Fleet Swap Discussion Thread

[TheNewYorkElevated]

Well, if you would want to know why the  and  has the most confusing car assignments (I think) is because of the mix of 4 car R160's and R42's at East New York Yard.

 

Is a R32 transfer to Coney Island possible? It can serve on the  ,   or  . 

Edited May 31, 2015 by TheNewYorkElevated

[R32 3838]

CI had a 10 car train of R32's in 2009-2010 and it ran mainly on the and it popped up 3+ times on the but i doubt CI will see R32's again

 

the R32's will be in ENY for a good while

[Daniel The Cool]

Well, if you would want to know why the and has the most confusing car assignments (I think) is because of the mix of 4 car R160's and R42's at East New York Yard.

 

Is a R32 transfer to Coney Island possible? It can serve on the , or .

No

[R3216068E]

Well, if you would want to know why the and has the most confusing car assignments (I think) is because of the mix of 4 car R160's and R42's at East New York Yard.

 

Is a R32 transfer to Coney Island possible? It can serve on the , or .

if an R32 transfers to coney island yard it would most likely go to the only because it's a part time line and the only uses cars nowadays that are 4 cars length the R32's can't operate in 4 car length because of the door situation and the c/R position

[Eric B]

That just reminds me. I had heard the 32's were officially banned from the line, due to them eliminating the car stop markers they would use, so yes, that would be out.

They're probably not going to bother moving them anywhere; why wouldn't they just stay on the ? That's Eastern Div., which like the was the the dumping ground for the oldest stuff (it only got new equipment because the 44-68's couldn't be sent over), so this makes sense.

Edited June 1, 2015 by Eric B

[R3216068E]

That just reminds me. I had heard the 32's were officially banned from the line, due to them eliminating the car stop markers they would use, so yes, that would be out.

They're probably not going to bother moving them anywhere; why wouldn't they just stay on the ? That's Eastern Div., which like the was the the dumping ground for the oldest stuff (it only got new equipment because the 44-68's couldn't be sent over), so this makes sense.

Yeah the 44-68s cars can be sent over to the because they are 75 footers the can't run on jamaica line because they are to long and stations are to short

[RollOver]

Well, if you would want to know why the  and  has the most confusing car assignments (I think) is because of the mix of 4 car R160's and R42's at East New York Yard.

 

Is a R32 transfer to Coney Island possible? It can serve on the  ,   or  .

 

I'll add one more answer to this post: Don't forget that the and share the same northern terminal and yard/shop, so they can swap cars at any given time. It's pretty much the same with the and .

[MTA Bus]

That just reminds me. I had heard the 32's were officially banned from the line, due to them eliminating the car stop markers they would use, so yes, that would be out.

They're probably not going to bother moving them anywhere; why wouldn't they just stay on the ? That's Eastern Div., which like the was the the dumping ground for the oldest stuff (it only got new equipment because the 44-68's couldn't be sent over), so this makes sense.

All of the stations on the line have the proper car markers, so I don't think that's a valid reason as to why they would be banned, if they are at all.

[R3216068E]

I just tought about something the and can swap some R46s for R160's right now they can make the R160s on the full length like they did with the R32's in the summer swap back in 2012 the crew on the are qualified for it since 207 st yard can maintain NTTS now

[RollOver]

I just tought about something the and can swap some R46s for R160's right now they can make the R160s on the full length like they did with the R32's in the summer swap back in 2012 the crew on the are qualified for it since 207 st yard can maintain NTTS now

 

Sigh. Alright look, I'll make this nice and easy. Just read all these links below:

 

http://www.nyctransitforums.com/forums/topic/46111-r68a/?p=796399

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R160_(New_York_City_Subway_car)

 

Hope this helps.

[MHV9218]

All of the stations on the line have the proper car markers, so I don't think that's a valid reason as to why they would be banned, if they are at all.

 

He probably is referring to the lack of R32 C/R boards.

[R3216068E]

Sigh. Alright look, I'll make this nice and easy. Just read all these links

 

http://www.nyctransitforums.com/forums/topic/46111-r68a/?p=796399

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R160_(New_York_City_Subway_car)

 

Hope this helps.

 

Alright 1)all the stuff about the NTTS not being able the Rockaways is a bunch of bull I've seen other NTTS like R143s, R142as testing in and out of the Rockaways and the we're just fine 2) the R46s don't meet the demands for the they suck on the the R44s were actually faster and better. 3)They can run other equipment out there other than R46s out there the R46s are so boring on the nowadays

Edited June 1, 2015 by R3216068E

[S78 via Hylan]

They're not going to change to fleet of the just so you will be happy.

[R3216068E]

They're not going to change to fleet of the just so you will be happy.

