R188 Discussion Thread

[Threxx]

Thats was why I said the would run R62/R142As mean while and later it would loose the R62s back to the and look now the instead of mixing R142A/R62As will just be R62As.

 

Please stop using run-on sentences.

 

It really wouldn't make sense for the to have 2 types of cars in the first place. How large is Corona Yard anyway?

[Fan Railer]

Please stop using run-on sentences.

 

It really wouldn't make sense for the to have 2 types of cars in the first place. How large is Corona Yard anyway?

 

Current numbers state that it holds 409 R62A's and any additional non-revenue service cars (work trains and test trains, ie: R188 set)

[junjun798]

Please stop using run-on sentences.

 

It really wouldn't make sense for the to have 2 types of cars in the first place. How large is Corona Yard anyway?

 

Well it currently hold 431 R62As and the currently 370 R142As and in 90s corona held almost all of the R33/R36 fleets WF so it should be pretty big.

[Fan Railer]

Well it currently hold 431 R62As and the currently 370 R142As and in 90s corona held almost all of the R33/R36 fleets WF so it should be pretty big.

 

Once again with the run on sentences. But with that aside, it is 409 R62As and 11 R188s as of this date (MTA Subway Yard Roster - TTMG's Transitwiki).

 

And one more correction, the R33WF contract totaled 40 cars while the R36WF contract totaled 390 cars, which turns out to be 430 cars, which is about the same as the number of cars housed at Corona today. So saying that 430 cars from the 60s and 70s is indicative of the assumption that the yard is "pretty big" is a weak argument, seeing as the yard currently houses roughly the same number of cars.

 

Keep in mind that they are installing layup trackage south of 34th street station on the extension that would also serve to store trains. This way, minimal expansion, if any at all, would be required at Corona itself. Besides it doesn't look like there's much room to expand at all... (checks bing maps), ok, perhaps 2-3 more tail tracks on the western end of the yard, directly adjacent to the barn, but once again, that's 2-3 extra trainsets. This means that the remaining 5-6 trains would have to be stored at the layup tracks south of 34th. But of course, that'll be no problem, considering a full shut down of the line would be rare, implying that there will always be trainsets running.

 

EDIT: after counting the number of tracks long enough to accommodate full length 11 car sets on bing maps again, I found the total to be 36 tracks which satisfy the requirements. 36*11 = 396 cars; this makes sense, seeing as there are smaller stub tracks throughout the yard that would facilitate storage of the extra 13 cars, although this is hardly necessary, as some of the cars will always be in service.

[junjun798]

Once again with the run on sentences. But with that aside, it is 409 R62As and 11 R188s as of this date (MTA Subway Yard Roster - TTMG's Transitwiki).

 

And one more correction, the R33WF contract totaled 40 cars while the R36WF contract totaled 390 cars, which turns out to be 430 cars, which is about the same as the number of cars housed at Corona today. So saying that 430 cars from the 60s and 70s is indicative of the assumption that the yard is "pretty big" is a weak argument, seeing as the yard currently houses roughly the same number of cars.

 

Keep in mind that they are installing layup trackage south of 34th street station on the extension that would also serve to store trains. This way, minimal expansion, if any at all, would be required at Corona itself. Besides it doesn't look like there's much room to expand at all... (checks bing maps), ok, perhaps 2-3 more tail tracks on the western end of the yard, directly adjacent to the barn, but once again, that's 2-3 extra trainsets. This means that the remaining 5-6 trains would have to be stored at the layup tracks south of 34th. But of course, that'll be no problem, considering a full shut down of the line would be rare, implying that there will always be trainsets running.

 

EDIT: after counting the number of tracks long enough to accommodate full length 11 car sets on bing maps again, I found the total to be 36 tracks which satisfy the requirements. 36*11 = 396 cars; this makes sense, seeing as there are smaller stub tracks throughout the yard that would facilitate storage of the extra 13 cars, although this is hardly necessary, as some of the cars will always be in service.

 

Thanks for the correction but that's wikipedia.It can be changed at anytime just letting you know and those numbers are probably not correct.

[Fan Railer]

Thanks for the correction but that's wikipedia.It can be changed at anytime just letting you know and those numbers are probably not correct.

