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.
INDman

Fleet Swap Discussion Thread

Recommended Posts

41 minutes ago, Q23 via 108 said:

I want to know what your walk is. You mean to tell me that you walked from Astoria Blvd down to Steinway Street?

On a very serious note.

Why are so hell bent on not getting on the R46s. 

from Steinway Street/Broadway to 21 Av approaching Astoria Park

I and the other passengers on the train had to be pulled out of one by the fire department after a smoke condition at 42 St on the (A) years ago caused by the subway car in question. There was no way out due to the storm doors being locked.

Edited by darkstar8983

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In all honesty, I actually do like riding the R46s when I take a long weekend trip to New York.  They are my favorite SMEE train.  I love that they have those seats that face forward or back so I don't have to twist my neck around to look out the window.  Only the R46s & R68/As have seats that face perpendicular to the windows.  I kinda like the retro style to the interiors, as they resemble some of the interiors on MBTA's older Orange line trains or WMATA's 1980s rolling stock.  I like the color coded route indicators on the front(also found on R68/As & R62/As).  I rode an R46 without pants during the No pants subway ride in January 2018 on the (R).  I enjoyed riding the R46s on the (A) with a few R179 (A) trains when I stayed in the Rockaways last summer.  I will likely miss them once they are gone.  That said, I can relate to darkstar's situation when it comes to the R32s.  I would let an R32 pass on the (A) or (C) just to wait to catch an R46, R160, or R179 on the IND 8th ave line.  I was in no rush, just didn't care to ride an R32.

  • Like 3
  • LMAO! 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Calvin said:

The 46s is different from the 68s/160s (N) :  more seats for the people with groceries, bubble tea at 8 Av and Canal St. However, the front of the train is the train route. The rear can sometimes show another route like  <Q>  

I've even had R46s on the (N) with the wrong route on the front...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The R46’s on Broadway has been an ABSOLUTE DISASTER! between dwell times and confusion and WRONG signage. 

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/10/2020 at 9:54 PM, Maxwell179 said:

Nah what 😂 you’re really sad and dragging it for no reason

 

On 2/10/2020 at 9:55 PM, Maxwell179 said:

You dragging it too , no one’s even arguing 

Shut up kid.

@VIP, once the swap is over and done with, no more confusion will occur and customers will recognize their respective line's "new" uniformed fleets.

Edited by Jemorie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/10/2020 at 11:27 PM, Coney Island Av said:

this is why your decisions are based out of pettiness, not even reason or logic...

just deal with and accept the (N)(W) being R46/R68As, you cant have the R160s on the line forever. besides, ur gonna get NTTs back in not even that long from now considering the 211s aren't far off from delivery and theres a chance that they will head to CI to replace the 46s once they are in service. you have (A) riders putting up with the 46s daily, you have (6) riders riding the R62As daily, you have (C) riders using the 32s daily etc etc etc, and yet they all dont complain about the lack of NTTs on said line. the average commuter is just going to take a train regardless of its age to go somewhere. if you wont change your mind thats up to you, but this is just a warning that what you are doing can possibly come back to harm you in the future. 

and also you really think that suing the MTA over the swap (which is something that will inevitably be finished) whether you like it or not is gonna do shit? lmao they will almost definitely care nothing about what we're saying and just continue the swap as they please. 

The (MTA) is always inconsistent with car assignments anyway. I have personally been under the impression that Lex deserved CBTC more as well as the other IRT trunk lines that were already 100% percent NTTs prior to the (6) / (7) car swap and the R188 contract. The (MTA) spent a whole ton of money and time spent on retrofitting the most of the R142As to R188s, even though they could have done that years before so that the R62As didn't need to be sent over from the (6) to the (7) to retire the Redbirds on the latter. I also read a recent article about the (MTA) is testing some other type of signaling system on some lines to keep costs down than with CBTC: https://www.ny1.com/nyc/all-boroughs/news/2019/09/27/mta-tests-ultra-wideband-technology-on-l-train- Couldn't they have just used that for Flushing (and then now Queens Blvd) instead?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Jemorie said:

The (MTA) is always inconsistent with car assignments anyway. I have personally been under the impression that Lex deserved CBTC more as well as the other IRT trunk lines that were already 100% percent NTTs prior to the (6) / (7) car swap and the R188 contract. The (MTA) spent a whole ton of money and time spent on retrofitting the most of the R142As to R188s, even though they could have done that years before so that the R62As didn't need to be sent over from the (6) to the (7) to retire the Redbirds on the latter. I also read a recent article about the (MTA) is testing some other type of signaling system on some lines to keep costs down than with CBTC: https://www.ny1.com/nyc/all-boroughs/news/2019/09/27/mta-tests-ultra-wideband-technology-on-l-train- Couldn't they have just used that for Flushing (and then now Queens Blvd) instead?

Two things.