I'm stating what's best for the , the sucks with the R46s it needs to upgrade it's fleet you're running those R46s down hard on the those s**ts get no rest at night

[RollOver]

Alright 1)all the stuff about the NTTS not being able the Rockaways is a bunch of bull I've seen other NTTS like R143s, R142as testing in and out of the Rockaways and the we're just fine 2) the R46s don't meet the demands for the they suck on the the R44s were actually faster and better. 3)They can run other equipment out there other than R46s out there the R46s are so boring on the nowadays

 

Well simply put, that's just your opinion, especially your #2 and #3. It's just a matter of taste.

 

And again, that's why you have the Proposal Thread to post your own ideas or whatever you want to make up. I mean nobody's ideas are great, neither are my own ideas (or should I say history changes). Outside of that thread, most of the times, you just have to understand what works from an operation's standpoint rather than a railfan's standpoint or a rider's standpoint. You also should just simply understand that there are always causes and effects.

[Lance]

I'm stating what's best for the , the sucks with the R46s it needs to upgrade it's fleet you're running those R46s down hard on the those s**ts get no rest at night

Deal with it. There aren't enough trains to put 160s on the A. They can't put the 160s currently on the C on the A as those trains aren't long enough to meet demand for the A-line. They also aren't going to switch trains from the E, F, N and/or Q lines and put those on the A because the former lines need those NTTs more than the A-line does.

 

Those 46s will likely remain where they are until their retirement at or around the end of the decade.

Well simply put, that's just your opinion, especially your #2 and #3. It's just a matter of taste.

 

And again, that's why you have the Proposal Thread to post your own ideas or whatever you want to make up. I mean nobody's ideas are great, neither are my own ideas (or should I say history changes). Outside of that thread, most of the times, you just have to understand what works from an operation's standpoint rather than a railfan's standpoint or a rider's standpoint. You also should just simply understand that there are always causes and effects.

It isn't about bad ideas, but rather the fact that they currently aren't feasible due to a lack of available options.

[2 Train Master]

Alright 1)all the stuff about the NTTS not being able the Rockaways is a bunch of bull I've seen other NTTS like R143s, R142as testing in and out of the Rockaways and the we're just fine 2) the R46s don't meet the demands for the they suck on the the R44s were actually faster and better. 3)They can run other equipment out there other than R46s out there the R46s are so boring on the nowadays

I can make you a damn near promise that the will be fully NTT's by 2035 if not the then every letter line. Why 2035? Well its an estimate since the Apple gets a share of older equipment and by that time the R-68/A's will be nearly 50 years old if they're still around some will be younger of course but pending how they shape up the next few years. If that makes you happy. So in 2025 the R-68/A's will be approaching 40(some) and in 2018-19 all will be in their 40's

[j express]

Honestly, I think 60 footers should be put on the  because it get crowded during the rush hour and 60 footers have more doors. But its best that R46s stay on the  for now since its the suitable fleet for the line. 

[S78 via Hylan]

The isn't the only line that's crowded during rush hours.

[j express]

The isn't the only line that's crowded during rush hours.

I know that there are other lines that are crowded in the rush hours. But I was referring to the  specifically.

[R3216068E]

Yeah I know it's just a suggestion I'm just saying put other equipment on the already, the is so dull with R46s

[trainfan22]

If history repeats itself, the 10 car test train of 179s will run on the for a month or so like the original R160 did.

 

 

To the poster who wants to see NTT on the , its best to just wait for that and ride it every chance you get during that month as you probably won't see NTT run regularly on the for quite some time.

[R3216068E]

If history repeats itself, the 10 car test train of 179s will run on the for a month or so like the original R160 did.

 

 

To the poster who wants to see NTT on the , its best to just wait for that and ride it every chance you get during that month as you probably won't see NTT run regularly on the for quite some time.

I already saw an NTT run on the it was back 2006 when that original R160 tested on the I also heard that a couple of R179s are going to run on the regularly

[RollOver]

Honestly, I think 60 footers should be put on the A because it get crowded during the rush hour and 60 footers have more doors. But its best that R46s stay on the A for now since its the suitable fleet for the line. 

The A isn't the only line that's crowded during rush hours.

I know that there are other lines that are crowded in the rush hours. But I was referring to the A specifically.

 

 

I thought about all the things that SubwayGuy said about the R46s being on the .

 

A train that enters 207th Street (from Far Rock) may get sent back out as a Lefferts-bound train. Likewise, a train that enters 207th Street (from Lefferts) may get sent back out as a Far Rock-bound train. The R46s' electric side signages come in handy for this. Any other car that features a rollsign signage would be problematic, because holding the train for 5 minutes as the crews change the signs from Lefferts to Far Rock or from Far Rock to Lefferts just isn't an option.

