Jump to content

SUBWAY - Random Thoughts Topic


Recommended Posts

Well it's a good thing you're not in charge of car equipment. The 46s are doing quite well for cars that are approaching 40 years in service. There are no inherent structural issues, they aren't rusting and on average, they can go over 90 thousand miles without breaking down. That's pretty damn rail-worthy if you ask me. And the 68s (both types) are doing even better, despite their "dark and depressing" nature.

 

 

Lol, both the 62s and 68s are "dark and depressing" in his eyes...  :rolleyes:

 

 

I actually find all the aforementioned car classes very pleasant above ground. Not so much underground, but that's pretty much expected given how you are riding the train through dark tunnels. There are bigger issues with the subway than the interiors of these cars.

 

And no, the R160 is no better.

Let's see...

 

R62s & 68s - Poor lighting and poor AC (save in the middle of the car)

                   - Terrible swaying and buzzing sound

                   - Illegible/garbled announcements for the most part

 

I wouldn't call those "rail-worthy", but rather cars that are needed because they need them for service.  Nothing more than that.

 

R46s  - Stuck in a time warp with that hideous 70s design

          - Lighting is better, but the doors take FOREVER to close

          - The (R) was plagued with them over the years and probably why service sucks so much on the line

          - I've used the (R) once or twice recently, and both times they've been R160s.... What a difference a car makes...

 

R32s & R42s - Well what can be said about them aside from the fact they should've been retired years ago... lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Replies 30.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

The only reason why the (R) is fairly unreliable is because of its interaction with the (M), (N) and (Q)...and when those three aforementioned lines get delayed or whatever, then the (R) gets backed up...the constant weekend track/signal maintenance (which requires flagging) on the IND Queens Boulevard Line is also the same result... 

Edited by RollOver
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let's see...

 

R62s & 68s - Poor lighting and poor AC (save in the middle of the car)

                   - Terrible swaying and buzzing sound

                   - Illegible/garbled announcements for the most part

 

I wouldn't call those "rail-worthy", but rather cars that are needed because they need them for service.  Nothing more than that.

 

R46s  - Stuck in a time warp with that hideous 70s design

          - Lighting is better, but the doors take FOREVER to close

          - The (R) was plagued with them over the years and probably why service sucks so much on the line

          - I've used the (R) once or twice recently, and both times they've been R160s.... What a difference a car makes...

 

R32s & R42s - Well what can be said about them aside from the fact they should've been retired years ago... lol

 

I will NOT let myself get sucked into another of these asinine debates that take up millions of pages and go back and forth without making any progress at all.

 

I'll leave it at this: that the doors are slow (which is wrong), the PAs suck, that the interior light coverings probably haven't been cleaned since the cars came into service and that they sway a lot (R160s do that too, make no mistake) doesn't mean that the cars aren't road worthy. I won't deny that it wouldn't hurt if they cleaned the insides of these more, but that still has nothing to do with road worthiness.

 

And the fact that the R46s have 1970s interiors is hands down the WORST justification I've ever heard for retiring a car class, and I've read a lot of bullsh*t reasons in my time.

 

And if it's the R46s making the (R) suck so much, why isn't the (A) as bad?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I will NOT let myself get sucked into another of these asinine debates that take up millions of pages and go back and forth without making any progress at all.

 

I'll leave it at this: that the doors are slow (which is wrong), the PAs suck, that the interior light coverings probably haven't been cleaned since the cars came into service and that they sway a lot (R160s do that too, make no mistake) doesn't mean that the cars aren't road worthy. I won't deny that it wouldn't hurt if they cleaned the insides of these more, but that still has nothing to do with road worthiness.

 

And the fact that the R46s have 1970s interiors is hands down the WORST justification I've ever heard for retiring a car class, and I've read a lot of bullsh*t reasons in my time.

 

And if it's the R46s making the (R) suck so much, why isn't the (A) as bad?

LOL...  It is... The (A) just runs more frequently...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And if it's the R46s making the (R) suck so much, why isn't the (A) as bad?

 

I mean, I do have to agree the R is much better with 160's - however, it also has a much shorter route when it's truncated to whitehall. I bet the route does more to improve service than the cars - that said, the A generally runs with much shorter headways than the R, so when the R is running it's full route and a train gets delayed, the whole line suffers a LOT. The 46's are definitely more prone to being delayed than the 160's - but still. 

 

 

LOL...  It is... The (A) just runs more frequently...

