Jump to content
Attention: In order to reply to messages, create topics, have access to other features of the community you must sign up for an account.

R188 Discussion Thread


East New York
 Share

Recommended Posts

^ Not only that, but UES residents would get pissed off quite quickly if they were in essence "downgraded" to not-NTT cars. I can't quite imagine trying to run R62s on the Lex anymore; it's already insane with better-designed cars. I don't see why the (7)'s fleet couldn't get upgraded with CBTC unless there were some sort of technology hindrance, but I'm not an expert on train technology so I'm sure someone has a better understanding of why the MTA would rather swap fleets. Come to think about it, wasn't the (L) equipped with CBTC-compatible R143s before CBTC went into service? It would make more sense to bring in the CBTC-compatible R188s before attempting to work with CBTC, at least having the Flushing Line outfitted by that point. But I guess money's the important factor right now. Oh well, it'll be a shame to see the Lex not be fully-NTT after almost a decade.

You just answered your own question. Money is the important factor right now. It would cost more to retrofit the older R62As with CBTC technology than it is to retrofit the R142As. It would also be more difficult to put that equipment in the smaller R62A cabs. Furthermore, the MTA doesn't have the money to buy a 400+ car fleet for the (7) line, so retrofitting existing NTT cars is the way they're going. It's not a bad idea to do that.

 

UES riders rode R62As on the (6) for many years. They didn't complain about them then. Why would they now? The R62As are good cars that are holding up well. They don't look much worse than they did 10 years ago.

 

And before the R62As, UES riders rode R17s, R29s and R36s that were rolling wrecks on steel wheels. I'm sure there were riders who complained about the hot, graffiti-covered trains that greeted them every day, but those same complaints were echoed system wide. Be glad we're not dealing with that right now. And you won't be dealing with that when R62As return to the (6), which they will.

Edited by T to Dyre Avenue
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 7.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Let's not make a big deal out of this. It's not like any of these lines will be getting R32's or R42's.

 

However, there could be some negative PR from this move. I and many riders believe that the newest car fleets should be placed on the most crowded lines. Newer cars cost less to maintain, don't break down as frequently and offer a more comfortable ride than the older fleet. For those reasons, I feel it is important for the (4), (5) and (6) lines to keep the R142/R142A fleet. Riders may not cry bloody murder but some and maybe most Lex riders will be pissed if they have to ride subways that are not as bright and inviting as the one's they have been used to. Plus R62A's were not designed to handle the types of crowds present on today's Lex Av line.

 

The (4),(5) and (6) lines also blend well together with the uniform car fleet. That cohesion makes it easy for tourists to navigate the Lexington Avenue line and shouldn't be messed with. We don't want a situation like the Broadway/7 Av line where the (2) stands out from the (1) and (3).

 

Besides, does the (7) line even need newer trains? It should get ATS instead of CBTC which would be a less costly installation and save more money by avoiding this R188 car order.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Newer doesn't always mean better. Because the R142s are basically computers on wheels, they can be just as if not more of a headache to maintain over machinery parts.

 

Broadway is more or less the 'tourist line' and they have R68s and R46s in addtion to the R160s, so what difference does it make about a line being 100% NTTs? If people can see what train they are getting on, then what's the big deal?

 

Like i've been saying, if people don't like riding the R62As on Lexington, they can take a taxi or the bus. Not my problem they feel they are too good for older cars. The MTA doesn't have the money to just retire still functional trains for new trains.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Newer doesn't always mean better. Because the R142s are basically computers on wheels, they can be just as if not more of a headache to maintain over machinery parts.

 

Broadway is more or less the 'tourist line' and they have R68s and R46s in addtion to the R160s, so what difference does it make about a line being 100% NTTs? If people can see what train they are getting on, then what's the big deal?

 

Like i've been saying, if people don't like riding the R62As on Lexington, they can take a taxi or the bus. Not my problem they feel they are too good for older cars. The MTA doesn't have the money to just retire still functional trains for new trains.

 

Why can't (7), <7> line riders continue to ride the R62A's and keep everything as is? Give the Flushing line ATS as their signal upgrade instead of CBTC. It's saves money and it's a win-win situation for everyone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Besides, does the (7) line even need newer trains? It should get ATS instead of CBTC which would be a less costly installation and save more money by avoiding this R188 car order.

