R188 Discussion Thread

[ScreechyFlange]

what the  should have done was to sms the R142A's since they were already in a beat up condition,before sending them to kawasaki

Agreed

[MHV9218]

This dumb-ass idea to convert the R142As to R188s is the stupidest idea the MTA has hatched in quite awhile...

Now they're paying for it with its faliures...

Actually a pretty good idea all around when you think about it. Saves a lot of money, moves a troubled fleet off of the harshest line, pretty good thinking. A couple early teething issues are hardly "failures" -- besides, talk to the R46s and the Rockwell trucks if you think early problems affect the fleet in the long run.

[Grand Concourse]

The R188 thing, I think they could've waited 10 more years till the R62s were to be retired and then give the 7 brand new trains. It's stupid how these ntt aren't backwards compatible. R160s were supposed to be compatible with the R143s, but that Canarsie yard damaged set is still being used as a parts train. I'm sure they'll fix the R142A coverts, but now there will be an issue on if the converts can last 50 years total or if the inserts might be retired after 30yrs unless they build more A car ends in the future.

And the same troll who considers the 75 footers to be "fat" and "slow", even claiming that the , and "suck" entirely for that one reason.

I still don't get his obsession with putting R62As on the 2 when it would have more issues with the rollsigns than the 6. It's one thing if the 2 and 5 had the same north south terminals, but I don't believe they are even close to each other (i mean isn't the 3 and 4 between them?). That'd be more time consuming than a 6 and . Just a guy getting all pissed off over the old trains coming back. 

Edited February 22, 2014 by Grand Concourse

[R62AR33]

This dumb-ass idea to convert the R142As to R188s is the stupidest idea the MTA has hatched in quite awhile...

Now they're paying for it with its faliures...

Its smart because it saves money and the R62As on flushing have to go somewhere else.. they couldn't just get a new order because where would the R62As go to , you can't retire them when they have still 12-15 yrs left in service. So the ideal thing was to Convert existing cars and send the R62As to the line thats losing the converted cars, since kawasaki got the order it was for the R142As from the to get converted and have the R62As come back to the . Had Bombardier got the order to convert the R142 then you likely would have seen the R142s from the get converted and we would have seen the R62As go to the , and those R142As would likely have gotten bumped to the to make the 100% R62As. So it's really about saving money and sending the R62As somewhere else.

Edited February 22, 2014 by R62AR33

[R188 7857]

This dumb-ass idea to convert the R142As to R188s is the stupidest idea the MTA has hatched in quite awhile...

Now they're paying for it with its faliures...

That wasn't really stupid. It saved them money.  They didn't have to waste their money to get new trains just to replace the R62A's that had still years to go, and why order new trains when you have identical ones already running? It was actually a good idea because it can extend the lives of the R142A. They get beat up on that line and the R62A are perfect for the , be cause the also has a rush hour express.

 

And the same troll who considers the 75 footers to be "fat" and "slow", even claiming that the , and "suck" entirely for that one reason.

Also the guy who searches up EVERY SINGLE R62A video and comments crying about his "favorite announcement"....... Yea well nobody gives a damn.

[ScreechyFlange]

They couldn't wait 10 more years they need to replace those aging signals.

[XcelsiorBoii4888]

Yeah it's cool that they are converting the R142As. Only thing that I didn't like was when they didn't clean up that converted set.

[Lance]

A couple of things with the idea of waiting for the 62As to retire. First off, it obviously hinges on the 62As being retired. We all know they'll hit the end of their optimal lifespan sometime in the mid 2020s, depending on the car. That does not mean the cars will all be removed from service at that time. They may be scrapped earlier or later. It all depends on how the cars perform in the intervening years. That does little to fix the myriad of issues plaguing the Flushing line, like how the signals over there are ancient, or how busy the line is and that it's at or near its present capacity.

 

Secondly, I'm sure we all know how the MTA is concerning schedules and timetables. Even if the cars were ready to be removed exactly in 2025, do we have an idea of when the MTA would order their replacements? I remind you the 32s presently on the rails are nearly 50 years old, but various circumstances have forced the agency to constantly delay the 179 order to replace those aging cars. What's to say something similar won't occur a decade from now.

