Jump to content

R46 SIR retrofit Discussion


East New York

Recommended Posts

Yeah, chill with my queen tonight at home as she gets home from work in an hour or so she just told me via text, then trek out to Queens tommorow. My uncles are coming and want to meet her in person. We might  sleep over. It should work we can either take the bedroom or the hooked up attic in the house. Probably go out for a night at the movies on Saturday. Keep it simple simon. I'm sure she will be down for a quiet weekend. That's what I'll do. I'll see if she accepts, she may have other ideas.

 

I know I'm bad: I'll order food tonight, I mean it's Friday, who wants to cook on a Friday?



I'll prepare a hot bubble bath for her then give her a foot massage for her tired feet. She loves that. let me stop, I'm way off topic, sorry dudes.




@ Metro CSW: Yeah It's my fault, I know, its because I don't know when to shut up sometimes. I can see every one now "realizm please STFU you moron!"

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Replies 383
  • Created
  • Last Reply
LMFAO!! +9000

 

 

I fricking love this episode!

 

Ahem. Good morning depotofrelax. This NYCTF English 101. Please sign in the attendance sheet and print clearly. Sit down. Please pass forward your homework. Today we shall be grading posts made on this forum and review gramatical concepts that will improve your internet posting skills.

 

Thank you.

 

Mr. depotofrelax I have graded your post. Please note my comments and corrections on your work.

 

 

 

WRONG DAMMIT!

 

The question mark (?) also known as an interrogation point, interrogation mark, question point, query, or eroteme, will need to be inserted at the end of the sentence to indicate the notion that that you are making an inquiry concerning an unknown phenomonon in regards to the topic you will be discussing. In this thread we will be discussing the fate of the R44s which are currently in service on the Staten Island Railway.

 

 

 

 

WHAT'S WRONG WITH YOU?!

 

Again the use of the question mark will reformulate this statement into a question rather than a redundant statement for us to lol at.

 

 

 

NO YOU DID NOT WRITE THIS SENTENCE CORRECTLY!

 

This is the way to make that same statement:

 

"That is why some say this is the forgotton borough"

 

 

THIS IS ILLOGICAL! GET YOUR DAMN FACTS STRAIGHT!!!

 

Otherwise this is indeed a well prosed sentence. Excellent job Mr. depotofrelax. :)

 

 

 

Good. A simple sentence. +1. Very good. :)

 

 

 

 

WRONG FDAMMIT!

 

Again, you forgot the question mark particle to change the context of the sentence.

 

 

 

 

WRONG! DO YOU UNDERSTAND SIMPLE MATH?!

 

2013 - 1971 = 42.

 

Therefore we can conclude that the R44 is 42 years old.

 

OMFG WHYYYYYY??

 

 

See me after class Mr. depotofrelax......

Actually, some R44s arrived in 1972 and 1973. The delivery was between 1971-1973. So oddly enough, Depotofrelax is somewhat accurate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, of course it's still running. We have yet to see whether or not the (MTA) is gonna refit the R46s this month so...

 

Its not the refit itself, but the contract award for said refit. The refit could happen anytime from next year to towards the end of this decade. 

 

And thats IF its still on the table. 

 

Retrofit.

 

The MTA Board has not yet been asked to approve a contract to retrofit the R46's for SIR, and the next board meeting is on March 13. The contract can't possibly be awarded until after that date.

 

But it hasn't been on the table since the R179's were ordered, if not earlier, so the point is moot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It indeed states that the R46's will be awarded a retrofit by Jan 2014. Eat that AndrewJC! You may have been right that they won't be retrofitted this year but it seems like you were wrong when you stated that they won't be retrofitted at all. The report speaks for itself.

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Link to comment
Share on other sites

as many "delays" in contract awarding that has happened over the years, its once again a wait and see. But its obviously still on the table. It was delayed, not cancelled. Werent the 179's delayed?

 

 

According to the MTA.infoo dashboard page, they're bookmarking $20,000,000 for the refit. Delayed 6 months, with an expected completion date of 2014.

 

Not one word of "cancelled"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Still a placeholder. It won't happen. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

It's DELAYED. If they wouldn't do it they would remove it. Maybe you should look up the meaning of the word "delayed".