Iirc, the whole reason the (7) never got 142As had to do with clearances in the Steinway tubes. That has since been fixed. What we see now is, in a way, what was supposed to happen in the first place.

Second: From what I heard and saw at the last board meeting, UWB will serve as a compliment to CBTC, not outright replace it. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, LTA1992 said:

Second: From what I heard and saw at the last board meeting, UWB will serve as a compliment to CBTC, not outright replace it. 

Oh okay. Knowing how cheap and half-ass the agency can be, I thought this UWB thingy would have been the way to go so that they can save money and no such car fleet swapping between CI and Jamaica (or between Pelham and Flushing) would have ever taken place.

I don’t think UWB is a bad thing though. I actually like it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Jemorie said:

 

Shut up kid.

@VIP, once the swap is over and done with, no more confusion will occur and customers will recognize their respective line's "new" uniformed fleets.

smd 😂

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, VIP said:

The R46’s on Broadway has been an ABSOLUTE DISASTER! between dwell times and confusion and WRONG signage. 

I think Coney Island will actually fix the broken signs on the R46’s. Jamaica didn’t Seem to care and people didn’t seem to care either since people knew that if an R46 showed up on Queens Blvd and Broadway it was an (R) train. 
As far as dwell times once the fleets have been swapped things should not be too bad. It should be almost the same as it was before the swap because instead of the (R) having the R46’s the (N) and (W) trains will have them instead. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Around the Horn said:

I've even had R46s on the (N) with the wrong route on the front...

Ha! You should have seen yesterday in the PM rush when there was a sick passenger at Ditmars Blvd. all (N)s had to switch to (W)s and vice versa, and the signs were completely mixed. And the conductors are barely announcing the routes, assuming people can read the inaccurate displays. Going downtown people had to ask other passengers already on the train

Edited by darkstar8983
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's an R46 (Q)  at Stillwell rn about to head to 96th street in a few. Rode it from the city down here, so nice to ride R46s on the Brighton line!!!!

Edited by trainfan22

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, VIP said:

The R46’s on Broadway has been an ABSOLUTE DISASTER! between dwell times and confusion and WRONG signage. 

They should stop the Fleet Swaps and Bring Back the R160s to CI Yard, I Guess that is a reason why Byford resigned because of fleet swaps between CI Yard and Jamaica.

Edited by SubwayFan3000

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, SubwayFan3000 said:

They should stop the Fleet Swaps and Bring Back the R160s to CI Yard, I Guess that is a reason why Byford resigned because of fleet swaps between CI Yard and Jamaica.

Completely wrong.

 

This was planned way before Byford.

  • LMAO! 3
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, MysteriousBtrain said:

Completely wrong.

 

This was planned way before Byford.

Yeah I'm Always Wrong, I Knew Corruption and Bureaucracy of Cuomo's MTA likes to destroy NTTs that were on the line since the beginning.

Edited by SubwayFan3000

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, NewFlyer 230 said:

I think Coney Island will actually fix the broken signs on the R46’s. Jamaica didn’t Seem to care and people didn’t seem to care either since people knew that if an R46 showed up on Queens Blvd and Broadway it was an (R) train. 
As far as dwell times once the fleets have been swapped things should not be too bad. It should be almost the same as it was before the swap because instead of the (R) having the R46’s the (N) and (W) trains will have them instead. 

The Swap has got to stop ASAP, R160s should return to CI Yard, R46s should be stayed in Jamaica until R211s came to service in 2021 plus CBTC in QBL is fully completed by that time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, SubwayFan3000 said:

Yeah I'm Always Wrong, I Knew Corruption and Bureaucracy of Cuomo's MTA likes to destroy NTTs that were on the line since the beginning.

I agree. The MTA really hates us so they decided "let's try to put CBTC on QBL and piss off rail fans by putting R46s on the (N) and (W) ".

8 minutes ago, SubwayFan3000 said:

The Swap has got to stop ASAP, R160s should return to CI Yard, R46s should be stayed in Jamaica until R211s came to service in 2021 plus CBTC in QBL is fully completed by that time.

Can you people stop sounding so damned spoiled? It's just a swap. It's just a train. It's just a ride. And don't come at me with the "age" excuse either. 

The MTA wanted to put CBTC on QBL and the sooner it's done the better. This is currently the fastest process and if they waited for the R211s it would not be online by 2021.

If anyone is curious, docs from July 2015 about QBL CBTC starting at page 36:

https://web.archive.org/web/20150906021415if_/http://web.mta.info/mta/news/books/pdf/150720_1345_CPOC.pdf

  • LMAO! 1
  • Thumbs Up 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, MysteriousBtrain said:

I agree. The MTA really hates us so they decided "let's try to put CBTC on QBL and piss off rail fans by putting R46s on the (N) and (W) ".

Can you people stop sounding so damned spoiled? It's just a swap. It's just a train. It's just a ride. And don't come at me with the "age" excuse either. 

