Jump to content
Attention: In order to reply to messages, create topics, have access to other features of the community you must sign up for an account.
Sign in to follow this  
Gramps

For the C Train’s Rickety and Rackety Cars, Retirement Will Have to Wait

Recommended Posts

My point was that you and the other guy are making it out as if I'm saying that the Redbirds were so grand. They weren't that great, but they were still better than those R32s.

 

No, nof really but if that's what you want to think, that's fine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, as long as they don't crash and burn or something, I have no problem with them running for a couple of more years. Besides, by 2017, I probably won't even be living in NYC anymore (after being born here, growing up under the Bloomberg regime, and living in the Bronx since 2007, I've figured that the Boston area is a much better place to live.) I'll sure miss those R-32s, though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The redbirds were not unique at all, all cars from the R16s until the R32s came in looked the same (both A and B Divisions). If anything, the R32s are more unique since they were the first all stainless steel car.

 

It's ok... In Staten Island all he sees is R44's and soon to be R46's..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
i am just happy to say ive operated a train older than my parents!:cool:

 

You must have some young patents there. My father (if he was still alive) would have been older then any of the post-war cars like the R10s.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The R32's and R42's are the MTA's version of Brett Favre. Just because you did well in 45 years with the system doesn't mean they need 50+ years. They will drain the maintenance resources of the agency and make the (A) and (C) lines more inefficient than they already are. If the MTA can scrape enough cash to get these things out of here before 2017, they BETTER do so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The R32's and R42's are the MTA's version of Brett Favre. Just because you did well in 45 years with the system doesn't mean they need 50+ years. They will drain the maintenance resources of the agency and make the (A) and (C) lines more inefficient than they already are. If the MTA can scrape enough cash to get these things out of here before 2017, they BETTER do so.

 

Very true. It's enough of a miracle as it is that they even made it to 47 years of age, to say nothing about 53.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The R32's and R42's are the MTA's version of Brett Favre. Just because you did well in 45 years with the system doesn't mean they need 50+ years. They will drain the maintenance resources of the agency and make the (A) and (C) lines more inefficient than they already are. If the MTA can scrape enough cash to get these things out of here before 2017, they BETTER do so.

 

Because they send pictures of their junk to teenage girls?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You must have some young patents there. My father (if he was still alive) would have been older then any of the post-war cars like the R10s.

 

Yup mine's age falls between a 9 and 10

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

its great for a railbuff point of view that the r32 will keep going they can last all subway cars have issues and can be fixed all i see now is R32 bashing and A/C line bashing if you dont like the cars dont use the line.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The C deserves R68.R68as/ R32s wil look better on the B.

 

I am waiting for Flushing Express to come and say that this is a good thing, because of his crazy idea of fat people on the (C). ROFL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, some responses!

 

To me, I don't mind the fact that the R32s are staying. Only thing that I hate is people arguing what lines they should go to and what not. Seriously, get over yourselves.

 

My opinion: I like them but they shouldn't even be here right now, despite the fact they're constructed well. Their MDBF was never that great out of the other SMEEs. The Slants and R38s were always better performers, the only difference between those cars and the R32s are the construction and why they were retired sooner. But now the (A) and (C) are suffering.

 

When the R32s go through with their SMS I hope something's done with the interior. I'm not so much a fan of the beige color at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest lance25
its great for a railbuff point of view that the r32 will keep going they can last all subway cars have issues and can be fixed all i see now is R32 bashing and A/C line bashing if you dont like the cars dont use the line.

 

Therein lies the problem. Most of the riding public aren't railfans. They're not gonna say "isn't it wonderful that these trains lasted so long." No, they're probably saying something along the lines of "damn, I have to deal with these trains for another five years." And while you can say "well they can find alternative ways to get around", really, they can't. These people are stuck with these cars. If they don't have another option to get to work, school, etc., they have no choice but to put up with trains that are probably older than their parents.