I'm sure he knows the meaning of the word. The fact is, delayed can mean two things, held for a later date, or held to see if its worth doing. That's why it might have not been removed. but the fact is, its still on the table.

 

I really think its gonna be a few years before they go on with it. The refit doesn't have to happen right away if the R44s are still performing well enough to last a few more years. A lot of posts here are based on the assumption that the refit is happening asap while I believe that if indeed the refit does happen, it won't be till the latter half of the decade when these cars will be on SIR tracks. SAS is bejlhind schedule so any "car shortage" argument may be mute by the time it opens. The refit R46s may become a "placeholder" themselves for a short time till SI gets a new fleet. and yes, if its even for a year, they will spend the money to have cars between the retirement of the 44s and the arrivals of their new fleet, whether they will be 211's or something else. I say that because well,it was originally supose to be the 179s and we saw what happened with that idea. and that's my point. delayed can mean anything can still happen but its still on tbe table with a pricetag of $20,000,000. So its a serious option on their end. And unless any of us are on the Board, we can't say what the final decision will be.

 

Sent from my BlackBerry PlayBook using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It indeed states that the R46's will be awarded a retrofit by Jan 2014. Eat that AndrewJC! You may have been right that they won't be retrofitted this year but it seems like you were wrong when you stated that they won't be retrofitted at all. The report speaks for itself.

 

And until a few days ago it stated that they would be awarded a retrofit by January 2013. That didn't happen, and neither will this.

 

 

It's DELAYED. If they wouldn't do it they would remove it. Maybe you should look up the meaning of the word "delayed".

 

It can't be removed until the funds allocated have been reallocated elsewhere. Until that happens, it will continue to be reallocated. As I explained on December 30: "When the current Capital Plan was being developed, a chunk of money was designated for R46 conversions to SIR. Whether that was the true plan back then or if it was merely a placeholder, I do not know, but with the R179 order configured as it is configured, it is obvious that it is now only a placeholder. It will remain a placeholder until something takes its place, since the capital dollars assigned to it have to be assigned to something."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe those 5-car R179's frees up 36 R46s for SIR service. Sure its not the full 64, but maybe all they will need is to replace 36 R44s in SIR? And yes, they can run two car types on one line. Anyone who thinks thats not the case doesnt follow operations on the "Main Line". They can still run 27 of the R44s that are in the best condition. Its obvious that thr SI R44s arent bad compared to their NYCT counterparts. 

 

Its an Observation. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What about 64 R179s in four car sets that can free up 64 R46s in four car sets? I mean think about it. I doubt AndrewJC and Art Vandelay will agree with this even though the numbers would work. R46s are 8-cars in sets of four like the 260/300 R179s. At least that makes sense there.

 

I mean the 40 R179s in sets of five could push off 32 R46s from the (A) to the (F) meaning 40 R160s could bump to Coney Island for a probable restoration of the (W) as the (Q) will require slightly less cars for SAS.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Remember the (Q) ran 18 trains when it ran between 57-7 and Coney Island until it ran 22-23 trains as it does currently for the Astoria extention after the (W) service's elimination. It might do the same for its rerouted SAS extention. So there be enough cars for the (W) or increased (N).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What about 64 R179s in four car sets that can free up 64 R46s in four car sets? I mean think about it. I doubt AndrewJC and Art Vandelay will agree with this even though the numbers would work. R46s are 8-cars in sets of four like the 260/300 R179s. At least that makes sense there.

 

I mean the 40 R179s in sets of five could push off 32 R46s from the (A) to the (F) meaning 40 R160s could bump to Coney Island for a probable restoration of the (W) as the (Q) will require slightly less cars for SAS.

Even I cant agree with this.

 

The 4-car sets are bumping the R32. And its most likely the C that will get them. The 4-car 179 for 4-car 44 wont work. You do realize that will reduce the train length by about 60 feet right? thats basically removing a car from each SIR train. 

 The numbers dont work because the train car lenghts have a difference of 15 feet per car. Thats where the math is flawed.

