RollOver Posted March 7, 2014 Share #1426 Posted March 7, 2014 (edited) You also don't know what the will do. I'm doubting that Phase 1 will have the type of patronage that negates the having two branches. So you basically believe that riders at 96th, 86th and 72nd (including Lex/63rd) see headways of 20 minutes during Phase I? What about relieving crowding on the local? Also, should Astoria get a 17% decrease in service just so the can run every 10 minutes between Coney Island and 57th and then, 20 minutes between 57th and Astoria & 96th/2nd? Why? If 96th, 86th, 72nd and Lex/63rd see 20 minute headways (off-peak), then what the hell is the point of opening up SAS in the first place then if all they get is 50% of service? Edited March 7, 2014 by RollOverMyHead 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lance Posted March 7, 2014 Share #1427 Posted March 7, 2014 (edited) Am I the only one hoping that the MTA gets rid of the FINDs? I think a better option would be to have an LCD screen where ethe FIND is and have that as a digital strip map. The strip maps can look just like the ones on the R142/R143 but instead, they would be digital and adjustable. For ex, when an operator changes from the to a , the screen just changes to show the line's strip maps. It would be easier to read than the pixelated text on a FIND and show all stops at once unlike what the FINDs, which cycle through stops that are more than 10 stops away. Nope, you're not alone with that wish. Besides, as of now, FIND technology is pretty dated nowadays. We don't really need decade-old displays on trains from the new tens. Of course, given who we're talking about here, I really wouldn't be surprised if the FINDs are on the 179s. Regarding car placement of the five-car sets, nothing is set in stone. They can stay at 207th to keep all the cars together or they can go to Coney Island or Jamaica. It's not as though yards maintaining similar car classes is a new concept. It really makes little sense to argue over such small details. We'll find out soon enough. Edited March 7, 2014 by Lance 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Missabassie Posted March 8, 2014 Share #1428 Posted March 8, 2014 Many of you seem to have forgotten that the (J/Z) are getting 179s too..... 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cl94 Posted March 8, 2014 Share #1429 Posted March 8, 2014 Nope, you're not alone with that wish. Besides, as of now, FIND technology is pretty dated nowadays. We don't really need decade-old displays on trains from the new tens. Of course, given who we're talking about here, I really wouldn't be surprised if the FINDs are on the 179s. Regarding car placement of the five-car sets, nothing is set in stone. They can stay at 207th to keep all the cars together or they can go to Coney Island or Jamaica. It's not as though yards maintaining similar car classes is a new concept. It really makes little sense to argue over such small details. We'll find out soon enough. The FIND is dated, but it's newer technology than what some of Bombardier's other clients are getting. The brand-new TRs in Toronto have strip maps not much unlike those in the R142/As and R143s. Only difference is that their strip maps show all 4 lines. I was shocked to see such old technology. Pardon my intentionally poor grammar, but if the FIND ain't broke, don't fix it. When the tries new technology, it usually blows up their face. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fresh Pond Posted March 9, 2014 Share #1430 Posted March 9, 2014 Many of you seem to have forgotten that the (J/Z) are getting 179s too..... It's only a piece of the pie lol. The only thing we know for sure is where the 4 car sets are going. The 5 car sets are still a toss-up between Pitkin and Coney Island. We don't know yet, and until there's solid proof instead of "it would make sense to" or "logic dictates that", then I believe no one. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndrewJC Posted March 9, 2014 Share #1431 Posted March 9, 2014 Did they say for sure they wouldn't be compatible? The 160's were originally supposed to be 100% compatible; described as almost indistinguishable from the 143's, but then they changed propulsion and other stuff. (Forgot whether the propulsion was decided yet). But it shows it is possible to make a new fleet compatible. If the contract doesn't call for them to be compatible, then they won't be compatible. And the contract doesn't call for them to be compatible. Yes, the R179's and R160's and R143's all look very similar, but that has no impact on compatibility. Am I the only one hoping that the MTA gets rid of the FINDs? I think a better option would