Staten Island Will Not Get Retrofit R46s

[DJ MC]

Credits and thanks go to Gold 12th on Subchat for posting this. Looks like the R44s are going to be run until the R211s arrive.

 

[realizm]

The SIR has figured out a deal with companies capable of specializing in the reproducing and manufacturing of R44 legacy parts no longer in mass production for the space age 75' footers at a lower cost. I've actually meet a forger for a contractor that works with the MTA in this sort of reproduction of legacy parts one time commuting from work.

 

At the same time it was determined that the pressing priority right now with new NTT rolling stock will be with Subways. I'm guessing that the SAS is coming, also the IND QBL CBTC project being in the planning stages, hence the need for CBTC ready cars if they choose to, which I'm pretty sure they will. Very likely CBTC ready R179 and R211 cars, along with, CBTC compatible R160's that can be retrofitted will be needed exclusively in the Subways subdivision, I'm assuming, plus the need to compensate for the current car shortage that is clearly apparent by the lack of ten car sets on the much of it aged SMEE R32's and 8 car NTT R160 sets currently. 

[Mysterious2train]

The SIR has figured out a deal with companies capable of specializing in the reproducing and manufacturing of R44 legacy parts no longer in mass production for the space age 75' footers at a lower cost. I've actually meet a forger for a contractor that works with the MTA in this sort of reproduction of legacy parts one time commuting from work.

 

At the same time it was determined that the pressing priority right now with new NTT rolling stock will be with Subways. I'm guessing that the SAS is coming, also the IND QBL CBTC project being in the planning stages, hence the need for CBTC ready cars if they choose to, which I'm pretty sure they will. Very likely CBTC ready R179 and R211 cars, along with, CBTC compatible R160's that can be retrofitted will be needed exclusively in the Subways subdivision, I'm assuming, plus the need to compensate for the current car shortage that is clearly apparent by the lack of ten car sets on the much of it aged SMEE R32's and 8 car NTT R160 sets currently. 

 

There won't be a need to compensate for car shortage, because this car shortage will become normal eventually. As far as I know, the current plan is to have to 8-car R179s run on the , probably because lengthening it to 10 cars is more expensive than keeping it at 8-cars. 

[realizm]

There won't be a need to compensate for car shortage, because this car shortage will become normal eventually. As far as I know, the current plan is to have to 8-car R179s run on the , probably because lengthening it to 10 cars is more expensive than keeping it at 8-cars. 

 

 I was under the impression it would help to increase the car lengths to 600' long 10 car consists. But indeed, you bring up a valid point I will have to consider.

 

What I am not clear on is how extending the to ten cars may be more cost efficient. Is it because they can save on capital construction costs in the long run by the purchase of less new cars with the tentative NTT orders against passenger load demands along the ? Or by running 8 car consists, they can produce additional carsets for service on the line with the desired effect of increasing the TPH on the local line ? If that's what you mean in terms of the reasoning on the part of those in charge of subway operations, I will have to say you may be correct.

 

I have seen 8 car consists on the that are crushloaded during the AM rush hour in particular between Jay Street and up to at least West 4th or 14th Street. On the PM rush it is less dense on passenger loads on the cars, I've noticed, but... However I would admit on weekends it doesn't seem to be too bad as the passenger load rates are varied (as straphangers leave work at different times @ the PM rush as opposed to the AM rush where they all have to be at work at a certain time between 7-9 AM as a common pattern in terms of work schedules and shifts).

[Mysterious2train]

Right now, the current plan for the R179s is to have 40 cars in sets of 5, presumably for the , and 260 cars in sets of 4 for the , and . The original plan was for 290 cars with an option for 50 more cars and another option for 80 cars after that, although how many cars would be in sets of 4 vs. sets of 5 I don't remember. The MTA came to the conclusion that the current 300-car plan would satisfy their need for rolling stock, taking projected ridership growth and demographic changes into account.