 

Begs the question:

 

Can R62As operate under ATS?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let's not make a big deal out of this. It's not like any of these lines will be getting R32's or R42's.

 

However, there could be some negative PR from this move. I and many riders believe that the newest car fleets should be placed on the most crowded lines. Newer cars cost less to maintain, don't break down as frequently and offer a more comfortable ride than the older fleet. For those reasons, I feel it is important for the (4), (5) and (6) lines to keep the R142/R142A fleet. Riders may not cry bloody murder but some and maybe most Lex riders will be pissed if they have to ride subways that are not as bright and inviting as the one's they have been used to. Plus R62A's were not designed to handle the types of crowds present on today's Lex Av line.

 

The (4),(5) and (6) lines also blend well together with the uniform car fleet. That cohesion makes it easy for tourists to navigate the Lexington Avenue line and shouldn't be messed with. We don't want a situation like the Broadway/7 Av line where the (2) stands out from the (1) and (3).

 

Besides, does the (7) line even need newer trains? It should get ATS instead of CBTC which would be a less costly installation and save more money by avoiding this R188 car order.

 

You just did exactly what you wanted to avoid- making a big deal about it. The R62A's are just as bright and inviting as any other train cars- remember- they have a polished stainless stell frame. And also, riders won't care what train cars they take- as long as it's clean, works, and get them from point A to B - they'll continue to take the train. As other users stated on this very thread, they will most likely go to the (4) and (6) trains- the LED Signs that state whether the train is express or local also help. As for the matter of tourists or other people on the Broadway/7 Av line where the (2) stands out from the (1) and (3), people are going to need to start listening to the announcements and look at the train rollsigns to see which train they are taking. Of course, since most people who do take (4)(5) or (6)<6> get on/off in Manhattan, it shouldn't be a problem. You also state that the "R62A's were not designed to handle the types of crowds present on today's Lex Av line." Well, in case you forget, the R62's used to run on (4)(5)(6)<6> before they were given R142's. They've handled the crowds before, they can handle them again. If they can handle the elements as well as crowds of running on the el while on the (7)<7>, they can surely handle the crowds and tubes of the Lex Av. Line.(Note, they also undergoing SMS) Lastly, you also ask why the (7)<7> needs newer trains- they need it to be able to run the CBTC, as well as providing a chance to undertake SMS on the R62's. Also note, at least 300 to 360 cars of the R142's are undergoing conversions to make them into R188's- but only 130-150 cars are going to be new, brand new- the "true" R188's. As for the CBTC question, well, the (MTA) has been planing to install it for a long time- and funding has already been provided on the old capital plan, as well as in the future capital plan- for the same reasons the (L) got CBTC.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you ^

 

Is it that hard for some people to handle? It's like the 'sky is falling' on when R62As are moved back to Lexington Av. So many posts in this thread by sometimes the same people about the same issue. When it happens it happens... the MTA decides the moves, not us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you ^

 

Is it that hard for some people to handle? It's like the 'sky is falling' on when R62As are moved back to Lexington Av. So many posts in this thread by sometimes the same people about the same issue. When it happens it happens... the MTA decides the moves, not us.

 

Where these R62A's end up is not the problem. The fact that they have to be moved in the first place is the problem. The ENTIRE IRT is doing fine with their current fleets. Why rob Peter to pay Paul when Paul isn't even asking for anything? I don't hear (7) line riders complaining about R62A's so why take them away from that line? In fact I have rode the (7) line and found the R62A to be a good car model for that line. Just keep everything as is and upgrade the Flushing line to ATS. The Dyre Av and White Plains Road lines are getting ATS,why not the (7)?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't get the hate on the R62's, and the R62A's they are working cars. They are about to get their overhauls as well so people should stop complaining.