 

Yes, those trains were the ish back in their heyday, but that time has long since come and gone. Now, it's time for these trains to retire because, outside of a rebuild from the ground up, they're done. There's nothing that anyone can do to prevent the inevitable. No offense, but some of you guys here have to face facts. These trains are approaching 50 years in service and while that might sound impressive to some, you have to remember 50 years isn't good for a train. The cars are almost always in the shop and for two years straight, they have been taken off their designated line for A/C issues. There was even rumors about bringing the R44s (the same class with the structural problems). While those rumors turned out to be relatively unfounded, I think it says something about the R32s' reliability when people are talking about bringing trains that could be structurally unsound back to the active roster just to meet service demands.

 

While it may seem like I'm bashing, hating, etc. the R32s, please don't misconstrue my thoughts and opinions as petty car class favoritism because it's far from it. I'm just getting tired of people defending the cars like they're the best performers in the system, when in reality, it's quite the opposite. Yes, the cars have some nostalgic value, but that's it.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

lance25 stole my thunder on this issue. He is dead on. The R32s are an impressive fleet that has withstood the test of time, but it is time to retire them. Nothing can be great forever. Even the best sports athletes lose their ability to be good. The R32 in recent years have had various problems which includes all the Air Conditioning troubles they have had. I mean, the problem has gotten to the point where the T.A. is considering bringing back the R44s, a fleet of cars with a massive history of structural and mechanical problems. As lance25 stated, most riders are not railfans. Most riders want two characteristics from their trains: comfort and reliability. The 47 Year Old R32 does not provide either of those. The NTTs provide those two characteristics. It is why I love the R160A and R160B so much. Those cars provide everything all these old cars do not provide: reliability, solid construction, useful technology such as the FIND Display, and comfort. In conclusion, most people are not railfans. They just want a comfortable and reliable ride. It is time to retire the R32.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe rehabbing the R32's might work. Like painting them in the colors they had before the GOH's, and add the sky blue seats, removing the roll signs they have now and adding LCD displays, give a LCD front roll sign display like the ones on the R160's, repainting the interior white, putting in new floors, cleaning out the smell of the car, adding the clock strip signs like ones on the R160's, and adding that strip map similar to the ones on the R160's. That should stop most complaints.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Maybe rehabbing the R32's might work. Like painting them in the colors they had before the GOH's, and add the sky blue seats, removing the roll signs they have now and adding LCD displays, give a LCD front roll sign display like the ones on the R160's, repainting the interior white, putting in new floors, cleaning out the smell of the car, adding the clock strip signs like ones on the R160's, and adding that strip map similar to the ones on the R160's. That should stop most complaints.

 

What...

 

It's not worth it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well currently the R46 are on the C, so I thought riders would be more happy with the R46.

 

The R32's will be able to handle until 2017, even 2020 (if they stay that long then the MTA should at least do a little fixing-up on them). But the R42's are already almost dead, I don't know why they keep running the lives out of the R42's. I mean, ENY with the J is hard enough for the R42's, so I really don't know why the MTA would put the R42's on the A to rust them out even more.

 

Putting the R46s on the (C) was not much of an upgrade for its overweight riders. They only things they enjoy from them are the wider seats, roomier interiors, and less bumpy ride. Other than that, R46s are a downgrade from the R32s because they are fat looking, slow, dark, dirty, have the worst MDBF of all cars in the system, and their air-conditioning is actually worse than the R32s based on my recent experience. The R211s cannot come soon enough and every subway car has to retire eventually.

 

As for the R42s, once the R32s get their SMS in 2012-13, 50 of those cars will hopefully be sent to ENY to replace the them. The only thing I will miss from them is laughing at the misery everyone else endures when they ride those rusted tin cans. When (J)(Z) riders see an R42 train coming, many are willing to wait an extra 10 minutes for the R160A train behind it and for those who cannot, they cringe every time they see an R160A train on the other side. So hilarious!

 

From the barely readable front display to the ugly interior colors, I cant stand those models, I wasnt too fond of the 44s either, but I look forward to seeing the R179s on the A and C

 

Do not expect the R179s to go on the (A)(C), especially since they are not coming for another six years. They might be 100% 75 footers by then, which of course would be great due to their riders need their wide seats and roomy interiors to support their huge asses. The R42s, not the R32s, have the ugliest interiors of all cars, though the beige paint on the R32s tends to peel off. Even the R40/40M interiors were better looking than them.

