R188 Discussion Thread

[jon2305]

2066-70 & 2076-80 just recently arrived on the couple of days ago.

[RTS9000]

Would this be the right roster for the R62As (I copied this from a quote, hence the weird font/background)?

 

1651-1825 - Westchester    

1826-1830 - 240th  

1831-1840 - Westchester  

1841-1900 - 240th    

1901-1910 - Corona     , singles (except 1909, which is scrapped)

1911-1925 - Westchester    

1926-1960 - Some at Livonia      as 3/4-car sets, some at Corona      (singles)

1961-2090 - Westchester    

2091-2095 - Corona      - will be transferred

2096-2155 - Westchester    

2156-2475 - 240th    

 

I heard that 2071-2075 were also transferred.

[Calvin]

2081-2085, 2091-2095 are the remaining 5-car R62As at Corona from what I've had and the 24 single units included. 

 

2136-2140: returned to Westchester

Edited June 13, 2016 by CH3348

[Javier]

Why does Westchester have a mix of R62A's from Corona and from 240th?

[T J Trainman]

7561-7569-7934-7570 are in service.

[MHV9218]

Think 2081-2085 are on the . I saw them yesterday or Friday, forget which.

 

 

2081-2085, 2091-2095 are the remaining 5-car R62As at Corona from what I've had and the 24 single units included. 

 

2136-2140: returned to Westchester

 

I really thought I saw 2081-2085 on the ...

[Daniel The Cool]

2071-2075 is still on the . I just off that train like 10 minutes ago

[RTS9000]

There is a picture of the new Local/Express sign going around.

 

 

I don't know if the set that "Tech and Transit" mentioned is the one pictured here.

 

IMO the sign looks nice but they could have done something with the number sign.

Edited June 14, 2016 by RTS9000

[LegoBrickBreaker101]

Yeah

 

There is a picture of the new Local/Express sign going around.

 

 

I don't know if the set that "Tech and Transit" mentioned is the one pictured here.

 

IMO the sign looks nice but they could have done something with the number sign.

 

Yeah, not digging that number sign... Still looks kinda interesting.

[Calvin]

that 7 is now orange, not a green/yellow you see on the 142/As.

Edited June 14, 2016 by CH3348

[Javier]

Yea no, NEXT

[MysteriousBtrain]

There is a picture of the new Local/Express sign going around.

 

 

You know what they say, don't fix it if it's not broken.

[jon2305]

PLEASE God just no... That looks like crap.

Edited June 14, 2016 by jon2305

[RTS9000]

that 7 is now orange, not a green/yellow you see on the 142/As.

 

Figured; someone posted a better image.

[Calvin]

 

image: source- from a group discussion

Edited June 14, 2016 by CH3348

[LegoBrickBreaker101]

 

image: source- from a group discussion

 

That actually doesn't look so bad...at least to me

[Tech And Transit]

Yes that was the same set I saw entering the barn last week. And I don't mind it, although I wish they used different colors for the number and I also wish they made one big LED board so that the 7 could be bigger instead of wasting the space on individual strips for the number, circle and diamond.

[Lance]

And here I thought they actually replaced the whole damn sign. I really should have known better. I understand the addition of the circle/diamond indicators as Flushing riders have gotten used to them on the 62As for the past few years. They are very useful when the train is already in the station as you run up/down the stairs to the platform. However, I do not appreciate this half-assed approach with the new indicators/route display jerry-rigged onto the existing displays. Displays that are rapidly deteriorating as they age. At 15+ years old, the 142A electronic signs need to be replaced before they fall apart completely.

 

By the way, this addition removed one of the routing character displays. Instead of the 20-character limit that's on the 142s and 142As, the 188s now can display 19 characters for a route.

[jon2305]

And here I thought they actually replaced the whole damn sign. I really should have known better. I understand the addition of the circle/diamond indicators as Flushing riders have gotten used to them on the 62As for the past few years. They are very useful when the train is already in the station as you run up/down the stairs to the platform. However, I do not appreciate this half-assed approach with the new indicators/route display jerry-rigged onto the existing displays. Displays that are rapidly deteriorating as they age. At 15+ years old, the 142A electronic signs need to be replaced before they fall apart completely.

 

By the way, this addition removed one of the routing character displays. Instead of the 20-character limit that's on the 142s and 142As, the 188s now can display 19 characters for a route.

I truthfully agree with you on the half-assed approach with these indicators. I would think the cause of the lights decaying probably has to do with lack of maintenance over the years, the line did a number on these cars in terms of rigorous service and Westchester seems to have a bad rap when it comes to maintenance. I've had the last 24 hours to think about it and don't mind the look of lights as far as customer convenience goes cause I've witness several times people on the R188s trying to figure out if the trains going local or express without knowing before entering the train. Thats why I think a subway route display on trains is very important for the customer eyes if its on either end of the bonnets like the R62As or on the sides of the train. Again, this whole thing could be just a pilot test before deciding if it would spread out to the other sets.