 

And before someone asks, no, the 142As could not have gone to Flushing back in 2000. Corona couldn't do anything with the cars until their recent yard upgrade a few years back.

 

Also, I want to address a couple of other things. 1) Yes, this is a forum and all opinions should be respected. The problem lies in those few who pass their opinions as definitive facts. It's especially annoying when they don't stop or realize it. If there is some change in the plan for the 62As and the converted 188s, it really needs to be backed up with proof. If people are outright avoiding the 62As for whatever reason (which I don't believe in the slightest to be frank), we need some proof to prove your claim. 2) What is it with your fixation with that "express stops in the Bronx" announcement Flushing Express? I'm kind of curious because it's bordering on an obsession. It's just a recording done by a near-catatonic Catherine Cowdery, based on how slow and subdued it is. Between this and that long-winded F transfer at 59 St, the next stop announcement, the part most passengers care about, is cut off a lot because they're too damn long.

 

Just felt I should say something.

[XcelsiorBoii4888]

What F train announcement at 59st? It gets cut off?

[Lance]

The one about how riders can transfer to the F at Lexington Av-63 St with their MetroCard. The problem with it is that it's so long, it doesn't finish before the doors open. Conductors either have to let the full transfer announcement play out or cut it off with a manual interruption before opening the doors or the normal destination/next stop announcements won't play. Some conductors wait; others don't.

[XcelsiorBoii4888]

I want to see how that sounds. Which 59st or ?

Edited February 23, 2014 by XcelsiorBoii4888

[YankeesPwnMets]

Announcement for the :

 

This is 59th Street. Transfer is available for the , , , and trains. A free transfer is also available for the train by walking to the Lexington Avenue-63rd Street Station and using your MetroCard.

 

Most of the time, the latter part of the announcement won't be finished by the time the doors open. This is especially true with the because the express hauls ass into 59th, and by the time the train stops, the announcement still has several seconds to go. It happens a lot with the too because the runs fairly fast. When the doors open before the transfer announcement finishes, the transfer announcement just keeps playing and the "next stop" announcement won't play.

 

 

Edited February 23, 2014 by YankeesPwnMets

[XcelsiorBoii4888]

Oh ok thanks. I see what you mean.

 

Now sorry for going a lil off topic, so let's continue with the R188 discussion.

[Grand Concourse]

I take it the cut off is a rush hour thing? when i ride the 4/5 to 59th (midday/weekends) I hear the whole announcement about the F and the metrocard transfer. I dunno about the 6, but i take it that is trimmed because it makes more stops closer together than the 4/5?

Edited February 23, 2014 by Grand Concourse

[ScreechyFlange]

I want to see how that sounds. Which 59st or ?

It does it on the BMT Broadway too.

[MHV9218]

I take it the cut off is a rush hour thing? when i ride the 4/5 to 59th (midday/weekends) I hear the whole announcement about the F and the metrocard transfer. I dunno about the 6, but i take it that is trimmed because it makes more stops closer together than the 4/5?

 

Trimmed?

 

What happens is that the announcement plays well into the train's arrival, so the C/R can either leave it to play without opening doors or cut it off to save time. Generally the latter happens. 

[LIRRHicksville]

Between this and that long-winded F transfer at 59 St, the next stop announcement, the part most passengers care about, is cut off a lot because they're too damn long.

 

Just felt I should say something.

There are about 5 posts already pertaining to this.  What does this have to do with the R188's?   We have plenty of discussion about R62A's being transferred also, but it atleast is somewhat on the topic concerning the swapping of ex-R142A's.   Don't get mad, but could we please stay on topic?  Thanks

Edited February 23, 2014 by LIRRHicksville

[Grand Concourse]

Trimmed?

 

What happens is that the announcement plays well into the train's arrival, so the C/R can either leave it to play without opening doors or cut it off to save time. Generally the latter happens. 

oic. i guess i never paid much attention to it then. But for the most part I have heard at least the mc transfer to the F part.