 

It all boils down to flexibility when trains come out of place. It's basically the same with the 2/5 at Flatbush Av and the N/Q at Ditmars Blvd. That's why you don't have 62s or 62As running on the 2/5 nor 68s or 68As running on the N/Q. The is already frequent as it is (give or take), since it runs 9-10 trains per hour (west of Rockaway Blvd) and 4-5 trains per hour (east of Rockaway Blvd) during middays, evenings and Saturdays. Rush hour service is more frequent in one of the directions, whereas the other direction maintains the same midday, evening and Saturday headways. The only time service on this line is much less frequent is on Sundays when it runs 6 trains per hour (west of Rockaway Blvd) and 3 trains per hour (east of Rockaway Blvd). I mean I myself don't agree at all with the off-peak frequency on the line for obvious reasons, but whatever.

 

j express is right that while an 8-car of 75 footers is the same length as a 10-car train of 60 footers, an 8-car train of 75 footers only have 64 doors on one side, whereas a 10-car train of 60 footers have 80 doors on one side. It's just the scheduled frequency, the two south terminals and the power dip in the peninsula that prevents anything else other than the R44/46s from running on the line. j express is also right about the rush hour crowds and the summer weekend Rockaway beach crowds.

 

And to top it all off, there aren't enough R32s to cover half of the 's fleet anyway. That's why during those 2011 and 2012 summer swaps respectively, it needed half of the 50 leftover R42s from ENY (or a pair of R46 trainsets from Jamaica), thus, lowering the spare factor on the other lines. For the C/J swap, it's just one car for one car and the spends like 85% of its route outdoors and has a 10 minute off-peak headway (except for the rush hour skip-stop service of course).

 

We're just gonna have to sit back and wait for 10+ years or so for the entire B Division to be 100% 60 footers. Same with how we're gonna have to wait an extra 50+ years, as we won't be seeing full-length trains on the anytime soon either.

[R3216068E]

 

 

I thought about all the things that SubwayGuy said about the R46s being on the .

 

A train that enters 207th Street (from Far Rock) may get sent back out as a Lefferts-bound train. Likewise, a train that enters 207th Street (from Lefferts) may get sent back out as a Far Rock-bound train. The R46s' electric side signages come in handy for this. Any other car that features a rollsign signage would be problematic, because holding the train for 5 minutes as the crews change the signs from Lefferts to Far Rock or from Far Rock to Lefferts just isn't an option.

 

It all boils down to flexibility when trains come out of place. It's basically the same with the 2/5 at Flatbush Av and the N/Q at Ditmars Blvd. That's why you don't have 62s or 62As running on the 2/5 nor 68s or 68As running on the N/Q. The is already frequent as it is (give or take), since it runs 9-10 trains per hour (west of Rockaway Blvd) and 4-5 trains per hour (east of Rockaway Blvd) during middays, evenings and Saturdays. Rush hour service is more frequent in one of the directions, whereas the other direction maintains the same midday, evening and Saturday headways. The only time service on this line is much less frequent is on Sundays when it runs 6 trains per hour (west of Rockaway Blvd) and 3 trains per hour (east of Rockaway Blvd). I mean I myself don't agree at all with the off-peak frequency on the line for obvious reasons, but whatever.

 

j express is right that while an 8-car of 75 footers is the same length as a 10-car train of 60 footers, an 8-car train of 75 footers only have 64 doors on one side, whereas a 10-car train of 60 footers have 80 doors on one side. It's just the scheduled frequency, the two south terminals and the power dip in the peninsula that prevents anything else other than the R44/46s from running on the line. j express is also right about the rush hour crowds and the summer weekend Rockaway beach crowds.

 

And to top it all off, there aren't enough R32s to cover half of the 's fleet anyway. That's why during those 2011 and 2012 summer swaps respectively, it needed half of the 50 leftover R42s from ENY (or a pair of R46 trainsets from Jamaica), thus, lowering the spare factor on the other lines. For the C/J swap, it's just one car for one car and the spends like 85% of its route outdoors and has a 10 minute off-peak headway (except for the rush hour skip-stop service of course).

 

We're just gonna have to sit back and wait for 10+ years or so for the entire B Division to be 100% 60 footers. Same with how we're gonna have to wait an extra 50+ years, as we won't be seeing full-length trains on the anytime soon either.

During the Am and PM rush hours the is packed to the gills and on off peak hours it is very infrequent and as for the IMO they should make it a full length so the and can properly swap equipment and give those and be less packed during rush hours. IMO the R179s should go to the and they should give the the R46s the needs 60 footers way more than the does and it is because that both the and are packed to the gills during rush hours and also prone to delays is why they are being studied by the MTA Edited June 2, 2015 by R3216068E