And IMO, when SAS does finally open (which i heard on the news is 2019), who says the W is coming back? Maybe the Service will just stay with the N. Or maybe they may add a few trains to the N. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your first point on sending the 4 car R179s to SI makes no sense. I don't see how you will get away with running less than 300' car trains during the middays and less than 375' during the rush hours. It's why I think it has to be 75' car trains for SI, so hopefully the R211s will be 75' car trains as well.

And if that was for the subway, you will still be short on train length. 4x60= 240', a full 60' short of a full half.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow, how did I know you and Far Rock Depot miss read my post? Like really? WTF.

 

Re-read again. I said 64 R179s in 4-car sets can free up 64 R46s in four-car sets for SIR. Meaning 4-car R179s will free up those 64 R46s for SIR. If my math is correct, 64 R179s in sets of four is the same as 64 R46s in sets of four. Why the hell would I want them to run 60 foot shorter trains on SIR.......? As I said before, 64 R179s in 4-car sets can free up those 64 R46s in four-car sets for SIR, meaning the R44s on SIR be replaced by said R46s. As planned, R46s will go to SIR and the (C) train and the BMT Eastern Divsion is mostly likely to run with R179s. And also I said that those 40 R179s in sets of five would go on the (A) to push off 32 R46s from Pitkin to Jamaica, and results that Jamaica would push off 40 R160s to Coney Island for a possible restored (W) or some more (N) service. Never in my post that states that they should send 4-car R179s to SIR and keep the R46s on the subway. Am I clear enough to you guys now?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I also want to say something else, I also believe that those 5-car sets of R179's would be better off at 207th Street and run on the (A) line. As AndrewJC said long ago back at the R179 Discussion Thread, if those 5-car R179s go to Jamaica or Coney Island, either depots would be stuck maintaining a small fleet of another car type on top of its primary fleet of two others (R46s and R160s at Jamaica, R68/68As and R160s at Coney Island). There wouldn't be no point in maintaining a small fleet of another car type when there's two others that are more focused on. East New York depot is the only exception obviously because the (MTA) didn't have enough money for more 4-car R160s to make the (J)(Z) exclusively of those (hence those 48 out of the original 400 R42s being left there).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow, how did I know you and Far Rock Depot miss read my post? Like really? WTF.

 

Re-read again. I said 64 R179s in 4-car sets can free up 64 R46s in four-car sets for SIR. Meaning 4-car R179s will free up those 64 R46s for SIR. If my math is correct, 64 R179s in sets of four is the same as 64 R46s in sets of four. Why the hell would I want them to run 60 foot shorter trains on SIR.......? As I said before, 64 R179s in 4-car sets can free up those 64 R46s in four-car sets for SIR, meaning the R44s on SIR be replaced by said R46s. As planned, R46s will go to SIR and the (C) train and the BMT Eastern Divsion is mostly likely to run with R179s. And also I said that those 40 R179s in sets of five would go on the (A) to push off 32 R46s from Pitkin to Jamaica, and results that Jamaica would push off 40 R160s to Coney Island for a possible restored (W) or some more (N) service. Never in my post that states that they should send 4-car R179s to SIR and keep the R46s on the subway. Am I clear enough to you guys now?

No, YOU misread what was written. R179's are 60' in length each car (60' 6" to be axact). R44's are 75' in length. a 4-car set of R179's will be physically shorter that a 4-car set pf R44's. This will lead to a lesser amount of passengers per set. When replacing One length of car with another, the size of the car is a HUGE factor. a 300' train (+/- 2.5 feet) has to either be four 75' cars or five 60'6" cars. A set of  four car 75' cars are 300' nd a set of four car 60'6" cars is 302.5'. This is why I specifically said that the car lengths makes your math flawed. You math reduces the number of passengers per four car train. 

 

So in order for those 64 R46 cars-in four car sets- to be freed up, you WILL need the 5-car sets of R179's. ( a five car 179 is the same length as a four car 46) But the thing is, the four car sets of R179s are slated to replace the R32's Which are used in 8 cars consists on the C. Replaced by 8 car consists of 179's. tit for tat. 

 

The only 46s that can be freed up by the 179s will be by the FIVE car sets. (300' vs 302.5')

 

Now do you understand?

 

As i said before, its not just number of cars but car length that is also a factor. Blame the MTA for this back in the 70s. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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