R188 Discussion Thread

[MHV9218]

Ehh... eventually the will be mostly R62As. No point in catching them now; eventually they'll be everywhere. Soon the R142A's on the are going to be the tough catch.

 

As a daily reader, I've caught the R62A a couple times. Personally, I don't mind it that much. The A/C is fine, they're extremely clean and if you ask me, they're just as reliable as the R142As. The only thing I really ask the to do is to replace the lights... compared to the R142A, the R62A lights are extremely dim.

 

The biggest difference is that they are significantly slower. I take the for 11 stops every day, the 62As cannot keep up in rush hour with the narrow doors and lesser capacities. My usual train runs 3-4 minutes late whenever it's a 62A, which is a bit of a pain in the ass.

 

Still, as a railfan, I like the old dogs on the line. 

[AndrewJC]

As a daily reader, I've caught the R62A a couple times. Personally, I don't mind it that much. The A/C is fine, they're extremely clean and if you ask me, they're just as reliable as the R142As. The only thing I really ask the to do is to replace the lights... compared to the R142A, the R62A lights are extremely dim.

 

Am I the only one who finds the R142A (etc.) lighting too bright? It's a subway car, not an operating room.

[RestrictOnTheHanger]

that because you rode the newest built car, wait until another year or two when its making buckled noises.

Didn't catch a car number, but it had a c/r position at the west end

[realizm]

Ehh... eventually the will be mostly R62As. No point in catching them now; eventually they'll be everywhere. Soon the R142A's on the   are going to be the tough catch.

 

Yes but many are trying to get all the R142A pics they can on the and all the R62A pics on the while it lasts, on camera.

Edited November 22, 2013 by realizm

[Fan Railer]

Random question: I presume that during weekdays, the R188 set bounces around between all local round trips and "express trip - local trip," right? Or does it stay assigned to one type of run per day?

[realizm]

Random question: I presume that during weekdays, the R188 set bounces around between all local round trips and "express trip - local trip," right? Or does it stay assigned to one type of run per day?

 

Now, the T/Ds are switching up assignments on a R188 as an assigned functioning express during rush hours (on the fly, as needed) as the typical weekday progresses. This was a very recent change in rapid transit operation of the NTT in service on the IRT Flushing line.

 

So dont be suprised if you see a R188 flying by killing it on the express to Main Street and vice versa at random.

[ScreechyFlange]

Now, the T/Ds are switching up assignments on a R188 as an assigned functioning express during rush hours (on the fly, as needed) as the typical weekday progresses. This was a very recent change in rapid transit operation of the NTT in service on the IRT Flushing line.

 

So dont be suprised if you see a R188 flying by killing it on the express to Main Street and vice versa at random.

Saw one on YT, it definitely was flying.

[FlushingExpress]

Just a quick question/suggestion,

 

I noted that during rush hours, the announcements in Manhattan say "This is a Queens bound 7 train, the next stop is ..."

wouldn't it benefit riders more if the announcements were similar to the 6 line during rush hours?

 

E.G. "This is a Flushing-Main Street bound 7 train making express stops in Queens, the next stop is Vernon Boulevard- Jackson Avenue" 

 

That announcement would be pointless since the only has three stations in Manhattan and all trains terminate at Main Street-Flushing unlike the . Of course, the weekday afternoon to the Bronx announcement was the best one ever made and will surely be missed when the R188s are all in service. RIP "This is a Pelham Bay Park-bound train making express stops in the Bronx."

 

 

With the addition of the circle/diamonds on the 62As, it is possible for a train to come in as a local and go back out as an express. The R188s are pretty much the same thing since its all digital signs. The does it every day, it would come down to Brooklyn Bridge as a then go right back out as a

 

Yeah, unfortunately, that has been problematic for the since it has two northern terminates, not one. Oftentimes, I see a Parkchester-bound 6 with "Pelham Bay Park" on its top destination sign and vice-versa, greatly confusing riders, especially weekday mornings when all Bronx-bound trains are local. The LED lights don't help much since the diamond has made some riders think it will make express stops in Manhattan.

 

The biggest difference is that they are significantly slower. I take the for 11 stops every day, the 62As cannot keep up in rush hour with the narrow doors and lesser capacities. My usual train runs 3-4 minutes late whenever it's a 62A, which is a bit of a pain in the ass.

 

Still, as a railfan, I like the old dogs on the line. 

 

Yes, I have noticed that too with the R62A trains despite this happening many times on that service (i.e. a train is late due to increased time spent at stations and forced to run express at a certain point). Its riders and crew look even more miserable than ever with old cars. If crowding and dwelling time become a huge problem, we can kiss the R62As on the goodbye just like how the MTA got rid of the R46s on the in the early 1990s because of crowding problems along 53rd Street. Same thing happened with the when it used R62s.

 

 

Rode the the 188s around 530. Buddy of mine was operating. Its just weird seeing a NTT on the .