 

I totally agree that the should be 10 cars, but that's more expensive. 

[realizm]

Right now, the current plan for the R179s is to have 40 cars in sets of 5, presumably for the , and 260 cars in sets of 4 for the , and . The original plan was for 290 cars with an option for 50 more cars and another option for 80 cars, although how many cars would be in sets of 4 vs. sets of 5 I don't remember. The MTA came to the conclusion that the current 300-car plan would satisfy their need for rolling stock, taking projected ridership growth and demographic changes into account.

 

I totally agree that the should be 10 cars, but that's more expensive. 

 

Ok that answers my question. Gotcha.

[Grand Concourse]

I still think it's a mistake to leave the C stuck at 8 car trains. If it was 10, then they could swap trains with the A. Are they going to continue swaps with the J in the summer in a few years when the R179s are all here?

 

As for the R46s, good. It doesn't make sense to send down 2 train types within 5 or such years of each other. They may as well just give them the new trains right away or send them something 'newer' (R68, but yeah yeah that's been talked to death).

[R32 3838]

Those R44s need to go, they're in bad shape, plus they're rotting

[Guest Lance]

I still think it's a mistake to leave the C stuck at 8 car trains. If it was 10, then they could swap trains with the A. Are they going to continue swaps with the J in the summer in a few years when the R179s are all here?

Why would they need to? The 32s are on the J to breathe. Hopefully they won't need to do that with the 179s.

[DJ MC]

Aren't the SIR R44s in better shape compared to the now retired NYCT R44s? 

[bobtehpanda]

Seeing as how most of SIR is geared towards long-haul commuter service, it'd be very odd to have bench seating NTTs on them, and probably inconvenient (the multiple times I've been on it during the PM rush, there haven't been more than a handful of standees).

 

I'm going to point out that the R143 order was thought to be enough for the Canarsie Line for several decades. MTA has the ridership projection skills of the average person you pull off the street.

[Q90]

Great! Looks like the SIR will get R211s. Anyways does anyone know what subway lines the R211s would be assigned too? So far the  , Rockaway  , and maybe the   are the only ones I can think of. 

[Amtrak7]

PATCO, which like SIR functions like a commuter railroad, is having all of their cars completely rebuilt. The new design:

 

 

Would such an M7-like plan would work for SIR, or is there too little standing room? I'd imagine SIR trains are VERY unevenly loaded given the layout of St. George Terminal.

 

For comparison's sake, PATCO has 9 non-CBD stops (7 if you count Camden as part of the CBD) and the end to end runtime is 26min.

[realizm]

I still think it's a mistake to leave the C stuck at 8 car trains. If it was 10, then they could swap trains with the A. Are they going to continue swaps with the J in the summer in a few years when the R179s are all here?

 

As for the R46s, good. It doesn't make sense to send down 2 train types within 5 or such years of each other. They may as well just give them the new trains right away or send them something 'newer' (R68, but yeah yeah that's been talked to death).

That would make sense as it would make it a heck of alot easier for the yard dispatchers @ 207th St yard and Pitkin Yard to do so, swapping car consists on the fly, technically.

 

But as Mysterious2train pointed out apparently monetary budget concerns concerning operation costs trumps everything from the official source he linked, so go figure. MTA logic here, sometimes I'll never understand it....

[4P3607]

Aren't the SIR R44s in better shape compared to the now retired NYCT R44s? 

They may be, but they are in worse condition than any other fleet that NYCT is running at the moment. (The R42's i'm not too sure about, but I know the R44 IS rotting on the inside).

[Amtrak7]

I don't know if its just because the SIR is faster, but I would say the R44 rode worse than the R42 (at least the ones I took)

[Vistausss]

Seeing as how most of SIR is geared towards long-haul commuter service, it'd be very odd to have bench seating NTTs on them, and probably inconvenient (the multiple times I've been on it during the PM rush, there haven't been more than a handful of standees).

