Fleet Swap Discussion Thread

[KK 6 Ave Local]

On 5/8/2018 at 12:42 PM, Dj Hammers said:

It’s already planned out. There will be a small amount of swapping during the summer, and things will pick up in the fall. Subject to change though.

Which will be the first changes? I think it'll be the / swap because that's the only one that doesn't require ALL the R179s.  

[VIP]

3896-3897/3929-3928 are the next pairs to 207th 

[Dj Hammers]

9 hours ago, KK 6 Ave Local said:

Which will be the first changes? I think it'll be the / swap because that's the only one that doesn't require ALL the R179s.  

First up is the A getting temporarily filled up with R32s from ENY.

Then things will start to get interesting in the fall. Always subject to change though.

[Jemorie]

5 hours ago, Dj Hammers said:

First up is the A getting temporarily filled up with R32s from ENY.

Then things will start to get interesting in the fall. Always subject to change though.

Could have sworn they were staying on the  with a few going to the  till retirement.

[AlgorithmOfTruth]

3 hours ago, Jemorie said:

Could have sworn they were staying on the  with a few going to the  till retirement.

Only time will tell. The current plans are tentative.

[Coney Island Av]

9 hours ago, Dj Hammers said:

First up is the A getting temporarily filled up with R32s from ENY.

Then things will start to get interesting in the fall. Always subject to change though.

Are the R42s also going to the ?

And another thing: which lines are the R160A's on the  going to? Some say the , but others say the . 

[KK 6 Ave Local]

Since Wikipedia only updates on actual confirmations, I think I might have some proof of R160s and R32s going to the  

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G_(New_York_City_Subway_service)

It states: 

Despite the influx of ridership, train lengths did not change. However, in 2016, it was announced that the G is expected to get full length trains to accommodate displaced L train riders in 2019. This is made possible because the delivery of new R179 subway cars consists to other routes makes it possible for older fleet from these other routes to be passed onto the G.[45] In addition, three extra G trains per hour would run during peak periods, for a total of 11 trains per hour during the shutdown. A full-length G train would run every five to six minutes, nearly tripling the route's capacity from eight to twenty-two 300-foot consists per hour. Since the G train's schedule is designed around that of the F train, train frequencies on both routes would have to be modified.[56]

 

Edited May 12, 2018 by KK 6 Ave Local

[RR503]

2 hours ago, Coney Island Av said:

Are the R42s also going to the ?

And another thing: which lines are the R160A's on the  going to? Some say the , but others say the . 

Yes, they will be there for a little while before they get moved again (or such is the plan as of current). 

[Art Vandelay]

On 5/10/2018 at 2:22 PM, VIP said:

Mileage is the problem... those cars have to be on short lines like the  or  

Length of lines is not related to car mileage at all. 

An example: In 1987, the C was the longest route in the subway. I believe the C fleet also had the lowest usage rate in the system as well. 

[AlgorithmOfTruth]

3 hours ago, Art Vandelay said:

Length of lines is not related to car mileage at all. 

An example: In 1987, the C was the longest route in the subway. I believe the C fleet also had the lowest usage rate in the system as well. 

I hypothesize that car mileage is dependent on frequency of service; high number of trips = increased mileage.

[Art Vandelay]

1 hour ago, AlgorithmOfTruth said:

I hypothesize that car mileage is dependent on frequency of service; high number of trips = increased mileage.

Closer, but not entirely true- 

Mileage of individual cars is directly related to both span of service, and consistency of service.  Having a high peak frequency but low off peak frequency results in lots of trains sitting around for much of the day getting little use. Having a line with consistent service, regardless of whether it is short and infrequent, or long and frequent, results in trains with high mileage. Short vs long, and frequent vs infrequent both affect the number of trains you need, but not so much the overall usage of those trains. 



 

[RR503]

48 minutes ago, Art Vandelay said:

Closer, but not entirely true- 

Mileage of individual cars is directly related to both span of service, and consistency of service.  Having a high peak frequency but low off peak frequency results in lots of trains sitting around for much of the day getting little use. Having a line with consistent service, regardless of whether it is short and infrequent, or long and frequent, results in trains with high mileage. Short vs long, and frequent vs infrequent both affect the number of trains you need, but not so much the overall usage of those trains. 

I’d go even a step further and say that really what matters is the disparity between peak and off peak service. Aside from short lines where time in terminal makes up a non-negligible portion of total run length, whether a route is short or long is frankly irrelevant provided trains are moving at similar speeds.  For example, I could make 3 trips on a 40 minute length line in the same time as one trip on a 2 hour line, and if we’re both moving at say, 20 miles per hour average, we’ll end up with approximately the same mileage, thus rendering route length irrelevant, and the number of cars getting down time in the off peak much more so. 

That said, these issues of car age/mileage are really not too important. The issues that car equipment/OP look at when assigning fleets really have to do with passenger flow. As has been said before, the number of delays attributable to car malfunction is statistically irrelevant when compared to other categories — for example overcrowding/insufficient capacity. Especially on lines like the Lex, where station dwell is the limiter on service, planners will be looking to assign the fleet that’ll best facilitate passenger movement given the line’s ridership characteristics, fleet reliability be damned. Consequently, the stats that’ll end up being really important are doors per train, door width, door positioning, seating capacity and standing capacity. 

