R179 Discussion Thread

[R42sDaBest]

2 hours ago, RedLine said:

The R179s run well on the J and Z. Only the ones on the A and C have issues. So the R42s are excess now.

I really wouldnt say they're aren't perfect on the (J), I was recently on an 179 on the J and on of its doors remained closed throughout the entire trip and when the other door closed to looked like they close completely shut.

 

I swear every time I ride a 179 it feels like I'm riding a death train, there was this one the and when I sat down on one of its seats I heard a lot of creaking, felt like I was about to fall through the entire train.

[4 via Mosholu]

5 hours ago, Lawrence St said:

How does that make sense? I could understand the 5 car sets having an issue, but the and use the same exact 4 car R179 sets.

Here is how this all makes sense:

The  train got the later 179 cars in four car sets, specifically numbered 3150 to 3237. Within that group, it was determined there was a ton of issues with the doors on two trains of that group. The  train, on the other hand, has the earlier group numbered 3050 to 3149; these had more intense tests on them prior to entering service. The  train has long had issues with its five car sets; the pilot had to be sent back to Bombardier for additional modifications that were necessary before going back to Transit to be tested again. This factored into how the ones for the BMT East entered first before the ones for the IND north.

[m2fwannabe]

So has anyone seen 3040-49 doing burn-in yet?

[VIP]

Y’all really took speculating to a whole new level. Guys relax, R32’s are not fully retired yet and no where near so. The R46’s assigned to the  will take effect 4/24/2020. The  gained 13 new train sets. The  got 9 sets of R32’s replaced by the R179’s the remaining R32’s and Extra R46’s are more than enough for Fulton Street/8 Av service. Also Cuomo does NOT make car equipment decisions. That sector is between Car equipment and the line Superintendents. 

[subwaycommuter1983]

9 hours ago, VIP said:

Y’all really took speculating to a whole new level. Guys relax, R32’s are not fully retired yet and no where near so. The R46’s assigned to the  will take effect 4/24/2020. The  gained 13 new train sets. The  got 9 sets of R32’s replaced by the R179’s the remaining R32’s and Extra R46’s are more than enough for Fulton Street/8 Av service. Also Cuomo does NOT make car equipment decisions. That sector is between Car equipment and the line Superintendents. 

Thanks for the clarification. 

Cuomo is not the CEO or the top boss of the MTA. He is the governor of NY state and he is doing a good job as a governor. He kept Obamacare in NYS, raised the minimum wage to $15/hr, paid sick time to all employees, etc.

As for the retirement of the r32's and overall car assignments , the MTA has the final decision.

[Mysterious2train]

10 hours ago, VIP said:

Y’all really took speculating to a whole new level. Guys relax, R32’s are not fully retired yet and no where near so. The R46’s assigned to the  will take effect 4/24/2020. The  gained 13 new train sets. The  got 9 sets of R32’s replaced by the R179’s the remaining R32’s and Extra R46’s are more than enough for Fulton Street/8 Av service. Also Cuomo does NOT make car equipment decisions. That sector is between Car equipment and the line Superintendents. 

Now I'm not saying these rumors are true at all (more just playing devil's advocate) but even if we ignore his interventions on big projects like the Second Avenue Subway and the L Project, Cuomo has certainly shown a willingness to micromanage MTA affairs in the past. Like when the Queens Midtown Tunnel was renovated post-Hurricane Sandy and he ordered the MTA to replace the white tiles with blue and yellow tiles to match NY state colors (which the NY Post claims cost an extra $20-30 million). You can even see it in official MTA board materials with the vague mention of "tunnel wall tile modifications to meet New York State branding guidelines".

Not to mention the light shows on several NY state bridges (including some owned by the MTA) and the blue and yellow wraps on the R160s, R211s, R262s and M9s, it's clear Cuomo/his administration is concerned with appearances is and wiling to extend that to the MTA. I honestly don't think it's outside the realm of possibility for the Cuomo admin to hear about shabby-looking subway cars that are closing in on 60 years old, with reliability slowing falling, with a new fleet of cars currently arriving to replace them, and him then ordering the MTA to get retire those old cars as soon as is feasible. If he or a high-ranking admin. member did give the order, would the MTA really be able to say no? And on what grounds? Maybe arguing that retiring the R32s now would create a car shortage, but would even that work?