 

That's not Wikipedia, and not everyone can change it. If you want to question Trevor Logan's inside information, go right ahead, but I wouldn't recommend it. In addition there is a bit of personal research that you just ignored as well, so it seems clear that your critiquing needs a bit of critiquing.

 

If only people actually found ways to do their own research to verify things that they hear instead of taking everything they see/hear at face value. What a novel idea

 

Edit: Here's that personal research I was referring to: http://www.bing.com/maps/#JnE9LkNvcm9uYSUyYllhcmQlN2Vzc3QuMCU3ZXBnLjEmYmI9NDAuNzUzODM2MTY1MDQxNCU3ZS03My44NDQxMDI2NTQ5ODQ1JTdlNDAuNzUxNDY4NTA4ODY3NyU3ZS03My44NDcxOTc4Njk5NDIx

[IRT Bronx Express]

Wikipedia and TTMG aren't the same... unlike Wikipedia, TTMG has reliable information.

 

edit: Fan Railer's explanation is better.

[Fan Railer]

Wikipedia and TTMG aren't the same... unlike Wikipedia, TTMG has reliable information.

 

edit: Fan Railer's explanation is better.

 

Thank you. But I must say I'm still dissatisfied with several trivial inaccuracies regarding rolling stock specifications on the TTMG wiki page, ie, the R160A doesn't have bombardier motors, but whatever =/.

[junjun798]

That's not Wikipedia, and not everyone can change it. If you want to question Trevor Logan's inside information, go right ahead, but I wouldn't recommend it. In addition there is a bit of personal research that you just ignored as well, so it seems clear that your critiquing needs a bit of critiquing.

 

If only people actually found ways to do their own research to verify things that they hear instead of taking everything they see/hear at face value. What a novel idea

 

Edit: Here's that personal research I was referring to: Bing Maps - Driving Directions, Traffic and Road Conditions

 

Got u thanks for the info.

[BM5 via Woodhaven]

Well lets just see what happens when the R188 come out and let's see what the MTA does. The R188'S however are made for the sole purpose to replace the R62.

[junjun798]

Well lets just see what happens when the R188 come out and let's see what the MTA does. The R188'S however are made for the sole purpose to replace the R62.

 

Nope to displace the R62As start retirement in 2027 R188s is to take em off of flushing. Just to put them back on the line

[Fan Railer]

Nope to displace the R62As start retirement in 2027 R188s is to take em off of flushing. Just to put them back on the line

 

First impression: Wut? 0_o SERIOUSLY, learn to type legibly. Your online sentence construction is so horrendous, an illiterate person would probably be able to read that =_=.

 

Secondly, I'm sure this was just a liberal tossing out of terms. Granted, it would have made more sense to phrase it as "replace the R62A on the 7," but anyone who's been following this information for all of 3 and a half years would know that by now.

[junjun798]

First impression: Wut? 0_o SERIOUSLY, learn to type legibly. Your online sentence construction is so horrendous, an illiterate person would probably be able to read that =_=.

 

Secondly, I'm sure this was just a liberal tossing out of terms. Granted, it would have made more sense to phrase it as "replace the R62A on the 7," but anyone who's been following this information for all of 3 and a half years would know that by now.

 

Thanks Im gonna try and improve my online sentencing.

[BronxReese]

i dont think it was 8 sets of R142As but Could the possibility of 2 or 3 of the (4)s R142As going to the explain why in recent months ive seen 2-3 R142 sets from the train on the so far ive seen 6711-6715-6791-6795 at my home station 176 street as a 10 car set in January. and 6675-6671/6595-6591 while it skipped 176 street when something happened at 170th street a few days ago but there was another set if im not mistaken 67xx but i do remember it being 3 sets from the (2)/(5) trains. if it has nothing to do with whats going on with the why is the receiving these cars from the (2)/(5). im not being smart really i just want to know why the are getting these cars

[Princelex]

i dont think it was 8 sets of R142As but Could the possibility of 2 or 3 of the (4)s R142As going to the explain why in recent months ive seen 2-3 R142 sets from the train on the so far ive seen 6711-6715-6791-6795 at my home station 176 street as a 10 car set in January. and 6675-6671/6595-6591 while it skipped 176 street when something happened at 170th street a few days ago but there was another set if im not mistaken 67xx but i do remember it being 3 sets from the (2)/(5) trains. if it has nothing to do with whats going on with the why is the receiving these cars from the (2)/(5). im not being smart really i just want to know why the are getting these cars

 

First off, cars from the have not gone over to the . Second, I don't believe that the trains sets from the and that were on the had anything to do with the train at all. I don't know why they were there to begin with but I believe that at least one of those sets, if not both of them are back on there regular lines. I know I haven't seen them for a while on the .