[LTA1992]

I'm

 

Secondly, I'm sure we all know how the MTA is concerning schedules and timetables. Even if the cars were ready to be removed exactly in 2025, do we have an idea of when the MTA would order their replacements? I remind you the 32s presently on the rails are nearly 50 years old, but various circumstances have forced the agency to constantly delay the 179 order to replace those aging cars. What's to say something similar won't occur a decade from now.

 

 

Um, why do people keep using the R32s as examples when the only reason they are still around is because of extenuating circumstances? Had the R44s not had their issues, the R32s would be gone. Same with those last 42s. It's not like the MTA just decided one day that they prefer the R32s stay. No, they saw the R44s had structural issues, saw that could be a safety issue, and had to change plans. The R32 still being around isn't a good example at the MTA not adhering to it's timetables. In fact, now that I think about it, a lot of the things said about the MTA not keeping timetables are bad examples. Because a lot of them were out of their control.

[NYtransit]

I'm

 

 

Um, why do people keep using the R32s as examples when the only reason they are still around is because of extenuating circumstances? Had the R44s not had their issues, the R32s would be gone. Same with those last 42s. It's not like the MTA just decided one day that they prefer the R32s stay. No, they saw the R44s had structural issues, saw that could be a safety issue, and had to change plans. The R32 still being around isn't a good example at the MTA not adhering to it's timetables. In fact, now that I think about it, a lot of the things said about the MTA not keeping timetables are bad examples. Because a lot of them were out of their control.

I remember some yard worker was complaining about the R62A because its single cars, Had to go through many inspections. Some people say the single car sets usually retire early then usual. But I think the guy was probably mad at the R62A's. The R62's have the pretty high MDBF if im correct

[RollOver]

Yeah. Not suprised at how the did pretty well in terms of breakdown rates for many reasons.

[R32 3838]

I'm

 

 

Um, why do people keep using the R32s as examples when the only reason they are still around is because of extenuating circumstances? Had the R44s not had their issues, the R32s would be gone. Same with those last 42s. It's not like the MTA just decided one day that they prefer the R32s stay. No, they saw the R44s had structural issues, saw that could be a safety issue, and had to change plans. The R32 still being around isn't a good example at the MTA not adhering to it's timetables. In fact, now that I think about it, a lot of the things said about the MTA not keeping timetables are bad examples. Because a lot of them were out of their control.

Even if the R44's stayed they would kept 50 R32's for the eastern div. The MTA knew the R44's had very bad frames, it just came to light a little too late

 

As for the R62A singles I would say a few more cars will be linked but a good chunk will be used for both work and passenger service like they do with the R32's at 207th, that's why I think the singles will go to the , to bump out their 1800's to the plus it makes very simple operation, plus they can use those cars for both passenger and work service especially in the summer months, I know they're trying to phase out the R33WF cars especially now they already got rid of a good chunk of them already

Edited February 23, 2014 by R32 3838

[Lance]

@LTA: Whether it's the 32s or the 44s, the 179 order was delayed by a couple of years due to several issues. That order was supposed to follow directly after the 160 order finished. It didn't and the cars they're supposed to replace are still on the rails, which happens to be the 32s.

 

Also, unlike some people here, I'm pretty indifferent to the 32s. I don't like them and I don't dislike them either. It was just an example of how extenuating circumstances can delay an order and why the MTA shouldn't wait before ordering the new 188s.

[T J Trainman]

What does this have to do with the R-188s??? Stay on topic please? Smh.

[Trainmaster5]

I'm going to jump in here for a moment with my two cents. As others have pointed out this thread is about the R188 cars and the Flushing line. What seems to have happened is that many posters have gotten hung up on the new and converted cars yet miss the big picture. All new rolling stock has teething issues that eventually get worked out. It always happens and that's why these cars are tested. I haven't posted in this thread because the R142A/R188 cars that are running today can have all the kinks ironed out, have the interiors spotless and it still means nothing in the long run. The main focus of the is the signal system, not the rolling stock. If the upcoming CBTC signal conversion project doesn't pan out then all this hype over R188s means nothing. The R188 class of car is just a component of a  major signal project in the long run. If Bombardier was picked we'd be talking about R142s instead of R142As. If they can't get that signal project up and running in good fashion it wouldn't matter what class of car ran on the line.  The real testing hasn't even started yet. Just my opinion. Carry on.