 

Like it or not, the R32s are the only reminders of how subway cars used to look like with their front end flip dot sign, side signs being next to the window instead of above it, beige interiors, and IRT style box shape. The design of the R44s and beyond make the cars look fat and chubby.

 

Man I tell everyone right now those R32s do not look their age. If they were made of Carbon Steel then that would be a different story.

 

If the R32s were made of carbon steel, they would like R42s and probably be gone now. People seem to have forgotten that more than 60% of the R32s are gone, including the 10 GE cars and all of the Phase II rebuilds. Now the remaining Phase I cars are being pushed way beyond their limits despite losing their bothers. R32s certainly look younger than all of the other car types built afterward that have retired. When I told a few aspiring railfans that the (C) train uses the system's oldest cars, they were very surprised.

 

That I can't deny.

 

Me too, but hopefully, once they get SMS, their performances will improve. People are bashing the R32s just because they run on a line that happened to rank worst in the system for three straight years. They are not entirely to blame for the ©'s poor performance. Even if it was using R42s, R46s, R68/68As, or even R160s, it will always be among the system's least favored primarily due to its long scheduled waits, which car type has no impact on at all, and break downs will always be inevitable since most of its station entrances are at the extreme platform ends, which due to its shorter trains will result in people holding the doors and doing other things that damage the cars. Annoucement quality on the other non-NTT cars are not very great either.

 

And this R32 thing gets brought back over and over again....They are ONLY retiring late cause THEY ARE ALL STAINLESS STEAL. Otherwise, sometimes when you walk inside an R32 your gonna be boiled. You think the MTA really wants to put these cars with broken LCD signs for the route, bad A/C, and broken things? NO. If it weren't that the R44's had problems, these R32's would be in the bottom of the atlantic by now.

 

The R32s were supposed to retire in Fall 2009 when they were 45 years old, which IMO is still very good for a New York City Subway car. This was pushed back a year due to the positioning problems caused by the R40/40M/42s on the (C), even though IMO they should have stayed there because a crappy train should get crappy cars. Now we can enjoy the R32s for a few more years due to unrepairable problems on the R44s, which remain the biggest failures in New York City Subway history. I knew they could not live to see 40 years old or outlive the R32s.

 

How in the world are these trains going to run another 6 years? Maybe 2 or 3 but 6?

 

Once they undergo SMS and are put on the (B) or (M) (which are both part time lines, thus allowing frequent maintenance of these cars) or even the (J) (which is almost entirely elevated, thus lessening the strain on air-conditioning), they can remain in service for another six years.

 

The R32's and R42's are the MTA's version of Brett Favre. Just because you did well in 45 years with the system doesn't mean they need 50+ years. They will drain the maintenance resources of the agency and make the A and C lines more inefficient than they already are. If the MTA can scrape enough cash to get these things out of here before 2017, they BETTER do so.

 

The R42s better get scrapped soon. They cannot survive 50 years in service. Even though they are older, R32s are superior to them in every way with much more durable car bodies, better looking interiors, more comfy seats, less vandalism, and a slightly higher MDBF (though both do not rank very high in that category compared to the system average).

 

The C deserves R68.R68as/ R32s wil look better on the B.

 

I totally agree. It will be a huge upgrade for both lines. Real brighton riders like me can enjoy the system's two best cars, the sleek and shiny R32s on the (B) (even though they are not enough to make that line 100% R32s) and red hot R160s on the (Q), while the obese Fulton Street and Upper Manhattan riders get the system's two fattest cars. R32s will make railfanning on the Brighton Express a lot more fun with faster runs and the railfan window, even better than the fast, but hideous and rotting R40s. The slow R68/68As really kill the express run there as well as 4th Avenue and Central Park West for the (D).

