32s/42s a maximum of down time. Thus, the TA wishes to send them to CI. Now, of course, the 32s/42s are, combined, too many trains for the , so a second assignment had to be found for them. Without spreading the fleet over two yards, the only relatively unintensive, Montague-free option was the , thus they chose to place the balance of the 32s there. 

I'm sure the passengers on the  see those R68 cars and think Jesus Christ, they put all of the old cars on this line then give us sh*t service to boot, which is the truth.  As others have said, I find it annoying that any time there's an issue on the 6th Avenue line,  service gets cut immediately.  That really needs to stop.  Given how poor the  runs and the crowding issues during the rush especially, riders need all the service they can get.

[AlgorithmOfTruth]

2 hours ago, Lawrence St said:

The  should honestly run as a shuttle from Bedford Park to 145th St or 2nd Av on weekends. The headways on the  are horrible.

If you're somewhere along CPW on the weekends, your only option is the , which puts you in a rather dire position. When @Via Garibaldi 8 mentioned the headways along CPW on the weekends being abysmal, he wasn't kidding. Sometimes you're required to wait an agonizing 15+ minutes for a  train to show up during midday hours. If the headways along the Grand Concourse Line were adjusted to accommodate alternating  and  trains, some of the issues along CPW would be addressed—the big one being unacceptably large headways. They should have the  run from Bedford Park Boulevard to 2nd Avenue on the weekends by doing a pilot test to see how it fares.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

24 minutes ago, AlgorithmOfTruth said:

If you're somewhere along CPW on the weekends, your only option is the , which puts you in a rather dire position. When @Via Garibaldi 8 mentioned the headways along CPW on the weekends being abysmal, he wasn't kidding. Sometimes you're required to wait an agonizing 15+ minutes for a  train to show up during midday hours. If the headways along the Grand Concourse Line were adjusted to accommodate alternating  and  trains, some of the issues along CPW would be addressed—the big one being unacceptably large headways. They should have the  run from Bedford Park Boulevard to 2nd Avenue on the weekends by doing a pilot test to see how it fares.

The problem is how they have the and run. Usually they're back to back and then there's nothing for anywhere from 10-15 minutes during rush hour, which is how the platforms back up on the express side. What they really should do is squeeze in a here and there. I know capacity is an issue but starting a from say 2nd Avenue or Grand Street would make sense to address the overcrowding.

What's amazing about the is with no running, you'd think you'd be moving when they do come, but that varies too. It's hard to justify train traffic as the excuse for a line that runs so infrequently.

Edited June 25, 2018 by Via Garibaldi 8

[Lawrence St]

8 hours ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

The problem is how they have the and run. Usually they're back to back and then there's nothing for anywhere from 10-15 minutes during rush hour, which is how the platforms back up on the express side. What they really should do is squeeze in a here and there. I know capacity is an issue but starting a from say 2nd Avenue or Grand Street would make sense to address the overcrowding.

What's amazing about the is with no running, you'd think you'd be moving when they do come, but that varies too. It's hard to justify train traffic as the excuse for a line that runs so infrequently.

Yesterday I waited 25+ minutes at Fordham Road for a and 30 minutes at West 4th St for another . I dear hope to god I never use CPW local during the weekends, because if I get this many problems on Concourse, it's going to be hell on CPW.

[Lance]

I believe part of the problem with Central Park West right now is the never-ending one-directional express service GOs for the various ESI projects. Forcing all three weekend services on one track undoubtedly does not help matters in the slightest and is probably causing some cascading delays upstream on Concourse.

[subwaycommuter1983]

53 minutes ago, Lance said:

I believe part of the problem with Central Park West right now is the never-ending one-directional express service GOs for the various ESI projects. Forcing all three weekend services on one track undoubtedly does not help matters in the slightest and is probably causing some cascading delays upstream on Concourse.

If the D is bad on the weekends, the A and C are worse. Honestly, at this point I don't think that there's a single subway line that runs well during the weekends. 

[Lawrence St]

10 minutes ago, subwaycommuter1983 said:

If the D is bad on the weekends, the A and C are worse. Honestly, at this point I don't think that there's a single subway line that runs well during the weekends. 

Now the only lines that run fine are the  and .

[S78 via Hylan]

Let’s back to R179 deliveries.

[Calvin]

3126, 3127 on its way to NY's 207 St shop

[R68OnBroadway]

5 hours ago, Lawrence St said:

Now the only lines that run fine are the  and .

The  has a 13% on time rating on weekends, so forget about that line. The  seems to run fine though- its the only line I know that overestimates arrival time instead of underestimating.

[subwaycommuter1983]

6 hours ago, S78 via Hylan said:

Let’s back to R179 deliveries.

Ok. But the ongoing issues on the  trains is one of the effects of the bad decisions of the MTA in regards to the r179's.

1. The MTA should've order more than 300 r179 cars.

2. Most of the r179's should've been 10 car trains.

3. Kawasaki should have built the r179's.

I just hope that the MTA gets it right with the r211's and people who live along the  need and deserve better service.

[j express]

Imagine running the  on weekends, when they close down one track on CPW on weekends. That means longer waiting times for the  on weekends. 

[subwaycommuter1983]

1 hour ago, j express said:

Imagine running the  on weekends, when they close down one track on CPW on weekends. That means longer waiting times for the  on weekends. 

Service can be suspended on the  when that happens. They have suspended service on the  and  trains on some weekends and the  is a full time line.

Edited June 25, 2018 by subwaycommuter1983

[Around the Horn]

16 minutes ago, subwaycommuter1983 said:

Service can be suspended on the  when that happens. They have suspended service on the  and  trains on some weekends and the  is a full time line.

His point is that it would suspended more often that it actually running.

[WizDaGamer]

On 6/21/2018 I caught R179 set <3110-3113><3085-3082>

 

[mine248]

15 hours ago, WizDaGamer said:

On 6/21/2018 I caught R179 set <3110-3113><3085-3082>

 

I actually took that set a while back. (

)

[VIP]

There’s so many R179’s in rotation and they run overnight. It already looks like the  is exclusively R179

[j express]

Saw a YouTube video of 3106-3109 and 3118-3121 in service. Which means we now have 64 R179s in service at ENY

[Coney Island Av]

EVEN MORE GOOD NEWS!!!!

3106-3109 and 3118-3121 are in regular service, so now we have eight R179s in-service on the !!!

3122-3125 & 3134-3137 should be moving to ENY shortly for burn-in!

3074-3077 recently arrived after a lot of questioning on its whereabouts.

3126-3129 also recently arrived, and are gonna transfer to Pitkin for testing in the Rockaways.

The  is basically almost fully NTT at this point, with the ratio of R32s to R179s only being 80:64.