peacemak3r Posted September 17, 2014 Share #7651 Posted September 17, 2014 (edited) Their mechanics, the brakes take a while to engage and stop the train, the pickup seems really slow. Rotting? The 46s are made of stainless steel. The literal term of "rotting" doesn't make sense like RollOver pointed out. But in terms of the trains are getting older, then yes, you can pretty much use the term "rotting" in those senses. Edited September 17, 2014 by peacemak3r 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MHV9218 Posted September 17, 2014 Share #7652 Posted September 17, 2014 Newer trains feel like newer trains. Any other observations? The real eyebrow-raiser should be why the collective NTT MDBF is so low. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
realizm Posted September 17, 2014 Share #7653 Posted September 17, 2014 (edited) Newer trains feel like newer trains. Any other observations? The real eyebrow-raiser should be why the collective NTT MDBF is so low. Thats left up to the unknown. I've heard many theories but I am all ears on this one, as I dont know whats actually going on in the maintenance shops. One thing I can say safely, they really sould see to it Bombardier is successful with the R179 order without further delay. They waited too long as it is. It amazes me that the R42s, falling apart as it is, are even still here. Edited September 17, 2014 by realizm 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ttcsubwayfan Posted September 17, 2014 Share #7654 Posted September 17, 2014 (edited) Newer trains feel like newer trains. Any other observations? In other news, the sky is blue... Thats left up to the unknown. I've heard many theories but I am all ears on this one, as I dont know whats actually going on in the maintenance shops. One thing I can say safely, they really sould see to it Bombardier is successful with the R179 order without further delay. They waited too long as it is. It amazes me that the R42s, falling apart as it is, are even still here. What issues the maintenance shops might be encountering has no bearing on whether the R179s will be delivered on time or not, seeing as they're not in the fleet yet. They had to keep the R42s around, they had no other option. Edited September 17, 2014 by ttcsubwayfan 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
realizm Posted September 17, 2014 Share #7655 Posted September 17, 2014 (edited) In other news, the sky is blue... What issues the maintenance shops might be encountering has no bearing on whether the R179s will be delivered on time or not, seeing as they're not in the fleet yet. They had to keep the R42s around, they had no other option. Umm... the reference to the mainenance shops was as a response to MHVs point on the cars that are on NYCT property not the R179s. As for the R42s look to be blunt they run and look like shit. They need to go. Lets not go on the idea that NYCT needs hang on to the old relics we really need new cars. If the R179s were on time to begin with and if the R44s was actually in good working order instead of being scrapped the R32s and R42s would have been gone by now completely replaced by R160s and R179s. That was the original goal. The MTA refused to expand the R179 order even after the fact with only a few five car sets, so the MTA screwed up on this one, and continues to make bad decisions. What is the turnover rate of cars on the TCC in Canada? Well we need the MTA to follow such standards. To hang on to cars for 50 years is a bit much. Edited September 17, 2014 by realizm 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ttcsubwayfan Posted September 17, 2014 Share #7656 Posted September 17, 2014 You said that you were hoping that the R179s will encounter no further delays, but that does not pertain to the maintenance issues as the R179s are not on property. Whether they need new cars is irrelevant. You may have noticed that the replacements for the R42s are the R179s, which are not on property. Course they need new cars, but until the new cars actually come online, they need to keep the R42s going. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
realizm Posted September 17, 2014 Share #7657 Posted September 17, 2014 (edited) You said that you were hoping that the R179s will encounter no further delays, but that does not pertain to the maintenance issues as the R179s are not on property. Whether they need new cars is irrelevant. You may have noticed that the replacements for the R42s are the R179s, which are not on property. Course they need new cars, but until the new cars actually come online, they need to keep the R42s going. No you are not looking at this correctly. The R160 order was supposed to replace the R32s and R42s. That was until inspectors found irreeversable defects on the R44s. Thats how the R160s much of it ended up at Jamaica yard and why the R42s and R32s are still here! I would imagine that where it pertains to NTTs in the maintenance shops I wasnt talking about R179s as obviously they are 6 months late because of welding defects similar to the Alstom R160 cars. The first test train was supposed to be here in December. Edited September 17, 2014 by realizm 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ttcsubwayfan Posted September 17, 2014 Share #7658 Posted September 17, 2014 Well, no, I think I am looking at this quite correctly. Yes the R160s were originally supposed to phase out the 32s and 42s, but you know what trumps the fact that the cars look like "relics"? The fact that the frame corrosion on the 44s was a far bigger problem than a bunch of dated looking rolling stock. Therefore the new replacements for the 32s and 42 are the 179s, and no matter how many times the people on this forum advocate "for the 32s and 42s to retire already!", the fact of the matter is, they can't do so until the 179s have actually arrived and have been approved for service. I surely cannot be the only one who tires of this constant back and forth rhetoric? The horse has been beaten to death and nothing has changed, something which no one should be surprised about. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