And putting aside the rumors/speculation from this thread, there's also Dan Ravoli saying outright in the article quoted above and on his Twitter that the R32s are being retired this Spring. Now granted, he doesn't work for the MTA and could be misinformed, made a mistake or is flat-out lying, but I would hope he know better than that being a reporter. Given how he reports heavily on transit issues and is a fixture at board and committee meetings I'd like to think he's a little more trustworthy than the typical reporter, but who knows.

36 minutes ago, subwaycommuter1983 said:

Thanks for the clarification. 

Cuomo is not the CEO or the top boss of the MTA. He is the governor of NY state and he is doing a good job as a governor. He kept Obamacare in NYS, raised the minimum wage to $15/hr, paid sick time to all employees, etc.

As for the retirement of the r32's and overall car assignments , the MTA has the final decision.

He doesn't have a title at the MTA, sure, but literally appoints a plurality of MTA board members, including the Chair/CEO and as of last year, the state budget director. And we know he and his administration are more than willing to interfere with MTA operations of any level, from big projects down to trivial issues, and he often gets his way. Not to mention the state legislature giving him most of what he wants when it comes to MTA things that require legislative approval (which is of course the legislators' choice, but just pointing it out). He definitely has influence. 

Edited February 15, 2020 by Mysterious2train

[R32 3838]

imo This is just a wait and see thing.

Its gonna be extremely hard running the with no spares and with the running every 15 mins if there isn't enough trains.

@VIP alot of credible people on that R42 last run were talking about it, Trust Me I rather them be wrong and all of this be speculation.

 

Even if they go with this plan, it will backfire real bad. the being mixed length trains was and will be a disaster. they're just better off making the 100% R179's and sending 50 R32's to ENY with 60 staying at 207th for the .

them getting rid of the R32's will hurt they system more than helping it knowing the issues with the R179's. by the time all of those issues are resolved, the R211's will already be entering service.

Edited February 15, 2020 by R32 3838

[subwaycommuter1983]

31 minutes ago, R32 3838 said:

imo This is just a wait and see thing.

Its gonna be extremely hard running the with no spares and with the running every 15 mins if there isn't enough trains.

@VIP alot of credible people on that R42 last run were talking about it, Trust Me I rather them be wrong and all of this be speculation.

 

Even if they go with this plan, it will backfire real bad. the being mixed length trains was and will be a disaster. they're just better off making the 100% R179's and sending 50 R32's to ENY with 60 staying at 207th for the .

them getting rid of the R32's will hurt they system more than helping it knowing the issues with the R179's. by the time all of those issues are resolved, the R211's will already be entering service.

The worst mistake that the MTA can do is to have the C run every 15 minutes and on top of that run the A or D local to make up for the gap in local service.

If the MTA wants a mixed length C trains, then they should lengthen the r32's instead of putting r46's.

Ridership is increasing on the C and the B doesn't run during the weekends. The C needs to be running every 8 minutes during off peak weekdays and every 10 minutes during the weekends. 

[Jemorie]

3 hours ago, subwaycommuter1983 said:

Thanks for the clarification. 

Cuomo is not the CEO or the top boss of the MTA. He is the governor of NY state and he is doing a good job as a governor. He kept Obamacare in NYS, raised the minimum wage to $15/hr, paid sick time to all employees, etc.

As for the retirement of the r32's and overall car assignments , the MTA has the final decision.

You do realize that, as @Mysterious2train pointed out, the governor influenced the  into making the  shutdown from full-time to half-ass, right? Among other things you fail to realize and understand... 

1 minute ago, subwaycommuter1983 said:

The worst mistake that the MTA can do is to have the C run every 15 minutes and on top of that run the A or D local to make up for the gap in local service.

If the MTA wants a mixed length C trains, then they should lengthen the r32's instead of putting r46's.

Ridership is increasing on the C and the B doesn't run during the weekends. The C needs to be running every 8 minutes during off peak weekdays and every 10 minutes during the weekends. 

Yeah no. Keep it simple.  headways stay 10 minutes off-peak including on weekends to equalize with those on the , R32s stay at 207th Street (reactivate all 222 cars unless they already stripped a handful of them), make them full-length 600 feet to run on the  alongside R46s and the 13 ten-car trainsets of R179s, put all the four-car R179s in the east since they won't be equipped for CBTC for the time being anyway. Most of the four-car R160s and all 212 R143s in the east are already equipped with CBTC for respective use on Queens Blvd and Canarsie.

