Jump to content

SUBWAY - Random Thoughts Topic


Recommended Posts


  • Replies 30.7k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Is there anybody that can respond to my post from the last page? I'm curious to hear anyone's input if possible.

On 9/26/2022 at 1:00 PM, RandomRider0101 said:

RandomQuestion: Is there a source somewhere that states that the (3) was planned to get the R142/As when new?

I've heard multiple people say this in the past, and I have a hard time believing it for the following reasons:

The (3) is only a part-time line, and is the least used line in the A-division; Plus it already had the newest fleet before the R142/As: the R62As. Why then would they get the newest fleet again?

The (4) getting them always made more sense from a logical standpoint, since they're a full-time, and heavily used line. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dude… chill.

first of all, until I actually want to say the early 2000s, the 3 ran only 9 car trains. This is one of those things that don’t get talked about a lot so it’s harder to get info, but I believe that it was something about the storage tracks in Lennox Yard that limited it.

as for today: the issue with the 3 and NTTs comes down to one thing:

we call it “the shield”.

it’s a bit of metal meant to go over the door controls to prevent the conductor from opening the rear of the train at stations where the platforms are not long enough.

it is part of the A division conductor’s regular kit (so as a B division conductor I don’t have one)

 

the door controls for NTT trains are laid out completely differently and the existing shields do not work on them.


Whenever a 2 ends up being sent to Lennox Terminal, they skip 145th street.

The MTA would have to make thousands  of new ones for the 142/188. With the 262s coming… their hand is about to be forced.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yesterday (L) service was temporarily suspended due to a train with an mechanical problem they couldn't move..

 

 

Today? There's an a train with an mechanical problem at 14th Street - Union Square and my (L) had to be short turned at Bedford Ave due to congestion in Manhattan caused by said train with mechanical problem, agggrrhhh

Edited by trainfan22
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, trainfan22 said:

Yesterday (L) service was temporarily suspended due to a train with an mechanical problem they couldn't move..

 

 

Today? There's an a train with an mechanical problem at 14th Street - Union Square and my (L) had to be short turned at Bedford Ave due to congestion in Manhattan caused by said train with mechanical problem, agggrrhhh

And they say the (M) ain't a useful alternative.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Kamen Rider said:

Dude… chill.

first of all, until I actually want to say the early 2000s, the 3 ran only 9 car trains. This is one of those things that don’t get talked about a lot so it’s harder to get info, but I believe that it was something about the storage tracks in Lennox Yard that limited it.

as for today: the issue with the 3 and NTTs comes down to one thing:

we call it “the shield”.

it’s a bit of metal meant to go over the door controls to prevent the conductor from opening the rear of the train at stations where the platforms are not long enough.

it is part of the A division conductor’s regular kit (so as a B division conductor I don’t have one)

 

the door controls for NTT trains are laid out completely differently and the existing shields do not work on them.


Whenever a 2 ends up being sent to Lennox Terminal, they skip 145th street.

The MTA would have to make thousands  of new ones for the 142/188. With the 262s coming… their hand is about to be forced.

I guess this was meant for me?

I knew the (3) used to be 9-car trains before the R142/As.

I was curious about the stuff I posted about, because people often spread rumors and they end up getting carried as fact. They did the same thing with the (7) and the R142As.

It's standard procedure for new cars to test everywhere before entering service.

When the R142/As tested at Corona, people saw that as "the R142As were going to Corona, And the reason they didn't go at the time was because Corona was falling apart and couldn't handle NTTs".

Even if Corona could handle NTTs back then, that doesn't mean they were getting NTTs then. Same applies to Livonia & any other yard.

This is why it's good to hear from actual MTA employees like yourself who would know more than just some random railfans.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, RandomRider0101 said:

I guess this was meant for me?

I knew the (3) used to be 9-car trains before the R142/As.

I was curious about the stuff I posted about, because people often spread rumors and they end up getting carried as fact. They did the same thing with the (7) and the R142As.

It's standard procedure for new cars to test everywhere before entering service.

When the R142/As tested at Corona, people saw that as "the R142As were going to Corona, And the reason they didn't go at the time was because Corona was falling apart and couldn't handle NTTs".

Even if Corona could handle NTTs back then, that doesn't mean they were getting NTTs then. Same applies to Livonia & any other yard.

This is why it's good to hear from actual MTA employees like yourself who would know more than just some random railfans.