[Lance]

You know, I see this as an excuse that Westchester treats their cars like crap way too often. There are multiple flaws with this logic.

 

First and foremost, the is one of the busiest lines in the system and the only local line that runs on the east side of Manhattan. The 142As have gone through hell and back over the past 15+ years to make service. If there's a distinct lack of maintenance on the cars, that's because they're in service somewhere on the line.

 

Secondly, why would Westchester intentionally sabotage their own cars by ignoring their maintenance needs? If anything, that would likely bring some sort of investigation on why cars at Westchester perform worse than their counterparts at Mosholu.

 

Speaking of which, that leads to my third point, which is that there are similar problems on the 142As on the as well. The busted signs, braking problems and other problems seemingly localized to Westchester; they're on most of the 142As. They aren't as prevalent on the Mosholu cars because the 142As are a minority fleet on the compared to the many 142s that make up the line's total fleet.

 

Finally, and this pertains to this issue alone, but it's a bit much to expect signs designed and built in 1999 will still function like new nearly 20 years later. The computers and electronic displays will not last the entire lifespan of the cars. Anyone who thinks otherwise are deluding themselves.

[jon2305]

You know, I see this as an excuse that Westchester treats their cars like crap way too often. There are multiple flaws with this logic.

 

First and foremost, the is one of the busiest lines in the system and the only local line that runs on the east side of Manhattan. The 142As have gone through hell and back over the past 15+ years to make service. If there's a distinct lack of maintenance on the cars, that's because they're in service somewhere on the line.

 

Secondly, why would Westchester intentionally sabotage their own cars by ignoring their maintenance needs? If anything, that would likely bring some sort of investigation on why cars at Westchester perform worse than their counterparts at Mosholu.

 

Speaking of which, that leads to my third point, which is that there are similar problems on the 142As on the as well. The busted signs, braking problems and other problems seemingly localized to Westchester; they're on most of the 142As. They aren't as prevalent on the Mosholu cars because the 142As are a minority fleet on the compared to the many 142s that make up the line's total fleet.

 

Finally, and this pertains to this issue alone, but it's a bit much to expect signs designed and built in 1999 will still function like new nearly 20 years later. The computers and electronic displays will not last the entire lifespan of the cars. Anyone who thinks otherwise are deluding themselves.

Definitely, the coverted R188s payed their dues on the much like the R62As at current state or even before moving to the in the early 2000s. Moshulu of course only contends with a minority of R142As compared to Westchester were they had to contend with a whole fleet of R142As and at certain times there were many out on the road serving the non stop.

 

Computers and electronics are not meant to last for a long period of time especially those built almost 20 years ago on these trains like you've pointed out. I guess in the long run it comes down to available financial resources in the budget to modify the light displays or the hardware on these cars.

[Tech And Transit]

You know, I see this as an excuse that Westchester treats their cars like crap way too often. There are multiple flaws with this logic.

 

First and foremost, the   is one of the busiest lines in the system and the only local line that runs on the east side of Manhattan. The 142As have gone through hell and back over the past 15+ years to make service. If there's a distinct lack of maintenance on the cars, that's because they're in service somewhere on the line.

 

Secondly, why would Westchester intentionally sabotage their own cars by ignoring their maintenance needs? If anything, that would likely bring some sort of investigation on why cars at Westchester perform worse than their counterparts at Mosholu.

 

Speaking of which, that leads to my third point, which is that there are similar problems on the 142As on the   as well. The busted signs, braking problems and other problems seemingly localized to Westchester; they're on most of the 142As. They aren't as prevalent on the Mosholu cars because the 142As are a minority fleet on the   compared to the many 142s that make up the line's total fleet.

 

Finally, and this pertains to this issue alone, but it's a bit much to expect signs designed and built in 1999 will still function like new nearly 20 years later. The computers and electronic displays will not last the entire lifespan of the cars. Anyone who thinks otherwise are deluding themselves.

I agree with you on all of your points. This slapped on LED sign over the original 7 looks terrible and tacky. It's bad enough that they decided to convert cars from the , (I know that's the MTA), but now these cars have these new bright green/red LED signs which shine much brighter than the ripped up, deteriorating, and dimming mosaic sign of the R142A/188s. Not to mention when I saw the LED sign set today, the new C car insert 7928 had a super dim display, so while the display was super dim, the new LED sign was shining super bright. 

 

 

Definitely, the coverted R188s payed their dues on the much like the R62As at current state or even before moving to the in the early 2000s. Moshulu of course only contends with a minority of R142As compared to Westchester were they had to contend with a whole fleet of R142As and at certain times there were many out on the road serving the non stop.