 

Of course, (C) riders may not like the R68/68As too much because like the R46s, they are fat, slow, dirty, and have been breaking down much more frequently than ever (it is amazing how their MDBF went from best in the system to second worst in just six years as proven by the huge drop in breakdown rates for the (:( and (D) trains in this year's State of the Subways Report Card, though they still performed above the system average). They are probably begging the MTA to give them the R160s, which is why Fulton riders were so happy whenever the (F) was rerouted there, but too bad they are not going to get them and the G.O. I mentioned is not likely going to happen again since construction at Jay Street-MetroTech is completed. Most riders on all other lines the R160s currently serve (including the (N)(Q)) love them and will be furious if they are taken away.

 

its great for a railbuff point of view that the r32 will keep going they can last all subway cars have issues and can be fixed all i see now is R32 bashing and A/C line bashing if you dont like the cars dont use the line.

 

Exactly, if you do not like the cars a certain line uses, stop complaining and just avoid that line entirely. I did that for the (E) when it suffered the biggest downgrade in NYCS history in January 2009 (switching from the sleek and shiny R32s to the rusted and ugly R42s) until it became 100% R160s six months later. I also avoided the (A) starting in October 2008 (when the R40/R40M/42s replaced the R32/38s there while the R44s stayed put) until the retirement of the ugly fatties last summer. It was not that hard, especially since other trains supplement both lines. Now I am starting avoiding the (B) until its chubby R68/68As are put somewhere else because they used to be great, but now suck, which is why Brighton riders like me (except for those who need to join a gym or fitness center) who used to love them hate them now, instead opting for the superior R160s on the (Q) even though it is the local.

 

Avoiding the (C) should not be a problem since the (A) runs alongside it during its entire run, especially if you love the R46s. For Manhattan riders, the (1) train can be an alternative and in Brooklyn, the B25 is there to transport the many unhealthy Fulton Street riders who cannot climb one flight of stairs without becoming short on breath like my late grandmother to Jay Street-MetroTech, where elevators are available. All the fast food restaurants along that street need to be replaced with gyms and playgrounds so residents can finally start trimming down. Perhaps that is why New York City Transit is keeping the R32s on the (C), using it as propaganda to get people to exercise more if they want to fit into the cars. Of course, putting 75 footers on certain lines may imply that it is okay to be bloated and a disgrace to humanity.

 

I am waiting for Flushing Express to come and say that this is a good thing, because of his crazy idea of fat people on the (C). ROFL

 

Since you keep mentioning Israel Kamakawio'ole, did you ever thought about the fact that no one talked about his weight problem was why he died so young? If he had greatly slimmed down, he probably would still be alive today, probably married with children and having a great music career. Can you imagine a 750-pound man walking down the streets of New York? He will bowl over anyone in his path and have to be rolled down staircases and slopes to get around.

 

lance25 stole my thunder on this issue. He is dead on. The R32s are an impressive fleet that has withstood the test of time, but it is time to retire them. Nothing can be great forever. Even the best sports athletes lose their ability to be good. The R32 in recent years have had various problems which includes all the Air Conditioning troubles they have had. I mean, the problem has gotten to the point where the T.A. is considering bringing back the R44s, a fleet of cars with a massive history of structural and mechanical problems. As lance25 stated, most riders are not railfans. Most riders want two characteristics from their trains: comfort and reliability. The 47 Year Old R32 does not provide either of those. The NTTs provide those two characteristics. It is why I love the R160A and R160B so much. Those cars provide everything all these old cars do not provide: reliability, solid construction, useful technology such as the FIND Display, and comfort. In conclusion, most people are not railfans. They just want a comfortable and reliable ride. It is time to retire the R32.

 

Actually, it is the R46s, not the R32s, that have been having air conditioning problems. No matter what, the R44s are not coming back because they are not suitable for service. Other than that, you are right, as much as I hate to see the R32s go, they have to retire eventually. Their retirement was already pushed back twice, i wonder how long can they go. Railfans hate the R160s because they are jealous that they are replacing their beloved old cars and do not get the fact that nothing lasts forever and everyone and everything has to go eventually. They use minor technical problems on the R160s as an excuse to say they suck while staying completely silent about the major mechanical and structural problems of their favorite cars that resulted in their retirement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TL;DR

 

Agreed and probably full of mindless, fact-less, opinionated drivel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.