[R32 3838]

Just now, Jemorie said:

You do realize that, as @Mysterious2train pointed out, the governor influenced the  into making the  shutdown from full-time to half-ass, right? Among other things you fail to realize and understand... 

Yeah no. Keep it simple.  headways stay 10 minutes off-peak including on weekends to equalize with those on the , R32s stay at 207th Street (reactivate all 222 cars unless they already stripped a handful of them), make them full-length 600 feet to run on the  alongside R46s and the 13 ten-car trainsets of R179s, put all the four-car R179s in the east since they won't be equipped for CBTC for the time being anyway. Most of the four-car R160s and all 212 R143s in the east are already equipped with CBTC for respective use on Queens Blvd and Canarsie.

they already starting to strip some cars

[Coney Island Av]

14 minutes ago, Jemorie said:

Yeah no. Keep it simple. R32s stay at 207th Street (reactivate all 222 cars unless they already stripped a handful of them), make them full-length 600 feet to run on the  alongside R46s and the 13 ten-car trainsets of R179s, put all the four-car R179s in the east since they won't be equipped for CBTC for the time being anyway. 

 

13 minutes ago, R32 3838 said:

they already starting to strip some cars

that is true but most of them should still be intact, albeit just sitting OOS. example: 3610-11, 3484-85, 3770-71, 3518-19 are at Pitkin, the lighting is still on in those cars and they don't appear to be missing components. 

[Coney Island Av]

44 minutes ago, Jemorie said:

Yeah no. Keep it simple. R32s stay at 207th Street (reactivate all 222 cars unless they already stripped a handful of them), make them full-length 600 feet to run on the  alongside R46s and the 13 ten-car trainsets of R179s, put all the four-car R179s in the east since they won't be equipped for CBTC for the time being anyway. 

 

43 minutes ago, R32 3838 said:

they already starting to strip some cars

that is true but most of them should still be intact, albeit just sitting OOS. example: 3610-11, 3484-85, 3770-71, 3518-19 are at Pitkin, the lighting is still on in those cars and they don't appear to be missing components. 

[trainfan22]

I think y'all is overreacting about the lack of spares in regards to the R32 retirement lol. MTA management don't foresee these problems but random railfans on a message board do..

 

 

 

Y'all is coming up all kinds of crazy theories to keep the R32s in service lol. Looking that always sunny meme..

 

[Jemorie]

46 minutes ago, trainfan22 said:

I think y'all is overreacting about the lack of spares in regards to the R32 retirement lol. MTA management don't foresee these problems but random railfans on a message board do..

 

 

 

Y'all is coming up all kinds of crazy theories to keep the R32s in service lol. Looking that always sunny meme..

 

You can't even do simple mathematics on Google and yet you're here typically talking all that crap. Nobody here is making any wild scenarios to keep the R32s in service forever, only till the R211s.

Edited February 16, 2020 by Jemorie

[R32 3838]

38 minutes ago, trainfan22 said:

I think y'all is overreacting about the lack of spares in regards to the R32 retirement lol. MTA management don't foresee these problems but random railfans on a message board do..

 

 

 

Y'all is coming up all kinds of crazy theories to keep the R32s in service lol. Looking that always sunny meme..

 

 

When 2nd ave opened concourse lost 3-4 trains, pitkin lost 3 trains and Jamaica lost 4-5 but gained 3

when the R179's started on the pitkin lost 4 MORE R46's to Jamaica

Concourse never got their trains back.

 

If there were enough trains why in the f**k do they need a Train off the to use on the in the AM rush

the R42's are now gone, If they decided to give the all the R179's ENY would be short.

Pitkin lost 7 trains of R46's in total

Coney Island is getting R46's (which needs a higher spare count due to age vs. an R160)

TA doesn't want to move the R179's off the so they have to use R46's from the to the in trade for the R32's that would run on the until retirement meaning the has to steal from the in order to make service with the being left with nothing.

the R179's aren't reliable, if they were them retiring the R32's would work. but due to their issues they need a high spare factor.

 

 

 

Its common f**king sense. Nobody wants a another godamn car shortage. the R211's will be in service by next year, so they can use those 110 R32's 60-70 out of that 110 would be used until 2021-2022 like originally planned.