realizm Posted September 17, 2014 Share #7659 Posted September 17, 2014 (edited) Well, no, I think I am looking at this quite correctly. Yes the R160s were originally supposed to phase out the 32s and 42s, but you know what trumps the fact that the cars look like "relics"? The fact that the frame corrosion on the 44s was a far bigger problem than a bunch of dated looking rolling stock. Therefore the new replacements for the 32s and 42 are the 179s, and no matter how many times the people on this forum advocate "for the 32s and 42s to retire already!", the fact of the matter is, they can't do so until the 179s have actually arrived and have been approved for service. I surely cannot be the only one who tires of this constant back and forth rhetoric? The horse has been beaten to death and nothing has changed, something which no one should be surprised about. So why are you debating facts on the car fleets then if this is such a beaten to death topic? Sound a bit hypocritical if you ask me... Plus isnt that exactly what I've just said to begin with? In regards to the SMEE fleets and how they will ultimately be replaced? R179s? R211s? Think that was what I was alluding to vs holding onto 50 year old cars which is illogical. So yeah as I were saying, next year in 2015 by June the R179 delivery begins if we dont experience anymore delays... Edited September 17, 2014 by realizm 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ttcsubwayfan Posted September 17, 2014 Share #7660 Posted September 17, 2014 So why are you debating facts on the car fleets then if this is such a beaten to death topic? Sound a bit hypocritical if you ask me... Plus isnt that exactly what I've just said to begin with? In regards to the SMEE fleets and how they will ultimately be replaced? R179s? R211s? Think that was what I was alluding to vs holding onto 50 year old cars which is illogical... I sensed this'd be another endless of back and forth debate? There's nothing wrong with talking about car fleets but what is beaten to death is how everyone keeps bringing up that the R32s should have long been gone. DUH, but, and this is true in all parts of life, things don't always go according to plan. The R44s were a more pressing issue, and rightfully so. You keep saying that it's illogical to hold on to 50 year old cars, but considering that they have nothing to replace them with, it's completely logical. You can argue about that all you want but the fact of the matter is that you can't replace something with nothing - for better or worse, New York will be stuck with the 32s and 42s for a while longer. 2017 is the date that they'll be gone, it's set and over with! Complaining will not make the date come any faster. What is the turnover rate of cars on the TCC in Canada? Well we need the MTA to follow such standards. To hang on to cars for 50 years is a bit much. What happened with the TTC (not TCC) does not contribute to the discussion, as the system in Toronto is loads different than the New York one. New York's cars are built heavier and are specifically made to last 40 years, while Toronto's cars are meant to last only 30. That the H6s were retired at 28 years of age is merely a happy (for some) turn of events. The H4s lasted for 38 years; the H5s for 37. The majority of the past car fleets have made it into their mid-30s, in a fleet where cars are not meant to last more than 25-30 years. The H6s were a special circumstance and not one that is likely to repeat itself. Last post from me on this topic. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
realizm Posted September 17, 2014 Share #7661 Posted September 17, 2014 (edited) I sensed this'd be another endless of back and forth debate? There's nothing wrong with talking about car fleets but what is beaten to death is how everyone keeps bringing up that the R32s should have long been gone. Ok no need to be angry now over trains. I was just simply relating the fact if the R32s and R42s have the worst MDBFs in the system and the cars are in decrept condition then by logic they should be retired ASAP. The R32s are not that far behind now in its golden years of 50 too you know. They are half a century years old! What do you propose then? Cancel the R179 order so we can salvage old trains? For what? All one needs to do is have the NYC Transit Mueseum preserve a ten car set if even that for nostalgia trips... Edited September 17, 2014 by realizm 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ttcsubwayfan Posted September 17, 2014 Share #7662 Posted September 17, 2014 Ok no need to be angry now over trains. I was just