Its was a rumor back at the time. Bloomberg did push for the Lexington to be 100% tech trains (He had a point and it made sense at the time) so the (4) ended up being 95% R142/R142A until March 2009 when the last of their R62s were transferred to the (3)

 

The (7) wasn't getting tech trains at the time because Corona Barn was old and worn out plus it was said that the barn was starting to sink into the ground. Once they made it official for the (7)  to be CBTC they built the new barn and years later the (7) got tech trains. Plus the R142As had clearance issues in the Steinway tubes when they tested the cars back in 2003. all of those issues were corrected and in 2011 they retested the R142A's on the (7) line before the first set of R142As (7211-7220) were sent to Kawasaki for R188 conversion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, R32 3838 said:

Its was a rumor back at the time. Bloomberg did push for the Lexington to be 100% tech trains (He had a point and it made sense at the time) so the (4) ended up being 95% R142/R142A until March 2009 when the last of their R62s were transferred to the (3)

 

The (7) wasn't getting tech trains at the time because Corona Barn was old and worn out plus it was said that the barn was starting to sink into the ground. Once they made it official for the (7)  to be CBTC they built the new barn and years later the (7) got tech trains. Plus the R142As had clearance issues in the Steinway tubes when they tested the cars back in 2003. all of those issues were corrected and in 2011 they retested the R142A's on the (7) line before the first set of R142As (7211-7220) were sent to Kawasaki for R188 conversion.

Yep, this is what I had learned. Plus it does make sense that Bloomberg wanted Lex to be 100% tech, since it was and still is the busiest trunk in the entire system.

Thanks for the input, as well as @Kamen Rider.

TBH, I kinda answered my own question in the first place. Even if the (3) had gotten the R142/As at that time, it would've likely been a mixed bag with the R62/As; similar to how the (4) and (6) had fleets of redbirds mixed with the R62s & R62As respectively.

Since the MTA usually tries to keep the fleets as uniform as possible, they would've made the (3) all old tech again anyway; just like they made the (4) all new tech.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Kamen Rider said:

Dude… chill.

first of all, until I actually want to say the early 2000s, the 3 ran only 9 car trains. This is one of those things that don’t get talked about a lot so it’s harder to get info, but I believe that it was something about the storage tracks in Lennox Yard that limited it.

as for today: the issue with the 3 and NTTs comes down to one thing:

we call it “the shield”.

it’s a bit of metal meant to go over the door controls to prevent the conductor from opening the rear of the train at stations where the platforms are not long enough.

it is part of the A division conductor’s regular kit (so as a B division conductor I don’t have one)

 

the door controls for NTT trains are laid out completely differently and the existing shields do not work on them.


Whenever a 2 ends up being sent to Lennox Terminal, they skip 145th street.

The MTA would have to make thousands  of new ones for the 142/188. With the 262s coming… their hand is about to be forced.

It's that, finally canning 145th Street, or finally extending the platforms to handle 10 cars.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am not sure if anyone has pointed this out, but I noticed another difference between the R142 and R142A. They both have different door open light positions on the inside. On the R142, it is above the doors, while on the R142A, it is to the side of the doors.

Also:

22 hours ago, Kamen Rider said:

With the 262s coming

I don't think so anytime soon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, Lex said:

It's that, finally canning 145th Street, or finally extending the platforms to handle 10 cars.

Looking at the RFW videos, it seems to me that there is quite more leeway for a southward extension than a northward extension. Immediately north of 145 Street is an S-curve. It could be severe enough for the northbound track that gap fillers would be required. Looking at the platform from the south, the junction doesn’t seem too close to the station.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, CenSin said:

Looking at the RFW videos, it seems to me that there is quite more leeway for a southward extension than a northward extension. Immediately north of 145 Street is an S-curve. It could be severe enough for the northbound track that gap fillers would be required. Looking at the platform from the south, the junction doesn’t seem too close to the station.

You're looking at the picture correctly. Directly north of the visible section of the N/B platform (is/was) a diamond crossover switch that led directly to the Lenox Yard and barn. The barn was demolished so trains entered the yard and turned westward to enter the layup tracks. When the 148th St station was opened in 1968 track 1 became the S/B track, tracks 2 and 3 are now covered by the platform and track 4 is the N/B platform in the station. If the N/B platform at 145th St were extended southward it would be close to the 142ndSt junction and the connection with the s/b (2) tracks and the abandoned tower at the split. I'm sure there'd have to be some signal work at that location to avoid locking out trains in the under-river tunnel. Gotta remember that when this section was built they were only running 5 car trains. That's why the s/b platform at 145th Street was never extended to the south. My recollections. BTW that abandoned tower used to be visible to the M/M heading northbound on the (2) or (3) or folks camped out at the railfan window. It was just a small triangular cutout in the wall where the n/b (3) crossed the s/b (2) tracks. IIRC the setup never changed because of the signal blocks layout in that area. Hope I haven't confused anyone. Carry on.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Trainmaster5 said:

You're looking at the picture correctly. Directly north of the visible section of the N/B platform (is/was) a diamond crossover switch that led directly to the Lenox Yard and barn. The barn was demolished so trains entered the yard and turned westward to enter the layup tracks. When the 148th St station was opened in 1968 track 1 became the S/B track, tracks 2 and 3 are now covered by the platform and track 4 is the N/B platform in the station. If the N/B platform at 145th St were extended southward it would be close to the 142ndSt junction and the connection with the s/b (2) tracks and the abandoned tower at the split. I'm sure there'd have to be some signal work at that location to avoid locking out trains in the under-river tunnel. Gotta remember that when this section was built they were only running 5 car trains. That's why the s/b platform at 145th Street was never extended to the south. My recollections. BTW that abandoned tower used to be visible to the M/M heading northbound on the (2) or (3) or folks camped out at the railfan window. It was just a small triangular cutout in the wall where the n/b (3) crossed the s/b (2) tracks. IIRC the setup never changed because of the signal blocks layout in that area. Hope I haven't confused anyone. Carry on.