 

You're right. They are working cars. So there is no need to move them from the lines they currently run on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Where these R62A's end up is not the problem. The fact that they have to be moved in the first place is the problem. The ENTIRE IRT is doing fine with their current fleets. Why rob Peter to pay Paul when Paul isn't even asking for anything? I don't hear (7) line riders complaining about R62A's so why take them away from that line? In fact I have rode the (7) line and found the R62A to be a good car model for that line. Just keep everything as is and upgrade the Flushing line to ATS. The Dyre Av and White Plains Road lines are getting ATS,why not the (7)?

 

It's not because they want to, it's because they have to.

 

As stated many times before in this thread, you CAN'T install CBTC in the older cars as they are probably not compatible. The NTTs are compatible and that's why those trains are going to be moved to the (7) because the MTA wants that line to run using CBTC.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Where these R62A's end up is not the problem. The fact that they have to be moved in the first place is the problem. The ENTIRE IRT is doing fine with their current fleets. Why rob Peter to pay Paul when Paul isn't even asking for anything? I don't hear (7) line riders complaining about R62A's so why take them away from that line? In fact I have rode the (7) line and found the R62A to be a good car model for that line. Just keep everything as is and upgrade the Flushing line to ATS. The Dyre Av and White Plains Road lines are getting ATS,why not the (7)?

 

Again:

 

Begs the question:

 

Can R62As operate under ATS?

 

One crucial difference between the Dyre and White Plains vs the Flushing is that... the former two use NTTs. Trains with computers.

 

@IntExp -- I took the (7) and the (4)(5) every weekday for the past four years. The NTTs are definitely brighter and more inviting than the R62A.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't get why you people are saying this. The R62 and the R62A are getting redone. It's called SMS (Scheduled Maintenance Service). They will get the blue seats, the new floors, better lighting, full motor rebuilds, the NTT technology, the LED displays on the side along with the front, and the announcements. What more do you damn foamers want? It doesn't matter where they go, but it seems like people are complaining about the R62's on the Lexington Avenue Line, because they are old trains. For god sakes they are trains they take you somewhere. You can take pictures of them, but instead of complaining about them, because they are old you guys should get a girl and a better hobby or something, or sleep with a train.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't get why you people are saying this. The R62 and the R62A are getting redone. It's called SMS (Scheduled Maintenance Service). They will get the blue seats, the new floors, better lighting, full motor rebuilds, the NTT technology, the LED displays on the side along with the front, and the announcements. What more do you damn foamers want?

 

Let's see:

 

If needed, if needed, if needed, if needed, no, no, no.

 

SMS is supposed to keep the car in working order -- preventive maintenance. NOT to add LED displays and automated announcments. Those would be covered in an overhaul.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't get why you people are saying this. The R62 and the R62A are getting redone. It's called SMS (Scheduled Maintenance Service). They will get the blue seats, the new floors, better lighting, full motor rebuilds, the NTT technology, the LED displays on the side along with the front, and the announcements. What more do you damn foamers want? It doesn't matter where they go, but it seems like people are complaining about the R62's on the Lexington Avenue Line, because they are old trains. For god sakes they are trains they take you somewhere. You can take pictures of them, but instead of complaining about them, because they are old get a girl and a better hobby or something.

 

I don't know who you are talking to, but I doubt that SMS will make R62As CBTC compatible. All SMS does is to keep them in 'running shape' [like a tune up] as opposed to a total overhaul as was done in the 80s.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest lance25
Begs the question:

 

Can R62As operate under ATS?

 

Yes, they have on the (1) line if those clocks along Broadway-Seventh Avenue are any indication.

 

However, ATS (Automated Train Signalling [i hope that's correct]) is quite different from CBTC (Communications-Based Train Control). CBTC encompasses all the features of ATS, along with the ability to add more trains to the line, which is the (MTA)'s ambition. You can't do that with ATS alone. That just allows dispatch or whoever controls the signalling to do so from a remote, centralized location.

 

I don't get why you people are saying this. The R62 and the R62A are getting redone. It's called SMS (Scheduled Maintenance Service). They will get the blue seats, the new floors, better lighting, full motor rebuilds, the NTT technology, the LED displays on the side along with the front, and the announcements. What more do you damn foamers want? It doesn't matter where they go, but it seems like people are complaining about the R62's on the Lexington Avenue Line, because they are old trains. For god sakes they are trains they take you somewhere. You can take pictures of them, but instead of complaining about them, because they are old you guys should get a girl and a better hobby or something, or sleep with a train.