HEY! WE AGREE ON SOMETHING!

 

 

Let's see...

 

R62s & 68s - Poor lighting and poor AC (save in the middle of the car)

                   - Terrible swaying and buzzing sound

                   - Illegible/garbled announcements for the most part

 

I wouldn't call those "rail-worthy", but rather cars that are needed because they need them for service.  Nothing more than that.

 

R46s  - Stuck in a time warp with that hideous 70s design

          - Lighting is better, but the doors take FOREVER to close

          - The (R) was plagued with them over the years and probably why service sucks so much on the line

          - I've used the (R) once or twice recently, and both times they've been R160s.... What a difference a car makes...

 

R32s & R42s - Well what can be said about them aside from the fact they should've been retired years ago... lol

 

What are you even on about. the 68's probably have the best AC in the system. I can't recall ever being on one that wasn't frigid. The 62's, well, some are okay others less so in terms of climate, but still. 

 

The 68's do have that PA buzz sometime. Seems to be poorly shielded lines. It's not loud, and it's not a big deal. The announcements are usually fine. 

 

I actually prefer the 62's to the 142's. I'll usually let the 2 pass and wait for the 3 because, well, I for one PREFER the dimmer lighting. The new cars' lighting is harsh. The 62's don't jolt to a start nearly as bad, but they're just as fast. 

 

But to each their own. For instance, I loathe bus service. We're allowed to have preferences, but "Rail-worthy" isn't a very high standard. Several R1-9's are "Rail Worthy" - they run every year -  but you certainly wouldn't see them in rush hour service....

 

(though that would be damn cool)

Edited by itmaybeokay
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let's see...

 

R62s & 68s - Poor lighting and poor AC (save in the middle of the car)

                   - Terrible swaying and buzzing sound

                   - Illegible/garbled announcements for the most part

 

I wouldn't call those "rail-worthy", but rather cars that are needed because they need them for service.  Nothing more than that.

 

R46s  - Stuck in a time warp with that hideous 70s design

          - Lighting is better, but the doors take FOREVER to close

          - The (R) was plagued with them over the years and probably why service sucks so much on the line

          - I've used the (R) once or twice recently, and both times they've been R160s.... What a difference a car makes...

 

R32s & R42s - Well what can be said about them aside from the fact they should've been retired years ago... lol

And I reiterate my previous comment when I say I'm damn glad you're not in charge of car equipment. Let's go through this car class by class. The 32s and 42s, I'll give you that one. They should have been gone and the premature retirement of the 44s is the only reason these cars are still in service. However, that doesn't apply to the other cars.

 

The 46s, which you claim are stuck in a time warp. Hmm, I wonder why that is. Maybe it has something to do with them being built in the mid-to-late '70s, making them a product of their time. The MTA isn't going to put out money to update the interior of cars that aren't going to be around much longer, and if they did, you'd be the first in line to complain about frivolous expenses. As for your claims that they're the cause of slow service on the R line, it's funny how it doesn't seem to affect the A and F lines, which use the same cars. It's almost like the R-line's problems are not related to the cars at all.

 

Regarding the '80s cars, the 62s and 68s, well I think you're just fishing for reasons why you don't like these cars. You can find mumbled or hard to understand manual announcements on any train, regardless of age. There are also many instances where said manual announcements are crystal clear. It depends on the conductor. I'll admit the lighting on the cars is lacking and that's because of some bone-headed move to put ad space on top of the light panels.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And I reiterate my previous comment when I say I'm damn glad you're not in charge of car equipment. Let's go through this car class by class. The 32s and 42s, I'll give you that one. They should have been gone and the premature retirement of the 44s is the only reason these cars are still in service. However, that doesn't apply to the other cars.

 

The 46s, which you claim are stuck in a time warp. Hmm, I wonder why that is. Maybe it has something to do with them being built in the mid-to-late '70s, making them a product of their time. The MTA isn't going to put out money to update the interior of cars that aren't going to be around much longer, and if they did, you'd be the first in line to complain about frivolous expenses. As for your claims that they're the cause of slow service on the R line, it's funny how it doesn't seem to affect the A and F lines, which use the same cars. It's almost like the R-line's problems are not related to the cars at all.

 

Regarding the '80s cars, the 62s and 68s, well I think you're just fishing for reasons why you don't like these cars. You can find mumbled or hard to understand manual announcements on any train, regardless of age. There are also many instances where said manual announcements are crystal clear. It depends on the conductor. I'll admit the lighting on the cars is lacking and that's because of some bone-headed move to put ad space on top of the light panels.