simply relating the fact if the R32s and R42s have the worst MDBFs in the system and the cars are in decrept condition then by logic they should be retired ASAP. The R32s are not that far behind now in its golden years of 50 too you know. They are half a century years old! What do you propose then? Cancel the R179 order so we can salvage old trains? For what? All one needs to do is have the NYC Transit Mueseum preserve a ten car set if even that for nostalgia trips... I know I said I wouldn't post about this topic again, but the sheer absurdity of this post has forced my hand. Like with the R32s, not all things go according to plan. Well, for starters - who's getting angry over trains? What a cheap way to completely dismiss all the other person has to say. I'm actually quite calm, thank you very much. For someone who talks a lot of keyboard warriors and trolls on the internet, I would have expected you'd be better at recognizing when people are angry in internet posts - excessive caps, excessive exclamation points, the works. Secondly, you can spare me the patronizing explanation on how 50 years is half a century. Thirdly, stop putting words in my mouth. At no point, EVER, have I suggested that the R179 order be cancelled. You can pore over every single post I have made on this forum and every other forum I have ever been a part of and I guarantee that you will not find any such phrases in any posts. This is a straw man, and a pretty awful one at that. There's a difference between recognizing that the cars are past it (which they are) and recognizing that there is NOTHING that can be done about that. If we retire all the R32s and R42s without any replacements, we'll need service cuts, because there would be nothing to run in their place. Cloning machines are not a thing yet. And you'd complain about that, too. Until the R179s are good for service the R32s and R42s will continue to stick around. If I had a penny for every time someone said that the R32s and R42s should be retired prior to the arrival of the R179s (which is NOT an option), I would be able to retire here and now. And in the meantime, I can't be the only one who is getting tired of the same old, tired rhetoric getting brought up over and over again. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RollOver Posted September 17, 2014 Share #7663 Posted September 17, 2014 (edited) Their mechanics, the brakes take a while to engage and stop the train, the pickup seems really slow. And once again....what the hell does that have anything to do with the cars "rotting"....you're comparing mechanics to conditions....apples to oranges.... Edited September 17, 2014 by RollOver 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fresh Pond Posted September 17, 2014 Share #7664 Posted September 17, 2014 Trans must be serious business... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
realizm Posted September 17, 2014 Share #7665 Posted September 17, 2014 (edited) Trans must be serious business... Apparently personal preferences in >50 year old trains with terrible car performance defies common sense and logic which is to scrap the shits and bring in the R179s. I should have caught on to that. Edited September 17, 2014 by realizm 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ttcsubwayfan Posted September 17, 2014 Share #7666 Posted September 17, 2014 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
realizm Posted September 17, 2014 Share #7667 Posted September 17, 2014 I know I said I wouldn't post about this topic again, but the sheer absurdity of this post has forced my hand. Like with the R32s, not all things go according to plan. Well, for starters - who's getting angry over trains? What a cheap way to completely dismiss all the other person has to say. I'm actually quite calm, thank you very much. For someone who talks a lot of keyboard warriors and trolls on the internet, I would have expected you'd be better at recognizing when people are angry in internet posts - excessive caps, excessive exclamation points, the works. Secondly, you can spare me the patronizing explanation on how 50 years is half a century. Thirdly, stop putting words in my mouth. At no point, EVER, have I suggested that the R179 order be cancelled. You can pore over every single post I have made on this forum and every other forum I have ever been a part of and I guarantee that you will not find any such phrases in any posts. This is a straw man, and a pretty awful one at that. There's a difference between recognizing that the cars are past it (which they are) and recognizing that there is NOTHING that can be done about that. If we retire all the R32s and R42s without any replacements, we'll need service cuts, because there would be nothing to run in their place. Cloning machines are not a thing yet. And you'd complain about that, too. Until the R179s are good for service the R32s and R42s will continue to stick around. If I had a penny for every time someone said that the R32s and R42s should be retired prior to the arrival of the R179s (which is NOT an option), I would be able to retire here and now. And in the meantime, I can't be the only one who is getting tired of the same old, tired rhetoric getting brought up over and over again. OK, so we can keep them trashed R32s for the next hundred years while we advance globally to flying cars for transportation. Hey its your world. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ttcsubwayfan Posted September 17, 2014 Share #7668 Posted September 17, 2014 OK, so we can keep them trashed R32s for the next hundred years while we advance globally to flying cars for transportation. Hey its your world. I'd post another meme that acutely expresses how I feel, but what's the use? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