 

Yep, and it's weird to see R62As on Lexington Avenue since we've gotten so used to the NTTs. It's weird to see R160s on the and fat R46s on the as well for me since we are so used to the opposite

Edited November 24, 2013 by FlushingExpress

[553 Bridgeton]

Rode the the 188s around 530. Buddy of mine was operating. Its just weird seeing a NTT on the .

[BM5 via Woodhaven]

Rode the the 188s around 530. Buddy of mine was operating. Its just weird seeing a NTT on the .

I don't blame ya, I'm so used to seeing R62A's, that it looks like a black sheep.

[ttcsubwayfan]

Yes, I have noticed that too with the R62A trains despite this happening many times on that service (i.e. a train is late due to increased time spent at stations and forced to run express at a certain point). Its riders and crew look even more miserable than ever with old cars. If crowding and dwelling time become a huge problem, we can kiss the R62As on the goodbye just like how the MTA got rid of the R46s on the in the early 1990s because of crowding problems along 53rd Street. Same thing happened with the when it used R62s.

 

What do you envision happening, exactly? Sending the converted R188s back to the where they can be redundant for the next 10 years?

 

Also, did the not have R62s until the 2000s? It hardly seems like the same scenario.

[RollOver]

R62s did fine on the and they ran there until it became 100 percent NTT.

[Fresh Pond]

That announcement would be pointless since the only has three stations in Manhattan and all trains terminate at Main Street-Flushing unlike the . Of course, the weekday afternoon to the Bronx announcement was the best one ever made and will surely be missed when the R188s are all in service. RIP "This is a Pelham Bay Park-bound train making express stops in the Bronx."

 

 

 

Yeah, unfortunately, that has been problematic for the since it has two northern terminates, not one. Oftentimes, I see a Parkchester-bound 6 with "Pelham Bay Park" on its top destination sign and vice-versa, greatly confusing riders, especially weekday mornings when all Bronx-bound trains are local. The LED lights don't help much since the diamond has made some riders think it will make express stops in Manhattan.

 

 

Yes, I have noticed that too with the R62A trains despite this happening many times on that service (i.e. a train is late due to increased time spent at stations and forced to run express at a certain point). Its riders and crew look even more miserable than ever with old cars. If crowding and dwelling time become a huge problem, we can kiss the R62As on the goodbye just like how the MTA got rid of the R46s on the in the early 1990s because of crowding problems along 53rd Street. Same thing happened with the when it used R62s.

 

 

 

Yep, and it's weird to see R62As on Lexington Avenue since we've gotten so used to the NTTs. It's weird to see R160s on the and fat R46s on the as well for me since we are so used to the opposite

 

 

They removed the R46s off the for the simple fact that an 8 car 75' train has less doors available for boarding (32) compared to a 10 car 60' train (40). The 62As & the 142s/188 have the same amount of doors, just that the NTTs doors are foot wider.

[SevenEleven]

Just a quick question/suggestion,

 

I noted that during rush hours, the announcements in Manhattan say "This is a Queens bound 7 train, the next stop is ..."

wouldn't it benefit riders more if the announcements were similar to the 6 line during rush hours?

 

E.G. "This is a Flushing-Main Street bound 7 train making express stops in Queens, the next stop is Vernon Boulevard- Jackson Avenue" 

 

They should have just added the Local/Express portion into the announcement. Three stops or not, the runs by itself. There's won't be any confusion compared to the , using the same style announcements. Either way, if you can't figure out that express trains leave Times Square from one track, a circle from a diamond or by reading the strip map while holding everyone up, then I don't know what to say.

[Grand Concourse]

What do you envision happening, exactly? Sending the converted R188s back to the where they can be redundant for the next 10 years?

 

Also, did the not have R62s until the 2000s? It hardly seems like the same scenario.

And it made more sense to give the older cars to the part time 3 line. I think the original plan was to give the R142s to the 3 until it was changed to bump the R62s over to the 3 and make the 3 100% R62s.

 

As usual he's overstating the issues. Even with the R142as on the 6, they still have the <> on the front, so not like it really matters if people are confused about if the 6 in manhattan is express. R62As have less space due to the cabs, but it's like a loss of maybe 4 seats and 4 standees per car (8 x 8 = ~64 riders that can't cram themselves into the train). Yes it adds up, but it's not end of the world drastic. 

 

I also love how he speaks for other workers. I won't say 100% are for or against the old cars returning, but I kinda doubt it's everyone that's 'miserable'. 

[R62AR33]

And it made more sense to give the older cars to the part time 3 line. I think the original plan was to give the R142s to the 3 until it was changed to bump the R62s over to the 3 and make the 3 100% R62s.

 

As usual he's overstating the issues. Even with the R142as on the 6, they still have the <> on the front, so not like it really matters if people are confused about if the 6 in manhattan is express. R62As have less space due to the cabs, but it's like a loss of maybe 4 seats and 4 standees per car (8 x 8 = ~64 riders that can't cram themselves into the train). Yes it adds up, but it's not end of the world drastic. 

 

I also love how he speaks for other workers. I won't say 100% are for or against the old cars returning, but I kinda doubt it's everyone that's 'miserable'. 