Computers and electronics are not meant to last for a long period of time especially those built almost 20 years ago on these trains like you've pointed out. I guess in the long run it comes down to available financial resources in the budget to modify the light displays or the hardware on these cars.

 

There is no reason why a set of R142A's running on the line should look half the age of an R142A from the line. I have observed on several occasions two R142As on both the and the pull up next to each other and the set on the looks a million times nicer. It's also sad to note that last year I rode R142A 7486 on the (pre conversion) and, although it did look terrible, it was considerably bright inside. When I got the chance to ride it after conversion, it had completely fallen apart. The lights literally looked like people had rubbed brown and yellow grime in the casing, there were burnt out lights everywhere, it was super dim, the storm door and other doors were super rusty, and the HVAC was making all kinds of weird noises. I have also ridden a lot of other R142A's pre and post conversion and have observed similar things. It's almost like when the set is about to be sent for conversion, the crews at Westchester intentionally destroy it. I rode 7580 on the a couple months back and it was pretty bright. After seeing it test on the a few days ago, I'm scared to ride it again. The cars that come back from Kawasaki look absolutely horrible. I'm not at all surprised that R142A's on the preform significantly better, and I am definitely not surprised that conversions have a much higher breakdown rate than the newly built sets of R188's, considering how bad they are when they return. Corona has cleaned up some of the R188 conversions considerably well, but it is definitely going to be a lot of work to get them in acceptable shape. Westchester definitely did a terrible job maintaining those cars.

 

Link for 7580 testing, you can see how disgusting the set is: 

 

I was also able to identify that it was testing downstairs on the platform because I heard 7578 hissing from ALL the way up on the 7th Avenue platform....

[trainfan22]

The R142As on the are few years newer than the ones on the ... that's why they look nicer on the outside.... 

 

 

 

If you notice, the line's 142s look much nicer than the ones on the ....

 

 

The newest R160s look much nicer than 87xx units at CI, etc.

[jon2305]

The project is in the closing stages, according to info from SubChat the final car to leave Kawasaki 7586 earlier is on route to re-enter the subway system.

 

The last remaining R62As might stick around the through the summer but there's VERY few left, take advantage of the RFWs or pics for memorabilia before its all completely gone.

[Tech And Transit]

The R142As on the are few years newer than the ones on the ... that's why they look nicer on the outside.... 

 

 

 

If you notice, the line's 142s look much nicer than the ones on the ....

 

 

The newest R160s look much nicer than 87xx units at CI, etc.

 

Not necessarily, at this point, they should look pretty much the same if they were maintained with the same standards, but they're not. 93-9800's at Jamaica look worse than some of the older 160's. And exterior wise, yes R142s on the look better than the ones on the because 239th does not clean their cars well, but on the interior, the cars look pretty much the same. It really depends on how the yard treats them. A three year difference between the R142A's at Westchester and the R142A/Supplementals at Jerome, had they both been maintained equally with the same standards, would look the same regardless of the age. A new train that's a few years old and a new train that's brand new are obviously going to look different (For example, let's just say R188 7899 and R188 7935), but after a couple of years, the trains are going to gather the same rust and grime, regardless if they were built at the beginning of the order or the end of the order. However, the main issue I have with Westchester maintenance is the interiors of the cars. Let's take two sets, one from Westchester and one from Jerome, both built around the same time, and compare.

For the sake of comparison, we'll just have 7651-7655 from Westchester and 7666-7670 from Jerome. The only sets in between these are 7656-7660 and 7661-7665 (the reason I am skipping around those is because they have been switched around from Westchester to Jerome so it's hard to evaluate their state based on one yard). 7651-7655 (based at Westchester) is in terrible condition. When I rode 7651, it's lights were super dim, the light covers had grime in them, the LED interior displays were faded and worn, the strip map LED lights were barely visible they were so dim, and on the outside the train was just terrible looking. Not to mention, there are several videos on YouTube of 7652 with propulsion issues.

Now when I rode 7666-7670 (just two sets away), it was much different. The lights were brighter (not crazy bright, but they were in ok condition), the exterior was clean, as well as the interior. Everything seemed to be in acceptable and working order, and it was a smooth ride, unlike 7651 which buckled constantly. There is a very big difference in maintenance between the two yards. For some sets, yes the newer Supplemental order of R142A's do look newer than the older R142A's, and yes, most newer R160's look better than the older 8700's (although, that fleet two can be used as an example of poor yard maintenance). The maintenance of a fleet depends on the yard it's at. If the yard has terrible maintenance (like Westchester, 207th or Jamaica), then the cars will look worse than cars of the same fleet that are maintained at other yards.