 

Maybe they could make 145 St a one-direction station, only southbound, and make it 10-cars, since the junction seems to be impeding the northbound platform, and according to this post, there is a real likelihood that the junction might not impede the southbound platform. Can’t the platform form already technically fit 6-7 cars? I would need to see the track map to see what is feasible 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/29/2022 at 6:09 PM, R32 3838 said:

Its was a rumor back at the time. Bloomberg did push for the Lexington to be 100% tech trains (He had a point and it made sense at the time) so the (4) ended up being 95% R142/R142A until March 2009 when the last of their R62s were transferred to the (3)

 

The (7) wasn't getting tech trains at the time because Corona Barn was old and worn out plus it was said that the barn was starting to sink into the ground. Once they made it official for the (7)  to be CBTC they built the new barn and years later the (7) got tech trains. Plus the R142As had clearance issues in the Steinway tubes when they tested the cars back in 2003. all of those issues were corrected and in 2011 they retested the R142A's on the (7) line before the first set of R142As (7211-7220) were sent to Kawasaki for R188 conversion.

So before the 188 conversion, did they send another pair of 10 car R142A's to the (7) first to test the clearances again after the first test?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, darkstar8983 said:

Maybe they could make 145 St a one-direction station, only southbound, and make it 10-cars, since the junction seems to be impeding the northbound platform, and according to this post, there is a real likelihood that the junction might not impede the southbound platform. Can’t the platform form already technically fit 6-7 cars? I would need to see the track map to see what is feasible 

That's a half-measure that'll only piss everyone off.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So… last night, I was on the L. I was at my position at 8th avenue, waiting for my starting lights. 
 

I’m in full uniform (minus my hat which has yet to come yet, it’s on backorder). MTA turtleneck, MTA jacket. Standing in the cab…

 

group of people walk up to me “uh, excuse us… do you work here? We have a question?”

 

I give the the “customer service” mode… but inside I was giving them the full “Sarcastic B!&$@ from Brooklyn”.

”no, I’m cosplaying as an employee…”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Lawrence St said:

So before the 188 conversion, did they send another pair of 10 car R142A's to the (7) first to test the clearances again after the first test?

Yes in 2011

 

https://www.nycsubway.org/perl/show?112967

https://www.nycsubway.org/perl/show?128408

https://www.nycsubway.org/perl/show?112778

https://www.nycsubway.org/perl/show?128407

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Kamen Rider said:

So… last night, I was on the L. I was at my position at 8th avenue, waiting for my starting lights. 
 

I’m in full uniform (minus my hat which has yet to come yet, it’s on backorder). MTA turtleneck, MTA jacket. Standing in the cab…

 

group of people walk up to me “uh, excuse us… do you work here? We have a question?”

 

I give the the “customer service” mode… but inside I was giving them the full “Sarcastic B!&$@ from Brooklyn”.

”no, I’m cosplaying as an employee…”

hahahaha! I'm weak! 'cosplay as an employee' 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Kamen Rider said:

So… last night, I was on the L. I was at my position at 8th avenue, waiting for my starting lights. 
 

I’m in full uniform (minus my hat which has yet to come yet, it’s on backorder). MTA turtleneck, MTA jacket. Standing in the cab…

 

group of people walk up to me “uh, excuse us… do you work here? We have a question?”

 

I give the the “customer service” mode… but inside I was giving them the full “Sarcastic B!&$@ from Brooklyn”.

”no, I’m cosplaying as an employee…”

After working in the service industry I understand how you feel, especially since you're in uniform, as it may be irritating to be asked the same questions over and over again by different people. However, our mindset is everything. You're going to encounter the same situation many, many times again in your career. Sure, there are passengers that are going to ask questions that seem downright trivial (happens at my job too), but it might be their first time asking that question. Approach your job with patience, you will find less stress and more satisfaction.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, Kamen Rider said:

So… last night, I was on the L. I was at my position at 8th avenue, waiting for my starting lights. 
 

I’m in full uniform (minus my hat which has yet to come yet, it’s on backorder). MTA turtleneck, MTA jacket. Standing in the cab…

 

group of people walk up to me “uh, excuse us… do you work here? We have a question?”

 

I give the the “customer service” mode… but inside I was giving them the full “Sarcastic B!&$@ from Brooklyn”.

”no, I’m cosplaying as an employee…”

Lol I get the same questions at work. I’m in uniform restocking the printers at work and it never fails that someone looks at me and ask if I work there. Like no of course I don’t because I have anything better to do in my life but pretend to work somewhere for 6-8 hours of the day. I don’t know why people ask such a silly question. If I see you in full uniform I will just ask the question I want to ask. 

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.