 

 

 

 

 

[R32 3838]

12 minutes ago, Jemorie said:

You can't even do simple mathematics on Google and yet you're here typically talking all that crap. Nobody here is making any wild scenarios to keep the R32s in service forever, only till the R211s.

he's just being a fool, people think this is a joke until it effects them. nobody don't want to wait for a train for 15 mins during the rush hour because an R46 or R179 needs to be serviced.

[Jemorie]

2 minutes ago, R32 3838 said:

he's just being a fool, people think this is a joke until it effects them. nobody don't want to wait for a train for 15 mins during the rush hour because an R46 or R179 needs to be serviced.

Yeah, don't mind him. I expected that snide response from someone like him from the beginning. At least @VIP, @Mysterious2train, @MysteriousBtrain, and @Coney Island Av seem to understand where we're coming from. They don't have to keep all 222 R32s as we already know the original plan was to keep at most 110-130. As long as not all cars are retired before the R211s, the spare ratio should be good.

[R32 3838]

Just now, Jemorie said:

Yeah, don't mind him. I expected that snide response from someone like him from the beginning. At least @VIP, @Mysterious2train, @MysteriousBtrain, and @Coney Island Av seem to understand where we're coming from. They don't have to keep all 222 R32s as we already know the original plan was to keep at most 110-130. As long as not all cars are retired before the R211s, the spare ratio should be good.

 

and the funny thing is they can use 5 sets of R32's, that's really all they need but with the R179's keep having their issues they'll still need 7 sets of R32's for the (A). there's not enough 10 car trains since the R179 order doubled the amount of 8 car trains. ether way they're still gonna need the R32's. if they retire them, then it's gonna be hard to keep gap trains and service levels at normal. this in turn will make things worse.

[SimplyMyself]

1 hour ago, R32 3838 said:

 

and the funny thing is they can use 5 sets of R32's, that's really all they need but with the R179's keep having their issues they'll still need 7 sets of R32's for the (A). there's not enough 10 car trains since the R179 order doubled the amount of 8 car trains. ether way they're still gonna need the R32's. if they retire them, then it's gonna be hard to keep gap trains and service levels at normal. this in turn will make things worse.

Before the swap CI had 580 R160’s (58 trains). Jamaica is only going to give 396 R46s (49.5 trains). CI is going to potentially need to have a few sets of R46s from Pitkin. So that could justify the idea of keeping some of the R32s.

[subwaycommuter1983]

2 hours ago, R32 3838 said:

 

and the funny thing is they can use 5 sets of R32's, that's really all they need but with the R179's keep having their issues they'll still need 7 sets of R32's for the (A). there's not enough 10 car trains since the R179 order doubled the amount of 8 car trains. ether way they're still gonna need the R32's. if they retire them, then it's gonna be hard to keep gap trains and service levels at normal. this in turn will make things worse.

Let's wait and see what happens. 

At the end of the day, the MTA will most likely have to stick to the original plan of keeping about half the r32's until the r211's.

Commuters are already paying a very high subway fare and the least thing that any subway commuter want is a reduction in service in any of the subway lines.

 

[R32 3838]

9 minutes ago, subwaycommuter1983 said:

Let's wait and see what happens. 

At the end of the day, the MTA will most likely have to stick to the original plan of keeping about half the r32's until the r211's.

Commuters are already paying a very high subway fare and the least thing that any subway commuter want is a reduction in service in any of the subway lines.

 

even if they do go with this because of the idiot upstate, this would blow up in his face.

[Coney Island Av]

3 hours ago, trainfan22 said:

I think y'all is overreacting about the lack of spares in regards to the R32 retirement lol. MTA management don't foresee these problems but random railfans on a message board do..

Y'all is coming up all kinds of crazy theories to keep the R32s in service lol. Looking that always sunny meme..

i am sure NO ONE here, and yes no one wants to see unreliable service nor increased wait times/delays (or even worse, more budget cuts.). its very clear and obvious how retiring all the 32s now will backfire in the MTA's face. we cannot trust the 179s given their constant unreliability and defects. and so what if MTA cant give a sh*t about these problems? they have failed everyone in NYC to this moment purely as a result of cuomo's arrogance and absolute control of them like a puppet. the only reason they dont "forsee" these problems like you said in your statement is because they try not to care if what their doing will only result in more problems. 

it does not matter whether we on this forum are drastically inferior to MTA as a whole. the matter is that we are able to foresee these crucial problems that the MTA cannot. and what we are coming up with are not theories whatsoever. they are actual statistics and facts. if the MTA wants to strip some R32s its understandable, they need more parts and there are some cars that are the worst pairs out of those that remain. but scrapping all of them isnt just about any railfanner or foamer's wet dream. retiring them all now will impact up to millions of commuters who use the subway on a daily basis which is on a whole other level. 

when the 211s arrive MTA definitely has a reason to get rid of the 32s. with the 42s gone that only leaves the 120 or so remaining R32s as the oldest fleet left on the rails. retiring the remaining 32s now would only bring back the one mistake the MTA has always made: being too overconfident in getting rid of old cars, which has a tendency to backfire. 