Oh they most certainly do affect (A) and (F) service... It's just that both lines have a lot more frequent service that the (R) gets...

 

Buying desperately needed new cars is not a "frivolous" expense...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let's see...

 

R62s & 68s - Poor lighting and poor AC (save in the middle of the car) That's because they usually don't turn on the highest A/C when I ride an R62..... On an R188 I'd always hear that loud HVAC and know it's on high, therefore it's freezing cold... On an R62A meanwhile you don't hear the HVAC much when it's turned on low, which is why it's so hot. Lighting is fine..... It's like in your house at night with only a lamp on....

                   - Terrible swaying and buzzing sound Every car sways. It's not just them, you know.... 

                   - Illegible/garbled announcements for the most part You know that's harder to fix than you think it is..... and it is way more costly, but not as costly as getting a new P/A system.

 

I wouldn't call those "rail-worthy"you wouldn't call these railworthy, but by FACTS it is rail-worthy. These cars run FINE and I don't hear anyone complain about them other than those people up in the UES, but rather cars that are needed because they need them for service.  Nothing more than that.

 

R46s  - Stuck in a time warp with that hideous 70s design Doesn't matter!

          - Lighting is better, but the doors take FOREVER to close The R160's have THE SLOWEST door motors in the system.

          - The (R) was plagued with them over the years and probably why service sucks so much on the line

          - I've used the (R) once or twice recently, and both times they've been R160s.... What a difference a car makes... Obviously because it's newer!

 

R32s & R42s - Well what can be said about them aside from the fact they should've been retired years ago... lol Very true, atleast something I can agree on...

Edited by R188 7857
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can say .. Why cant Concourse yard cannot handle All R68A ( Kawasaki car #5001 - #5200 series) of the (B).... While (4) are stored at Concourse yard.. Who know during night hours R68A (B) , shared fleet with (Q) are stored or lay up at 49 street station ( via Broadway (N) , (Q))  in middle track in night hours... While Concourse yard does not carry that much #5001 - #5200 of the (B).. Where they can layed up with the exception of 207 Street Yard I know...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Forgot today I saw R62 #1525 on (3)... The Orange color tape have been removed.. Everyone know when R62 ran on the (4) #1301 - #1625 by then they had Orange tape color that stand for those car belong to Concourse yard.... What make mind change Orange color tape etc:/ on R62 #1525 to be removed...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can say .. Why cant Concourse yard cannot handle All R68A ( Kawasaki car #5001 - #5200 series) of the (B).... While (4) are stored at Concourse yard.. Who know during night hours R68A (B) , shared fleet with (Q) are stored or lay up at 49 street station ( via Broadway (N) , (Q))  in middle track in night hours... While Concourse yard does not carry that much #5001 - #5200 of the (B).. Where they can layed up with the exception of 207 Street Yard I know...

 

wat-meme.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let's see...

 

R62s & 68s - Poor lighting and poor AC (save in the middle of the car)

                   - Terrible swaying and buzzing sound

                   - Illegible/garbled announcements for the most part

 

I wouldn't call those "rail-worthy", but rather cars that are needed because they need them for service.  Nothing more than that.

 

R46s  - Stuck in a time warp with that hideous 70s design

          - Lighting is better, but the doors take FOREVER to close

          - The (R) was plagued with them over the years and probably why service sucks so much on the line

          - I've used the (R) once or twice recently, and both times they've been R160s.... What a difference a car makes...

 

R32s & R42s - Well what can be said about them aside from the fact they should've been retired years ago... lol

First off of all bad ac happens on any subway car class regardless off age , Ummm u do realize that the R62/As are the most reliable trains that they have in the A division and are trains that rarely break down and in alot of cases perfom better than an R142/A , they are also doing very very well for being almost 30 yrs old on the lines that they run on , if that's not road worthy then i don't know what is

Edited by R62AR33
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Let's see...

 

R62s & 68s - Poor lighting and poor AC (save in the middle of the car) That's because they usually don't turn on the highest A/C when I ride an R62..... On an R188 I'd always hear that loud HVAC and know it's on high, therefore it's freezing cold... On an R62A meanwhile you don't hear the HVAC much when it's turned on low, which is why it's so hot. Lighting is fine..... It's like in your house at night with only a lamp on....