 

Dont even waste your time on that. People only use SIR for work so they dont really care about it.

[RollOver]

Great! Looks like the SIR will get R211s. Anyways does anyone know what subway lines the R211s would be assigned too? So far the  , Rockaway  , and maybe the   are the only ones I can think of. 

 

The ? Not quite. The and the other two lines you mention are most likely getting the R211s. And maybe the too, because the IND Queens Boulevard Line will be CBTC after the IRT Flushing Line and all cars assigned to the , , and must be equipped with CBTC.

[realizm]

The ? Not quite. The and the other two lines you mention are most likely getting the R211s. And maybe the too, because the IND Queens Boulevard Line will be CBTC after the IRT Flushing Line and all cars assigned to the , , and must be equipped with CBTC.

 

Well that makes sense to me, unless the MTA decides to retrofit more R160's for the new technology but there are no plans for that or else it would have been announced by now. So I think I will have to agree with you on that, the R179's and the R211's may be CBTC ready straight out of the manufacturing plant for IND CBTC. At lest t this point with the current information we have from the MTA on the status of the pending contracts to be fulfilled for both roster types.

[Q90]

The ? Not quite. The and the other two lines you mention are most likely getting the R211s. And maybe the too, because the IND Queens Boulevard Line will be CBTC after the IRT Flushing Line and all cars assigned to the , , and must be equipped with CBTC.

The cannot get R211s because 75 foot cars are banned from operating on that line. But I suppose the rest of them makes sense now.

[realizm]

The cannot get R211s because 75 foot cars are banned from operating on that line. But I suppose the rest of them makes sense now.

 

Well the R179's are to be 60' footers so that may compensate for the limitations on the BMT Jamaica El as they may order 4 car sets, but this again is not officially confirmed although very likely for many reasons. We will have to see if the MTA decides to retrofit some of the R160 car sets for the in anticipation of QBL CBTC, but again this not confirmed nor announced as of now. (yet.)

[Q90]

Well the R179's are to be 60' footers so that may compensate for the limitations on the BMT Jamaica El as they may order 4 car sets, but this again is not officially confirmed although very likely for many reasons. We will have to see if the MTA decides to retrofit some of the R160 car sets for the in anticipation of QBL CBTC, but again this not confirmed nor announced as of now. (yet.)

If the needs CBTC ability then I think they'll go with the modified R160s. Just like how all those R142As are being modified to R188s for use on the , the same thing may happen on the R160s.

[RollOver]

The cannot get R211s because 75 foot cars are banned from operating on that line. But I suppose the rest of them makes sense now.

 

I never said the would get the R211s. Yes, I'm aware that 75 footers cannot run on the BMT Eastern Division. I was implying that any cars presently assigned to the routes that serve the IND Queens Boulevard Line will be equipped with CBTC.

[bobtehpanda]

 

Seeing as how most of SIR is geared towards long-haul commuter service, it'd be very odd to have bench seating NTTs on them, and probably inconvenient (the multiple times I've been on it during the PM rush, there haven't been more than a handful of standees).

 

 

 

Dont even waste your time on that. People only use SIR for work so they dont really care about it.

 

on the contrary, that makes them care about it more, because most of them are heading to/from st. george. less seating means already vocal staten islanders become even more cranky and vocal.

[4P3607]

There's another side to whatever SIR will get next... The cars have to fit railroad standards. Notice how all of them aren't speed capped, they can go 60+ MPH. You can't just take something from NYCT and stick it on SIR. There are a few modifications that need to be made:

>Railroad standards 

>Cars can't be speed capped
>Cars must be singles or in 4/5 car sets (Unless they stopped the 5-car trains during rush hour, I haven't seen that lately)
 

Im pretty sure there's more that I'm not thinking of at the moment. 
There's one thing for sure, I don't think those R44's are going to last that long.

________
And EEWWWW at those rebuilt PATCO cars! They are raping them!