The MTA wanted to put CBTC on QBL and the sooner it's done the better. This is currently the fastest process and if they waited for the R211s it would not be online by 2021.

If anyone is curious, docs from July 2015 about QBL CBTC starting at page 36:

https://web.archive.org/web/20150906021415if_/http://web.mta.info/mta/news/books/pdf/150720_1345_CPOC.pdf

MTA should put CBTC on Astoria Line and Second Avenue Line instead of QBL, Asotria and Second Avenue Line are Slow AF.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3484-85, 3518-19, 3610-11, 3770-71 are currently sitting in Pitkin Yard along with at least two other pairs which i could not identify. 

the cars appear to be intact despite being listed as retired. (unlike 3878-79 which has been OOS for two years) 

L5OboPH.jpg

BauyGeK.jpg

elTOGeT.jpg

YzcbKwv.jpg

Edited by Coney Island Av
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, trainfan22 said:

There's an R46 (Q)  at Stillwell rn about to head to 96th street in a few. Rode it from the city down here, so nice to ride R46s on the Brighton line!!!!

How many more R46s are on the (Q)? There’s a lot of R160s making appearances on the (N) and (W). At least 6 of them in just the Astoria to 57 St-7 Av section

Edited by darkstar8983
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, SubwayFan3000 said:

MTA should put CBTC on Astoria Line and Second Avenue Line instead of QBL, Asotria and Second Avenue Line are Slow AF.

Yeah about that:

There is another way to resolve the slow issues. Currently, the train capacity constraints on the Broadway Line are due to the bottlenecks on the local tracks between 34th Street-Herald Square and the 60th Street Tunnel connection. Here, the (N) moves to the local tracks from the express tracks and shares the local tracks with the (R) and (W) from Lower Manhattan. 5 stops and a East River tunnel crossing later, the (R) splits from the (N) and (W) to head up the Queens Blvd Line, while the (N) and (W) go to Astoria (the (W) is scheduled as a branch of the (N) route). As a result of this, all three services run at a lousy 8 trains per hour. While this is fine on trunk lines, the branches run at lower frequencies. In addition, because of the slow switches at 34th Street, there are delays and slowdowns on the entire Broadway and Astoria Line on both local and express tracks.

A simple solution for this is to simply reroute the (N) from Astoria-Ditmars to 96th Street with the (Q), never merging with other lines. This will result in faster service on Astoria and Broadway due to the lack of switching. To replace the (N) to Astoria, (W) service would be increased, which would be possible by releasing some cars from (N) service to (W) service, which will now have its own staff schedule and train crews. The end-goal is to reroute the (R) to Astoria and taking all Broadway service off Queens Blvd, but that's another story. However, with this one change, the (R) will now have one less merge to deal with, improving efficiency a bit. Virtually everyone on the Astoria Line is going as far as 34th Street-Herald Sq, so nothing is lost.

Line capacity on each subway line is not equal due to a variety of factors. This includes power constraints, track geography, terminal constraints (middle track at Whitehall). With all that in mind, and for simplicity, lets say that track capacity with the existing signals tops out at 24 trains per hour, or one train every 2.5 minutes. This is actually impressive train throughput, even though presently, some lines go past that. With this, all 4 Broadway services would operate at 12 trains per hour. Since there would be two services per track the whole way, both would run 24 trains, roughly the same as current local service between 60th and 34th, and a significant improvement elsewhere. Turning 12 trains is possible on the Whitehall middle track, but operations resiliency does appear to be low. However, some policy changes (which should be applied system-wide) should be able to mitigate this. I would also look into modifying operations at the Gold Street and DeKalb track junctions to better handle the increased service.

Again, the only car swaps needed would be to reassign some cars from the (N) route to the (W) route, since the (N) would be operating a shorter route. All in all, its as if you are getting faster and more frequent service on the Astoria Line and Broadway Line for free. It's totally more effective and efficient than CBTC, which would cost millions of dollars and take time to install. This is all the matter of scheduling trains at nearly no additional cost.

And that my friends is how to fix the Broadway Line.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, darkstar8983 said:

How many more R46s are on the (Q)? There’s a lot of R160s making appearances on the (N) and (W). At least 6 of them in just the Astoria to 57 St-7 Av section

The 46 I rode was the only one I saw on the (Q)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, SubwayFan3000 said:

MTA should put CBTC on Astoria Line and Second Avenue Line instead of QBL, Asotria and Second Avenue Line are Slow AF.

? How are the Astoria and SAS slow? Those lines are mostly straight trackage with little to no timers. I take it you never ridden any of the BMT Broadway lines between Canal and DeKelb ... Now that's slow!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Jova42R said:

Why are most R46 (Q)s signed up either as <Q>s or (N)s?

The rollsigns are heavy and if the T/O scrolling through the signs stumbles upon the Diamond (Q) first, they'll just leave it that. Close enough lol, or so I heard..

 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
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.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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