[Dj Hammers]

3 hours ago, RR503 said:

I’d go even a step further and say that really what matters is the disparity between peak and off peak service. Aside from short lines where time in terminal makes up a non-negligible portion of total run length, whether a route is short or long is frankly irrelevant provided trains are moving at similar speeds.  For example, I could make 3 trips on a 40 minute length line in the same time as one trip on a 2 hour line, and if we’re both moving at say, 20 miles per hour average, we’ll end up with approximately the same mileage, thus rendering route length irrelevant, and the number of cars getting down time in the off peak much more so. 

That said, these issues of car age/mileage are really not too important. The issues that car equipment/OP look at when assigning fleets really have to do with passenger flow. As has been said before, the number of delays attributable to car malfunction is statistically irrelevant when compared to other categories — for example overcrowding/insufficient capacity. Especially on lines like the Lex, where station dwell is the limiter on service, planners will be looking to assign the fleet that’ll best facilitate passenger movement given the line’s ridership characteristics, fleet reliability be damned. Consequently, the stats that’ll end up being really important are doors per train, door width, door positioning, seating capacity and standing capacity. 

This is very accurate. As I mentioned before, the marginal delay impact of MDBF differences between fleets is very small, and only becomes worth considering when the relative difference between the MDBF of two fleets is over ~150K.

 

Besides the ability to handle crowds, there are some other factors, like electronic vs. non-electronic signage and shop familiarity with car classes that go into the decision-making process. However, the main goal is usually to maximize throughput, with all other factors being secondary, subject to cost considerations. A good example was the decision to place the R62As on the 6, rather than the 4, in order to not "contaminate" the entire Lex express service with the empirically-demonstrated increased dwell times of the R62A fleet in areas of high station crowding.

 

 

I'm sure that this has been repeated before, but the term "overcrowding/insufficient capacity", while used as a delay "cause", is more accurately a definition of a symptom of a delay. Many operational factors, including the relative impacts of car assignments, can have an impact on this "bucket" of delays. I'm sure you (RR503) know that, but I think it deserves explicit clarification for others. To put it simply, overcrowding is often a symptom of other operational issues, rather than a discrete cause of delay.

[Dj Hammers]

ENY to 207:

 

3520/3891

3644/3621

3924/3925

[kosciusko]

14 hours ago, Dj Hammers said:

the empirically-demonstrated increased dwell times of the R62A fleet in areas of high station crowding.

Really, why is this the case?

[VIP]

2 hours ago, Dj Hammers said:

ENY to 207:

 

3520/3891

3644/3621

3924/3925

Sad to see those cars go, but also 3897/3896 & 3929/3928 left East New York I assume

[m2fwannabe]

Has anyone confirmed that the Myrtle Shuttle R-42s have reentered J & Z service?

[VIP]

Just now, m2fwannabe said:

Has anyone confirmed that the Myrtle Shuttle R-42s have reentered J & Z service?

No confirmation needed, they’re physically in service based on the conditions that the  viaduct project is Complete. 

[j express]

1 hour ago, m2fwannabe said:

Has anyone confirmed that the Myrtle Shuttle R-42s have reentered J & Z service?

Last Friday, I saw 5 sets of R42s for rush hour  service. So you know what that means

Edited May 20, 2018 by j express

[LGA Link N Train]

1 hour ago, Vtrain said:

That means NO more R32 on the J/Z lines.

No, I ride the and every school day and R32's are still running in regular service. Maybe like 6 or 7 Sets from my observations 

[Coney Island Av]

1 hour ago, Vtrain said:

That means NO more R32 on the J/Z lines.

Yeah, about that...

 

 

Edited May 20, 2018 by Coney Island Av

[m2fwannabe]

On 5/20/2018 at 10:33 AM, VIP said:

On 5/20/2018 at 10:31 AM, m2fwannabe said:

Has anyone confirmed that the Myrtle Shuttle R-42s have reentered J & Z service?

No confirmation needed, they’re physically in service based on the conditions that the  viaduct project is Complete. 

I wouldn't automatically assume that all 24 were just placed back on J and Z.  They needed a thorough inspection after returning to ENY from isolation, so it appears there were no unusual circumstances.  That's good news, for the time being...hardy beasts, indeed.

Did anyone (besides me) notice the broken window sash on 4815 through the last few weeks of the shuttle?

[Dj Hammers]

ENY to 207 soon (tentative):

3810/3811

3730/3731

3718/3719

3682/3683

[Dj Hammers]

On 5/31/2018 at 11:10 AM, Dj Hammers said:

ENY to 207 soon (tentative):

3810/3811

3730/3731

3718/3719

3682/3683

FYI - This transfer has been delayed. When I say "tentative" it's for good reason haha.

 

[VIP]

10 hours ago, Dj Hammers said:

FYI - This transfer has been delayed. When I say "tentative" it's for good reason haha.

 

Haha. They sent 207th an R160 set instead. The “cuomo scheme” set to be exact.