[East New York]

The and the swap train sets ALL the time. I ride the , , , and almost daily, and have never seen cars from the on the , and see cars swapped between the and the at least 2-5 times a week.

[Guest lance25]

You mean and right? Because I have never seen the using line sets or vice-versa.

[East New York]

You mean and right? Because I have never seen the using line sets or vice-versa.

 

Thanks for the correction. That is what I meant. I live off the 2/5 line now in Flatbush, and was previously staying in Harlem temporarily between the 2,3,4,5 & 6 lines.

[trainfan22]

You mean and right? Because I have never seen the using line sets or vice-versa.

 

I seen it once, a line 142 on the a while back, rode it from Nevins to Flatbush, I only wish it was R142A though....

 

But I don't think its that common, as I'm pretty sure if it was on occasion they would send a 142A, some railfans would have pics/vids of the 142A on the by now.

[junjun798]

First off, cars from the have not gone over to the . Second, I don't believe that the trains sets from the and that were on the had anything to do with the train at all. I don't know why they were there to begin with but I believe that at least one of those sets, if not both of them are back on there regular lines. I know I haven't seen them for a while on the .

 

According to info that I got the gave 80 R142As to the line as extras.I don't know if its true or not.When the R188 order was awarded the line had 370 R142As all of a sudden it has 450 sets so it seems like it got 80 sets extra from the and I know they were from the because they were option order R142As the line runs the only primary order R142As.

[R188 7857]

No disrespect, but I've talked to this junjun guy on youtube using my own knowledge from the workers and mods here, and he actually disagrees with me and makes ideas that I think will NEVER happen.

May I ask you junjun where you got your information? You shouldn't really trust anyone unless they are a retired or current worker. But there are some people who ask workers for info like ENY, so those are the people who you should really trust, not commuters, and especially big railfans - they make up a variety of fantasy ideas.

[junjun798]

No disrespect, but I've talked to this junjun guy on youtube using my own knowledge from the workers and mods here, and he actually disagrees with me and makes ideas that I think will NEVER happen.

May I ask you junjun where you got your information? You shouldn't really trust anyone unless they are a retired or current worker. But there are some people who ask workers for info like ENY, so those are the people who you should really trust, not commuters, and especially big railfans - they make up a variety of fantasy ideas.

 

Ok thanks for the correction bro.

[Princelex]

According to info that I got the gave 80 R142As to the line as extras.I don't know if its true or not.When the R188 order was awarded the line had 370 R142As all of a sudden it has 450 sets so it seems like it got 80 sets extra from the and I know they were from the because they were option order R142As the line runs the only primary order R142As.

 

That bolded sentence was the first thing you said that actually made sense! LOL

 

Real talk though, I don't know the specific number of R142A's on the but I can tell u that if the had really given up 80 of those cars, don't you think there would hardly be any of those 142A's on the now? And if they gave the their 142A's, then what cars are in it's place?

[junjun798]

That bolded sentence was the first thing you said that actually made sense! LOL

 

Real talk though, I don't know the specific number of R142A's on the but I can tell u that if the had really given up 80 of those cars, don't you think there would hardly be any of those 142A's on the now? And if they gave the their 142A's, then what cars are in it's place?

 

The R142s would likely take their place.

[Fan Railer]

Honestly, there are sources online with this information. I have no idea why you keep speculating, and making statements on what you have heard without doing your own research.

 

Car Assignments

 

All of this information is based off of insider reporting.

 

The number of R142As on the has not changed since 2004. They have always run 400 cars in revenue service during rush hours since that year. So the car transfers you speak of are non-existent in the context of the last 3 years.