R10 2952 Posted February 23, 2017 Share #3701 Posted February 23, 2017 Disappointing to see the R32 and R42 MDBF continue to slide, but it's still not as bad as the R46 (-28%). And -30% for the R160s? In only 12 months? Wow... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lance Posted February 23, 2017 Share #3702 Posted February 23, 2017 I'm not surprised on the consistently dropping numbers on the 32s and 42s. After all, they are quite old and were never intended to last much past 2010. Even with their constant maintenance, there's only so much they can do to stop the aging process on these cars. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R10 2952 Posted February 23, 2017 Share #3703 Posted February 23, 2017 The R32s and R42s being worn out is no secret to me, but I am more intrigued about the other data: -Like the 28% drop in R46 performance. -The 30% decline in R160 performance. -The fact that despite being transferred to Westchester, the R62As still manage to perform better than the R142As. -The R62s, despite their age, having a MDBF of almost 200,000 compared to the R142s having 60,000 less. -The R143s being barely more reliable than the 45+ year-old cars that ran on the before them. Compared to the SMEEs, I doubt the NTTs will last 40 years (let alone 30 for that matter). 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lance Posted February 23, 2017 Share #3704 Posted February 23, 2017 I'll give a pass for the 46s for the same reasons I gave for the 32s and 42s. The oldest of the 46s are over 40 years old, just slightly younger than the remaining 42s. As the workhorses of the and lines, they see some serious mileage. As for the rest of the fleet, the 142As in particular, I gave a response in the random topics thread, but it does bear repeating. It's becoming quite apparent that it's a maintenance issue rather than design problems that are causing the significant swings in performance. Since the shift over to the , the former 142As have drastically outperformed their non-converted counterparts. And as we know given the cars' appearance, nothing was changed on the converted cars besides the addition of CBTC equipment, so that cannot be a reason for the uptick. We've also seen a sharp drop in the MDBF numbers for the 62As since the move to Westchester. Obviously I don't know the cause of these performance drops for the Westchester cars, I do believe Transit should investigate these yard issues before these problems become major hindrances to operating service. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fresh Pond Posted February 23, 2017 Share #3705 Posted February 23, 2017 They count CBTC failures with the R143s along with regular wear and tear, so their numbers dropped significantly 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maserati7200 Posted February 26, 2017 Share #3706 Posted February 26, 2017 As for the rest of the fleet, the 142As in particular, I gave a response in the random topics thread, but it does bear repeating. It's becoming quite apparent that it's a maintenance issue rather than design problems that are causing the significant swings in performance. Since the shift over to the , the former 142As have drastically outperformed their non-converted counterparts. And as we know given the cars' appearance, nothing was changed on the converted cars besides the addition of CBTC equipment, so that cannot be a reason for the uptick. We've also seen a sharp drop in the MDBF numbers for the 62As since the move to Westchester. Obviously I don't know the cause of these performance drops for the Westchester cars, I do believe Transit should investigate these yard issues before these problems become major hindrances to operating service. What I don't understand is, why aren't all shops doing the best they can with maintenance as possible. Why do the higher ups within the MTA even tolerate sub-par maintenance from some yards? Also, which yards are notoriously the worst? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BreeddekalbL Posted February 28, 2017 Share #3707 Posted February 28, 2017 I heard a rumor a while back that R32's were going on the what ever became of it? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lawrence St Posted February 28, 2017 Share #3708 Posted February 28, 2017 Who knows. This is what I think is going to happen during the shutdown: Increased service on the and , will use R160/R179's. becomes fully NTT gains cars from the to become a full 10 car set. There may be some NTT'S from either the or the on here as well. gets to keep some of their R68's since the has some full sets that can be aired in 5 cars. It will also get R32's. