Jump to content

R179 Discussion Thread


East New York

Recommended Posts

Well I don't think there's that many R143s to cover the full (C) line's needs, but I'm saying it's not the end of the world if they were given to the (C). Again assuming the R179s for the (C) turns out to be 8 car trains over 10 car ones.

 

Had those R143s go to the (C), only 144 out of the 212 cars will be in service every day (not night).

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Replies 10.2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

those R143's are gonna stay on the (L), (MTA) made it clear that those cars are for the (L), i see the R160A-1's going to 207th but not the R143's MTA didn't waste money getting those cars ready for the ATO and CBTC upgrade for nothing, i don't believe they are gonna send the R143's to the (C) i just don't see it happening

Link to comment
Share on other sites

R143s are not leaving ENY or the L. Such would never be seriously considered.

ENY will have three car fleets- R143, R160, R179. Even if the C became 100% R143, you'd still be stuck with some on the L. It makes no sense whatsoever to split a small fleet like the R143 unless you had to. There is no reason you have to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I actually love the post you've made! :) Then all subway yards will have one or two car types assigned! I can see why R143s being possible for the (C) makes sense (not because of ridership, service increase, and CBTC) but will reduce maintenance costs at East New York Yard and provide better service for the BMT Eastern Division by simply making the (L) 100% R179s, (C) 100% R143s, and the (J)(Z) 100% R160s like the (M) so the (L) doesn't borrow any of the other BMT ED lines.

 

Of course, this is just mute disscussion. Just discussing what's possible that would actually help prevent ENY from maintaining a third car. ;)

 

 

Damn that makes plenty of sense.

 

R143s from the (L) to the (C)

R179s to the (A) and the (L)

 

It seems a lot more efficient than my plan.

 

MTA prefers opto on that line and I believe the platform can only hold 150' trains. So at best you can only run a 2-car R32 train or 120' and then you'd need a c/r.

 

 

But I can't understand why you can't run a 2 Car Consist R46. Is it because the MTA wants to have a car that is able to be operated from the front and the back? Because an A-A R46 would work fine if that is not the case.

 

 

those R143's are gonna stay on the (L), (MTA) made it clear that those cars are for the (L), i see the R160A-1's going to 207th but not the R143's MTA didn't waste money getting those cars ready for the ATO and CBTC upgrade for nothing, i don't believe they are gonna send the R143's to the (C) i just don't see it happening

 

 

^^^ Agreed lol

 

 

R143s are not leaving ENY or the L. Such would never be seriously considered.

ENY will have three car fleets- R143, R160, R179. Even if the C became 100% R143, you'd still be stuck with some on the L. It makes no sense whatsoever to split a small fleet like the R143 unless you had to. There is no reason you have to.

 

 

Do we really have to go back to this?

Edited by Brighton Express
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Art Vandelay

 

We're just going through the (MTA)'s internal disscussion. We're not saying it as if the R143s ARE leaving ENY and going to 207th. We're just keeping this as civil and to prevent fights from happening again...

Edited by RollOverMyHead
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks RollOverMyHead! I did't realize that the point of moving the 143's was to have ENY only maintain two fleets!

 

Having said that, seeing how everything besides the 46's at that point would be less than 15-20 years old, and the 68's are staying on the (B) and (D), means that the cars will very rarely (if it all) be moved around until the 143's retire! Meaning, that it actually might be cheaper to install CBTC on the 179's, if it means it can be a lot more efficient for 20+ years.

 

In addition, because the (C) is a light line, and the (L) will beat cars to death, that would decrease life on the 179's, and increase life on the 143's meaning that they could both be retired with the 160's, so that even more of the fleet will be uniform, thus making maintenance costs go sharply down.

Edited by CDTA
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Either way I think the R143 thing is a moot point. I think the big thing is people need to calm down about IF they were moved off the (L). 'If it happens, it happens. If not, then whatever.'

 

Well. the R179s will be caple of CBTC which is why the R143 swap makes sense to me at least. That's also because 64 R160s assigned to the (L) are CBTC. I still wonder how much costs ENY has over maintaining a third car (R143, R160, and R42 (later R179) fleets) though...

Edited by RollOverMyHead
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The (L) could sure as hell use all those 300 R179s (with only 160 in service and the rest on standby) as well as to keep those CBTC 64 R160As there. Though since the R143s are CBTC, that's the only reason I can go against of putting all of them on a non-isolated line lol..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Remember East New York Yard will receive 50 cars of R179 it will be 4 car unit example you know A+B+B+A divison

 

 

We know that... that's why we're saying the R143's could go to the (C) and get rearranged to 5 car sets, and the 4 car R179's go to the (L).

 

Seriously, it's not funny, it's spam. Use some grammar.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've been thinking about this, and since there are so many possibilities that could theoretically work, we have to understand that it's better spread car types over as few yards as possible. Thus, putting R143s on the (C) seems attractive because it would leave ENY yard with only two car types (R160 and R179) and 207 St yard with only one (R143). The question is whether there are enough R179s to displace all of the R143s from ENY, because if there are any R143s left there, there's no point in moving any to 207 St in the first place. The other issue is that if the (A) is supposed to get R179s too, the R179s are no longer isolated to ENY and the cost savings of displacing the R143s are gone.

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.