realizm Posted September 17, 2014 Share #7669 Posted September 17, 2014 The R179s were proposed with the very purpose and goal, and objective of replacing and burning the R32s and those horrid R42s. man google it its all there for you to read. Hey I did admit that at least one ten car set of these junk cars should be preserved if that makes you feel some solace... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ttcsubwayfan Posted September 17, 2014 Share #7670 Posted September 17, 2014 Jeeezzzus. I know very well what the purpose of the R179 order is. And I don't care about the R32s and R42s - they could be retired this week for all I care. But the point is, it is not possible to do that until the R179s arrive, a point which you are misinterpreting fantastically. And no, you can't rush the R179s along unless you want a lemon on your hands. I don't see how I can make this any clearer! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
realizm Posted September 18, 2014 Share #7671 Posted September 18, 2014 I have a question: What is the actual the car assignments on the R? Many say that its 100% R46s while others say that theres a presence of R160s out there. Personally I do see R160s on a full fledged line. Heres another: It seems that they removed timers on the Brooklyn Bound tunnel that makes part of the Montague Street tubes. The trains are much faster now on the Brooklyn Bound then it ever was. Is it just me or did anyone else catch on to this too? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CenSin Posted September 18, 2014 Share #7672 Posted September 18, 2014 Did anyone notice the nice rail sound while travelling express northbound on 4 Avenue? It comes up as the train takes the curve near 9 Street. It's the fastest part of the express run up 4 Avenue as well. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quill Depot Posted September 18, 2014 Share #7673 Posted September 18, 2014 R32s maybe nostalgic and everything, but the prices of shit are past their prime. Sure I love to ride em', but NY doesn't, and not are they reliable. Hell, if I was in charge Redbirds would still be on the rails, but it's about time they get a complete replacement. And once again....what the hell does that have anything to do with the cars "rotting"....you're comparing mechanics to conditions....apples to oranges.... How hard is it to see, the cars are past their prime and it's time for them to be sent to the junkyard or the reefer. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
realizm Posted September 18, 2014 Share #7674 Posted September 18, 2014 (edited) Did anyone notice the nice rail sound while travelling express northbound on 4 Avenue? It comes up as the train takes the curve near 9 Street. It's the fastest part of the express run up 4 Avenue as well. Yup. Its really cool riding the 4th Avenue express in both directions but esp on the Manhattan bound. Trains will hit 45 MPH guaranteed or your money back. I cant stress enough how the Montague Street tunnel is on the Brooklyn bound. Sue me major foam those cars fly through the tube. I believe after riding it for awhile as an alternative to dashing for the IRT at Atlantic that absolutely signals dept removed timers there, and if you ride the R, now it is indeed fast and BARRELS into Court Street from Whitehall. It has some awesome rail sounds there you dont even hear on Queens Blvd. Good to see some new speed zones along the BMT. *BTW: http://www.ny1.com/content/news/transit/215702/renovations-taking-a-little-longer-for-riders-at-two-queens-stations/ "The job should have been done a month ago, but A trains are still bypassing the Queens-bound platforms at the 88th and 104th Street stations while the Metropolitan Transportation Authority renovates them. Nearly 5,000 riders use the stations on weekdays, and many NY1 spoke with were annoyed that the work has gone on longer than planned. "Completely a big inconvenience for everybody," said one commuter. "You see everybody on the next stop just waiting there for the train back. It just delays you." "Once they give a deadline that work should be completed, it should be completed," said another. "They should not be coming up with lame-duck excuses, because you're hampering commerce, you're hampering the neighborhood." The MTA said it had to make some unexpected repairs to the steel girders supporting the platforms. That's extending the project, which started in May and was supposed to have been completed by August 18." "During the course of the work, we uncovered some structural deficiencies to the steel along that corridor, so that's work that we needed to get in there," said MTA spokesperson Kevin Ortiz." Edited September 18, 2014 by realizm 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Abba Posted September 18, 2014 Share #7675 Posted September 18, 2014 Don't bet your money though cause train traffic can ruin it. 1 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.