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R32 3838 Posted March 1, 2017 Share #3709 Posted March 1, 2017 The is going to be 10 cars. It can't use R160's from the J and L lines 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fan Railer Posted March 2, 2017 Share #3710 Posted March 2, 2017 Why not? Are there clearance issues with the 4-car R160 sets that no one but you knows about? I also didn't know you suddenly got a degree in a transportation - related field and started working for operations planning at 2 Broadway. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lawrence St Posted March 2, 2017 Share #3711 Posted March 2, 2017 The 4 car R179's will start testing on Crosstown anyway with clearance testing. Queens Boulevard handle's both 10 car and 8 Car sets without a problem. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B46 via Utica Posted March 2, 2017 Share #3712 Posted March 2, 2017 The 4 car R179's will start testing on Crosstown anyway with clearance testing. Queens Boulevard handle's both 10 car and 8 Car sets without a problem. I think they already tested on Crosstown months ago. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fresh Pond Posted March 3, 2017 Share #3713 Posted March 3, 2017 Why not? Are there clearance issues with the 4-car R160 sets that no one but you knows about? I also didn't know you suddenly got a degree in a transportation - related field and started working for operations planning at 2 Broadway.I'm pretty sure he's referring to the point that since the comes out of Coney Island, they're gonna use the 10 car sets there. No need to overboard there 7 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amtrak41 Posted March 4, 2017 Share #3714 Posted March 4, 2017 < Why do the higher ups within the MTA even tolerate sub-par maintenance from some yards?> Given how MTA tolerates an M-3 MDBF on the LIRR that is a fraction of what they are on MN for the M-3A, I am not surprised. MTA is only concerned when "apologizing" and managing after a fare increase approval, then they go to sleep for 2 years. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Calvin Posted April 22, 2017 Share #3715 Posted April 22, 2017 3912-3913 207 to ENY 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VIP Posted April 23, 2017 Share #3716 Posted April 23, 2017 3912-3913 207 to ENYAlso 3896/3897 & 3900/3901 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RFWLover Posted April 24, 2017 Share #3717 Posted April 24, 2017 Probably to fill in for cars going for SMS 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R32 3838 Posted April 24, 2017 Share #3718 Posted April 24, 2017 (edited) Yea i saw 3900/01 yesterday on the J Edited April 24, 2017 by R32 3671 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S78 via Hylan Posted April 24, 2017 Share #3719 Posted April 24, 2017 Does anyone know what's going on with 3476/3477? It's been sitting on the same spot in ENY yard for a good while. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R32 3838 Posted April 24, 2017 Share #3720 Posted April 24, 2017 Does anyone know what's going on with 3476/3477? It's been sitting on the same spot in ENY yard for a good while. Its been stripped for parts. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Calvin Posted April 25, 2017 Share #3721 Posted April 25, 2017 (edited) 8585-8592 (R160A-1) : ENY to 207 St Edited April 25, 2017 by CH3348 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R32 3838 Posted April 26, 2017 Share #3722 Posted April 26, 2017 One reason is to why another set of R160's were sent to the for an exchange for another R32 set is probably to prepare for the GO and for the shuttle this upcoming fall since it will use R32's and the temporary barn to house those R32's. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarInspector 848 Posted April 26, 2017 Share #3723 Posted April 26, 2017 Lotta people in here making assumptions. My boss in the shop read these posts and laughed, lol That R32 pair at ENY is long term hold cars, they aren't really stripped. There's 4 other 32s up at 207 that were stripped slightly but they're putting em back together now. One reason is to why another set of R160's were sent to the for an exchange for another R32 set is probably to prepare for the GO and for the shuttle this upcoming fall since it will use R32's and the temporary barn to house those R32's.when we have changes in the car assignments, we do the transfers to support them only a day or two before the changes start, so no, this isn't correct. They sent the 32 set to ENY to fill in for the 143 and 160 going for SMS 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R32 3838 Posted April 26, 2017 Share #3724 Posted April 26, 2017 Thats why i wrote probably 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Calvin Posted May 5, 2017 Share #3725 Posted May 5, 2017 8577-8584 (R160): ENY to 207 St 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.