[subwaycommuter1983]

12 minutes ago, Coney Island Av said:

i am sure NO ONE here, and yes no one wants to see unreliable service nor increased wait times/delays (or even worse, more budget cuts.). its very clear and obvious how retiring all the 32s now will backfire in the MTA's face. we cannot trust the 179s given their constant unreliability and defects. and so what if MTA cant give a sh*t about these problems? they have failed everyone in NYC to this moment purely as a result of cuomo's arrogance and absolute control of them like a puppet. the only reason they dont "forsee" these problems like you said in your statement is because they try not to care if what their doing will only result in more problems. 

it does not matter whether we on this forum are drastically inferior to MTA as a whole. the matter is that we are able to foresee these crucial problems that the MTA cannot. and what we are coming up with are not theories whatsoever. they are actual statistics and facts. if the MTA wants to strip some R32s its understandable, they need more parts and there are some cars that are the worst pairs out of those that remain. but scrapping all of them isnt just about any railfanner or foamer's wet dream. retiring them all now will impact up to millions of commuters who use the subway on a daily basis which is on a whole other level. 

when the 211s arrive MTA definitely has a reason to get rid of the 32s. with the 42s gone that only leaves the 120 or so remaining R32s as the oldest fleet left on the rails. retiring the remaining 32s now would only bring back the one mistake the MTA has always made: being too overconfident in getting rid of old cars, which has a tendency to backfire. 

I agree 100%. Those 120 cars are needed to maintain service on a line that has been having an increase in ridership and needs more service, not less.

[Jemorie]

24 minutes ago, Coney Island Av said:

i am sure NO ONE here, and yes no one wants to see unreliable service nor increased wait times/delays (or even worse, more budget cuts.). its very clear and obvious how retiring all the 32s now will backfire in the MTA's face. we cannot trust the 179s given their constant unreliability and defects. and so what if MTA cant give a sh*t about these problems? they have failed everyone in NYC to this moment purely as a result of cuomo's arrogance and absolute control of them like a puppet. the only reason they dont "forsee" these problems like you said in your statement is because they try not to care if what their doing will only result in more problems. 

it does not matter whether we on this forum are drastically inferior to MTA as a whole. the matter is that we are able to foresee these crucial problems that the MTA cannot. and what we are coming up with are not theories whatsoever. they are actual statistics and facts. if the MTA wants to strip some R32s its understandable, they need more parts and there are some cars that are the worst pairs out of those that remain. but scrapping all of them isnt just about any railfanner or foamer's wet dream. retiring them all now will impact up to millions of commuters who use the subway on a daily basis which is on a whole other level. 

when the 211s arrive MTA definitely has a reason to get rid of the 32s. with the 42s gone that only leaves the 120 or so remaining R32s as the oldest fleet left on the rails. retiring the remaining 32s now would only bring back the one mistake the MTA has always made: being too overconfident in getting rid of old cars, which has a tendency to backfire. 

He obviously does not ride the  on a daily basis to know how crowded trains get during the morning rush hour out of Brooklyn with 10-minute headways, let alone, how many total cars are in the overall NYC Subway fleet to calculate on Google one by one like how former transit employee Joe Korman did in his own website which has now been outdated (while still accurate) since his death.

He knows nothing of what he is talking about. That's why he typically commented the way he did. It's not even funny. It's just reeking of ignorance.

[Jemorie]

17 minutes ago, subwaycommuter1983 said:

I agree 100%. Those 120 cars are needed to maintain service on a line that has been having an increase in ridership and needs more service, not less.

Can't increase service without slightly reducing  service due to the current aging signals between Hoyt and Canal that are eventually going to need replacing anyway, or to accommodate work that is taking place under traffic.  Or both. A general order that requires all three different lines to share a track anywhere along their routes also prevents service increases, until CBTC.

Edited February 16, 2020 by Jemorie