 

Please don't go on saying that things will happen when you don't know for sure. That article from the Times I posted last month or so indicated that the (MTA) was looking into whether the benefits would outweigh the costs of adding NTT-like features to the R62s and R68s. There was and still is nothing set in stone as of yet. The idea could quite easily be scrapped for a variety of reasons, most of which I'd believe involve a lack of funds.

 

As to this ongoing debacle about Pelham and Lexington Avenue local line riders not liking the return of the R62As to the (6) line, yes some people will complain. That is the way of these folks. People will complain about anything, but I can guarantee you with the utmost certainty that those riders will continue to use the (6) even with the "older" cars because, let's face it, they'll have to get to work, school, etc. Plus, like someone else stated in this thread, they aren't getting trains like the rust-bucket R42s or the rickety R32s.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can take pictures of them, but instead of complaining about them, because they are old you guys should get a girl and a better hobby or something, or sleep with a train.

 

Pot calling the kettle black...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...you guys should get a girl and a better hobby or something, or sleep with a train.

 

That's alright, I'll stick to my buses and trains....They cost less to deal with, they don't talk back, they don't nag you if you don't call, they don't bleed, you don't have to buy them dinner or flowers and when you leave them, they don't ask why & stalk you! :P:P:p (jk jk jk, sorry had to have a little fun!)

 

But I gotta agree, this is pure pot calling the kettle black. How do you gauge what anyone's range is in this hobby? Seriously? And YOUR here!!!! I'm a die hard transit fan, no doubt, but trust when I tell you I have other hobbies that aren't as forthcoming to this board which including DJ'ing and Cooking. You don't know what anyone else does outside this board unless you're under them 24/7/365.

 

Am I right or wrong? Can't be pointing the fingers when you right here with us, maxin' and relaxin'. Chiiiiillllllllllll!!! Just putting logic where it needs to be.

Edited by Vintage Soul
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The (4),(5) and (6) lines also blend well together with the uniform car fleet. That cohesion makes it easy for tourists to navigate the Lexington Avenue line and shouldn't be messed with. We don't want a situation like the Broadway/7 Av line where the (2) stands out from the (1) and (3).

 

Besides, does the (7) line even need newer trains? It should get ATS instead of CBTC which would be a less costly installation and save more money by avoiding this R188 car order.

Why is having a "uniform car fleet" on the Lex such a big deal? There is no other trunk line anywhere in the system that has one. What is so different about the (4), (5) and (6) trains that they must have a "uniform car fleet?" And please don't say the crowds and/or tourists because other trunk lines get very crowded and see lots of tourists.

 

So what if the (2) has different cars from the (1) and (3) trains? So what if the (R) has different cars from the (N) and (Q) trains? And so what if the (6) has different cars from the (4) and (5) trains? This is not Boston, Philadelphia or Stockholm where every subway line is a self-contained line with no track connections to the other lines. This is New York, where trains interline extensively and have multiple track connections. Unless the MTA ever decides to buy a 6000-car fleet for the whole system and replace everything currently on the rails in one shot, you will NEVER see a uniform car fleet in the system. And they will never do that because it's too expensive and impractical to do so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the (MTA) is looking for a uniform fleet for it's subways and railcars because is cheaper to maintain. You'll never have TOTAL uniformity because of the different ages of their equipment and the (in)ability of the manufacturers to provide large orders of replacements at one time. That's why you have Kawasaki, Bombardier, Alstom, and the like providing parts of an order instead of one large order from one source. Throw the capital budget woes in the mix and we end up with supplemental orders from one or more builders. That being said, I would guess that any new car orders for the TA or the railroads will be based on NTT for a long time to come. They might not be totally interchangeable electrically but they will all look alike Just my opinion. Carry on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To Be Honest I think the (4) is going to get the R62A's, they already have R62A's for the shuttle at the Jermone yard, so it would make the most sense to give the (4) the R62A's and send the later R142A's to the (6) along with the R142's, this would make the most sense because the (4) only has 1 terminal in both directions thats Utica ave and Woodlawn and late nights New Lots.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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