be to have an LCD screen where ethe FIND is and have that as a digital strip map. The strip maps can look just like the ones on the R142/R143 but instead, they would be digital and adjustable. For ex, when an operator changes from the to a , the screen just changes to show the line's strip maps. It would be easier to read than the pixelated text on a FIND and show all stops at once unlike what the FINDs, which cycle through stops that are more than 10 stops away. Fully agreed. According to Wikipedia the order was drastically changed from 250 5-car sets and 40 4-car sets to now 40 5-car sets and 260 4-car sets.. Seems a bit of a big change.. The original plan was for a base order of 290 plus an option of 50 plus an option of 80. In a round of budget cuts, the second option was dropped, the first option was combined into the base, and the 340 cars were slimmed down to 300 by dropping plans to lengthen C trains (2 cars per train on each of 18 trains comes to 36 cars; add on 4 spares and there's the 40 cars saved). I don't care what AndrewJC said, I'm going off the documents most of us have already seen. The coming back is just speculation. You also don't know what the will do. I'm doubting that Phase 1 will have the type of patronage that negates the having two branches. Now, Phase 2 on the other hand, definitely negates the need for two branches. At that point, I believe the will be brought back. The Astoria line cannot afford a loss of any service. Any Astoria train diverted up SAS will be replaced by a different train on the Astoria line. The letters don't matter. The FIND is dated, but it's newer technology than what some of Bombardier's other clients are getting. The brand-new TRs in Toronto have strip maps not much unlike those in the R142/As and R143s. Only difference is that their strip maps show all 4 lines. I was shocked to see such old technology. Pardon my intentionally poor grammar, but if the FIND ain't broke, don't fix it. When the tries new technology, it usually blows up their face. Of course other clients are using strip maps - they're much easier to read. The only reason NYCT went with FIND was that it was the best option available at the time that allowed the same cars to be used on multiple lines without swapping physical maps. That's not an issue in Toronto, where the entire system is small enough that a full map can fit into the space available. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T to Dyre Avenue Posted March 10, 2014 Share #1432 Posted March 10, 2014 Well in that case, they might as well have dropped the five car sets altogether, then. Doesn't make sense. Really, changing it to mostly four car sets limits options in the future, like expanding the to 10 cars (like if there's a lot of growth on the Fulton local, especially with the gentrification going on), or even switching the lines, like in a proposal for a Manhattan Bridge outage where the would replace the . It was supposed to be a few four car sets to fill out the . (Again, it should have just been a 160 option). But they get into this "cutback" mode, and then "burn their bridges behind them", like reducing the capacity of Franklin (which would have worked with that plan in that scenario) or eliminating 72nd St. middle track. Agreed. Either the R179 order should have consisted exclusively of four-car sets to finish off the R32s and 42s completely or the cars should have been ordered as married pairs, so they could be assigned anywhere within the B-Division. If the contract doesn't call for them to be compatible, then they won't be compatible. And the contract doesn't call for them to be compatible. Yes, the R179's and R160's and R143's all look very similar, but that has no impact on compatibility. This decision could potentially come back to bite them on the butt, especially if the five-car sets are indeed sent to CI or Jamaica yards. Only 40 out of the 300 cars are going to be configured that way and if they can only run in trains by themselves, they will be orphans "within an order of orphans" (300 cars is a relatively small order of cars by NYC Transit standards). Having spare parts for just 40 cars is not practical. And what if the cars end up being "shop queens?" That shouldn't be a problem with the four-car sets because there will be a lot more of them. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobtehpanda Posted March 12, 2014 Share #1433 Posted March 12, 2014 Agreed. Either the R179 order should have consisted exclusively of four-car sets to finish off the R32s and 42s completely or the cars should have been ordered as married pairs, so they could be assigned anywhere within the B-Division. This decision could potentially come back to bite them on the butt, especially if the five-car sets are indeed sent to CI or Jamaica yards. Only 40 out of the 300 cars are going to be configured that way and if they can only run in trains by themselves, they will be orphans "within an order of orphans" (300 cars is a relatively small order of cars by NYC Transit standards). Having spare parts for just 40 cars is not practical. And what if the cars end up being "shop queens?" That shouldn't be a problem with the four-car sets because there will be a lot more of them. MTA hasn't run mixed sets of cars in a very long time. When was the last time you saw a mixed consist of trains? The MTA is fine ordering non-compatible cars; for Christ's sakes, we're going to have two sets of cars restricted to just one line (the (L)'s R143s and the (7)'s R188s) The FIND is dated, but it's newer technology than what some of Bombardier's other clients are getting. The brand-new TRs in Toronto have strip maps not much unlike those in the R142/As and R143s. Only difference is that their strip maps show all 4 lines. I was shocked to see such old technology. Pardon my intentionally poor grammar, but if the FIND ain't broke, don't fix it. When the tries new technology, it usually blows up their face. FINDs themselves are a new MTA tech, and for what it's worth they're not that great. It would've been better for the MTA to just have an LCD screen with a slowly scrolling strip map, but let's be honest, this is not an agency known for its design credentials or user-friendliness. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lance Posted March 12, 2014 Share #1434 Posted March 12, 2014 FINDs themselves are a new MTA tech, and for what it's worth they're not that great. It would've been better for the MTA to just have an LCD screen with a slowly scrolling strip map, but let's be honest, this is not an agency known for its design credentials or user-friendliness. I'm going to give them the benefit of the doubt with the 160s. When the orders were placed in 2004/2005, full length LCD screens like the ones they'd need for those displays was quite expensive. Obviously, that's not the case nowadays, but they'll probably stick with it long after its obsolescence. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T to Dyre Avenue Posted March 12, 2014 Share #1435 Posted March 12, 2014 MTA hasn't run mixed sets of cars in a very long time. When was the last time you saw a mixed consist of trains? The MTA is fine ordering non-compatible cars; for Christ's sakes, we're going to have two sets of cars restricted to just one line (the (L)'s R143s and the (7)'s R188s) There are a lot more R143s and there will be a lot more R188s than there will be of 5-car sets of R179s. Neither of those fleets are oddballs. The 40 R179s in 5-car sets will be, especially if they get assigned to CI or Jamaica. Best place for them to go is Pitkin or 207, where at least there they will be able to run alongside other R179s, even if never in the same trains with the 4-car sets. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fresh Pond Posted March 12, 2014 Share #1436 Posted March 12, 2014 There are a lot more R143s and there will be a lot more R188s than there will be of 5-car sets of R179s. Neither of those fleets are oddballs. The 40 R179s in 5-car sets will be, especially if they get assigned to CI or Jamaica. Best place for them to go is Pitkin or 207, where at least there they will be able to run alongside other R179s, even if never in the same trains with the 4-car sets. No matter where you send the 5 car sets, they gonna be oddballs. Unless you stick it with a 4 car set and have some 9 car train running around 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cl94 Posted March 12, 2014 Share #1437 Posted March 12, 2014 No matter where you send the 5 car sets, they gonna be oddballs. Unless you stick it with a 4 car set and have some 9 car train running around Maybe that's how they are going to make consists longer. You never know with the . They'll send them where they send them and they'll figure something out. I'd put them at 207th so some 46s can get back to Jamaica in advance of Broadway needing more NTTs for SAS and (possibly) service. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Missabassie Posted March 13, 2014 Share #1438 Posted March 13, 2014 ...Don't like the idea of all these R46s back on the (F)ox, but what can you do.... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XcelsiorBoii4888 Posted March 13, 2014 Share #1439 Posted March 13, 2014 ...Don't like the idea of all these R46s back on the (F)ox, but what can you do.... I agree. Oh well. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndrewJC Posted March 18, 2014 Share #1440 Posted March 18, 2014 Agreed. Either the R179 order should have consisted exclusively of four-car sets to finish off the R32s and 42s completely or the cars should have been ordered as married pairs, so they could be assigned anywhere within the B-Division. This decision could potentially come back to bite them on the butt, especially if the five-car sets are indeed sent to CI or Jamaica yards. Only 40 out of the 300 cars are going to be configured that way and if they can only run in trains by themselves, they will be orphans "within an order of orphans" (300 cars is a relatively small order of cars by NYC Transit standards). Having spare parts for just 40 cars is not practical. And what if the cars end up being "shop queens?" That shouldn't be a problem with the four-car sets because there will be a lot more of them. The conscious decision in the 90's was to move away from married pairs and toward four car and five car units instead. The car design would have to be radically altered to go back to married pairs. Ordering four car units only wouldn't have provided enough cars for Second Avenue. I agree with your concern about the small fleet size. That's why I strongly suspect that they will be maintained at 207th, or maybe Pitkin, so that they can share parts with the other R179's. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VIP Posted March 20, 2014 Share #1441 Posted March 20, 2014 (edited) Watch them put the R179s on the and give 207st Hand-me-down R160s from the and for service. As far as the five car sets, im sure the MTA will place them in CI for the Edited March 20, 2014 by VIP 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScreechyFlange Posted March 20, 2014 Share #1442 Posted March 20, 2014 Watch them put the R179s on the and give 207st Hand-me-down R160s from the and for service. As far as the five car sets, im sure the MTA will place them in CI for the You can't be serious... 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MTA Bus Posted March 20, 2014 Share #1443 Posted March 20, 2014 (edited) Watch them put the R179s on the and give 207st Hand-me-down R160s from the and for service. As far as the five car sets, im sure the MTA will place them in CI for the I don't think the will get them because they already have the R160s plus the R179 is supposed to replace the remaining R32s and R42s, but knowing the MTA, anything is possible. Edited March 20, 2014 by MTA Bus 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R32 3838 Posted March 20, 2014 Share #1444 Posted March 20, 2014 I can see ENY getting most of them because of the propulsion system being similar to the R143's, but we'll see 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2 Train Master Posted March 20, 2014 Share #1445 Posted March 20, 2014 Can't rule out Jamaica getting some 179's bumping the 46's to the exclusively since QBL is supposed to get CBTC in the future. As for the 4 car sets ENY/Fresh Pond.... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScreechyFlange Posted March 20, 2014 Share #1446 Posted March 20, 2014 Can't rule out Jamaica getting some 179's bumping the 46's to the exclusively since QBL is supposed to get CBTC in the future. As for the 4 car sets ENY/Fresh Pond.... My question to you and VIP is why would the purposefully go out of their way to give the 179's to Fresh Pond just to keep the from receiving brand new trains? Wouldn't they be delivered to 207th and then go to Pitkin for their third rail shoes? What would be the logic in giving 160a-1's to the ? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NYtransit Posted March 20, 2014 Share #1447 Posted March 20, 2014 Whats the propulsion for the R179? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YankeesPwnMets Posted March 20, 2014 Share #1448 Posted March 20, 2014 It could the same as the R142A/R143 but Bombardier might use their updated MITRAC propulsion. We'll just have to wait and see until the first test trains start rolling out later this year. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Around the Horn Posted March 20, 2014 Share #1449 Posted March 20, 2014 My question to you and VIP is why would the purposefully go out of their way to give the 179's to Fresh Pond just to keep the from receiving brand new trains? Wouldn't they be delivered to 207th and then go to Pitkin for their third rail shoes? What would be the logic in giving 160a-1's to the ? They've run there before 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RollOver Posted March 20, 2014 Share #1450 Posted March 20, 2014 They've run there before That's not what he meant. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.