]

Subway cars A/C can't be adjusted like they are auto cars by there operators. Its only a on/off switch for the HAVC, not a circular knob with Red for heat and blue for A/C lol. Simply put, the NTT have a better HAVC system than the SMEEs which is why there more comfortable when the temperature is at extremes in Winter and Summer.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Forgot today I saw R62 #1525 on (3)... The Orange color tape have been removed.. Everyone know when R62 ran on the (4) #1301 - #1625 by then they had Orange tape color that stand for those car belong to Concourse yard.... What make mind change Orange color tape etc:/ on R62 #1525 to be removed...

1. The (4) never was based out of Concourse. It just stores trains there & gets washed there since its yard (JEROME) doesn't have a wash or enough space

2. Orange was the color for JEROME yard when they ran on the (4)

3. The tape probably fell off.

4. They don't use yard color stickers anymore.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One thing I can agree with Vito on: that the R46s are hilariously dated inside. But personally, I like it--it's a nostalgia trip right into the mid-70s. Only in that era would we see beige wallpaper (a subway car with wallpaper!), beige floors, beige seat ends, and orange-yellow seats. It looks like my older family's kitchen. It's pretty amusing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Subway cars A/C can't be adjusted like they are auto cars by there operators. Its only a on/off switch for the HAVC, not a circular knob with Red for heat and blue for A/C lol. Simply put, the NTT have a better HAVC system than the SMEEs which is why there more comfortable when the temperature is at extremes in Winter and Summer.

 

Then does it auto-adjust? Because well it gets louder sometimes and when it gets louder it gets cooler.... Same goes with SMEE....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd like to put this out here for myself and my fellow posters. I"ve been on these forums for a few years and I enjoy the back and forth. Having said that there is something that I've been noticing for a few weeks(months). It's also happening to a degree in the bus forums but it's especially prevalent in the subway section. At the risk of becoming a "grammar nazi" there are some threads, like the R188 one, where some posts are basically incoherent. IDK if it's an ESL thing or something else but it's very jarring to come across such a post in an otherwise interesting thread discussion. I'm not talking about people not agreeing with each other but rather posts that obsess over missing stickers on equipment, or new, converted, or SMSed equipment where one has to read and re-read a post to try to decipher the poster's point.. IMO instead of some people worrying about trainsets remaining in numerical order while they're out railfanning perhaps they should spend the same amount of time hitting up those English textbooks they've cast aside for the summer. It just doesn't look right, at least to me, when you can tell subway and bus fleets by number or sound but you can't get your points across clearly in a post. To an oldtimer like me the latter shows more intelligence than any thing else you have to say.I can read a post from SubwayGuy, Lance, VG8, Eric, or B35, for example and I know and understand what they're trying to convey. Same with Wallyhorse, LOL. I may not agree with their thoughts as posted but I know what they're saying. Some of the posts I'm speaking of come across as pure gibberish, as my grandmother might put it. All I'm asking is that we take our time and think about how our posts come across to others. Just my rant. Carry on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd like to put this out here for myself and my fellow posters. I"ve been on these forums for a few years and I enjoy the back and forth. Having said that there is something that I've been noticing for a few weeks(months). It's also happening to a degree in the bus forums but it's especially prevalent in the subway section. At the risk of becoming a "grammar nazi" there are some threads, like the R188 one, where some posts are basically incoherent. IDK if it's an ESL thing or something else but it's very jarring to come across such a post in an otherwise interesting thread discussion. I'm not talking about people not agreeing with each other but rather posts that obsess over missing stickers on equipment, or new, converted, or SMSed equipment where one has to read and re-read a post to try to decipher the poster's point.. IMO instead of some people worrying about trainsets remaining in numerical order while they're out railfanning perhaps they should spend the same amount of time hitting up those English textbooks they've cast aside for the summer. It just doesn't look right, at least to me, when you can tell subway and bus fleets by number or sound but you can't get your points across clearly in a post. To an oldtimer like me the latter shows more intelligence than any thing else you have to say.I can read a post from SubwayGuy, Lance, VG8, Eric, or B35, for example and I know and understand what they're trying to convey. Same with Wallyhorse, LOL. I may not agree with their thoughts as posted but I know what they're saying. Some of the posts I'm speaking of come across as pure gibberish, as my grandmother might put it. All I'm asking is that we take our time and think about how our posts come across to others. Just my rant. Carry on.

This sure enough sums it all up, great way to put it. We pretty much all know who the people this is aimed at. "Wink Wink"

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.