Wasn't the original plan to have the and be half R62 and half R142 but thanks to bloomberg he wanted the to be all NTTs so the got all the R62s from the . As for the like you said , people will be confused no matter what ,wether its R62As or R142As because sometimes the announcements or Leds on the R142As stop working . Also there are workers that are happy that R62As are back on the , because the trip is a little shorter . Keep in mind the workers that are not happy about the R62As back on the  , when next pick comes try  will jump to the , , and to be with the NTTs , same as for the workers on the that aren't happy about the R188s going on the line will try and jump to the , and to be with the R62/As .

Edited November 25, 2013 by R62AR33

[NYtransit]

Caught it express a few days ago 

[Lance]

@R62R33:

The original plan for the numbered lines was as follows:

- 62As

- 142s

- mostly 62s, some 142As

- 142As

 

http://www.thejoekorner.com/carassignments/IRT2002-proj.htm

 

Politicking may have played a part in where the cars wound up in the end, but really it made more sense that the 4 got the 142s since it's a much busier line than the 3 is or was.

[Grand Concourse]

Exactly. I don't buy the politics bs. The 4 is a full time line and was more demanding. I don't think the R62s can't handle the 4, but since the 3 and 4 shared the same yard, it wasn't that big a deal to just shift over the R62s to the 3. Plus They have enough R62s (with a few spares) to cover the whole 3 line, so no need for a 2nd fleet to run on it.

They also ordered some extra R142As for the 4 as well, the R142s (supplements).

[realizm]

I don't think the R62s can't handle the 4, but since the 3 and 4 shared the same yard, it wasn't that big a deal to just shift over the R62s to the 3. Plus They have enough R62s (with a few spares) to cover the whole 3 line, so no need for a 2nd fleet to run on it.

They also ordered some extra R142As for the 4 as well, the R142s (supplements).

 

All facts true but I feel differently abut the R62's performance, the MDBF is decent as of August 2013 in the official report. The R62s did well from at least in 1984 along with the redbirds from what I remember as a kid until the R142's//A came to town. The redbirds had to retire as they were decades old in change keep in mind not the R62's advanced SMEE IRT cars.

 

But then again the performance of the R142's/A has not exactly been high in recent years. Anyway not to create a backlack, not my intentions,please bring in the R188 /R142/A Conversion cars to the Flushing line swap it with the ,  done. But I disagree on the excellent performance of the R6A's/A. The reason we have this arrangement is because Kawasaki is responsible for creating this order of the R188's for the MTA in prep for CBTC and an extension. 

Edited November 25, 2013 by realizm

[R62AR33]

All facts true but I feel differently abut the R62's performance, the MDBF is decent as of August 2013 in the official report. The R62s did well from at least in 1984 along with the redbirds from what I remember as a kid until the R142's//A came to town. The redbirds had to retire as they were decades old in change keep in mind not the R62's advanced SMEE IRT cars.

 

But then again the performance of the R142's/A has not exactly been high in recent years. Anyway not to create a backlack, not my intentions,please bring in the R188 /R142/A Conversion cars to the Flushing line swap it with the ,  done. But I disagree on the excellent performance of the R6A's/A. The reason we have this arrangement is because Kawasaki is responsible for creating this order of the R188's for the MTA in prep for CBTC and an extension. 

In General if you check the mdbf , the R62/As are still performing well and actually better then the NTTS , we just have to check in about 3-4 yrs how they will have been doing on the , to actually be able to compare the R62A and R142As performance on the .

Edited November 25, 2013 by R62AR33

[realizm]

In General if you check the mdbf , the R62/As are still performing well and actually better then the NTTS , we just have to check in about 3-4 yrs how they will have been doing on the , to actually be able to compare the R62A and R142As performance on the .

 

 

Here are the figures. The R62's 181,538 and R62/'s 154,670 MDBHs against an 163,367 MDBF for the R142's  and 116,119 MDBF for the R142A's currently still on the . All against an average of 160,059 for the entire fleet. So they are performing better in term of MDBFs when all for car types mentioned are compared. Plus they have like what? 30 years to go before retirement?

Edited November 25, 2013 by realizm

[leo2car]

What happened to the R143s? Thats a huge drop.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

@R62R33:

The original plan for the numbered lines was as follows:

- 62As

- 142s

- mostly 62s, some 142As

- 142As

 

http://www.thejoekorner.com/carassignments/IRT2002-proj.htm

 

Politicking may have played a part in where the cars wound up in the end, but really it made more sense that the 4 got the 142s since it's a much busier line than the 3 is or was.

That's only because of how the runs in comparison to the . 

Edited November 25, 2013 by Via Garibaldi 8

[realizm]

What happened to the R143s? Thats a huge drop.

 

When CBTC apparatus fails on the R143's it was realized by many of us here in an unrelated discussion that CBTC failures on the trains and even if the signal system fails forces a block signal pattern on the line either way then many R143'2 will go OOS and counts as a failure in a given day and week. Hence the MDBF. This happens alot.