R211 Discussion Thread

[RandomRider0101]

3 hours ago, R32 3838 said:

R179 will be CBTC compatible before option Order II. They need the 130 R179s (5 car units) to Be CBTC ready and the 8 car ones as well meaning they can run on the . This would allow ENY to lose a portion of their 8 car R160s for the

The thing is that if they do this, the will have the same issue that the has now with it being mixed length. There wouldn't be enough 8-car R160s to cover the entire .

What they should do is leave all those cars at ENY, and order enough 8-car R211s to cover the entire

1,537 is alot of cars. They can make about 172 of those arranged in 4-car sets.

[R32 3838]

They would have more than enough cars. ENY has a very large spare factor since their Fleets are used in groups. The uses 64 R160A-1s (8313-76) and all of the R143s. The uses It's own R160A-1 group (8377-8612, * 9551-54 and others outside of 8612 has also been used) The uses all of the R179s, R160A-1 8613-8652/9943-74 and the R143/R160A-1 spares from the / groups.

Them losing a portion the 8 car R160s isn't going to hurt them because they will gain the 8 car R179s from 207th st which by then will be equipped with CBTC to run on the line meaning the & can share both R160s and R179s meaning you can slightly reduce the spare factor by 5-10%.

 

The R211 order only calls for 32 4 car units that would help the line or allow more cars to run on the line.

 

IMO if the stays at Jamaica which is very likely, It should just be full length of 10 cars for fleet uniformity (share with the fleet) which i think might happen. 

Have the 8 car R179s at ENY and either create a new line between chambers st and Bay ridge or just extend the to south Brooklyn (9th ave) Have every other go to 9th ave during the rush hour this way it wouldn't screw up skip stop service.

4th ave need an additional local anyway which I'm surprised still isn't addressed.

[darkstar8983]

44 minutes ago, R32 3838 said:

They would have more than enough cars. ENY has a very large spare factor since their Fleets are used in groups. The uses 64 R160A-1s (8313-76) and all of the R143s. The uses It's own R160A-1 group (8377-8612, * 9551-54 and others outside of 8612 has also been used) The uses all of the R179s, R160A-1 8613-8652/9943-74 and the R143/R160A-1 spares from the / groups.

Them losing a portion the 8 car R160s isn't going to hurt them because they will gain the 8 car R179s from 207th st which by then will be equipped with CBTC to run on the line meaning the & can share both R160s and R179s meaning you can slightly reduce the spare factor by 5-10%.

 

The R211 order only calls for 32 4 car units that would help the line or allow more cars to run on the line.

 

IMO if the stays at Jamaica which is very likely, It should just be full length of 10 cars for fleet uniformity (share with the fleet) which i think might happen. 

Have the 8 car R179s at ENY and either create a new line between chambers st and Bay ridge or just extend the to south Brooklyn (9th ave) Have every other go to 9th ave during the rush hour this way it wouldn't screw up skip stop service.

4th ave need an additional local anyway which I'm surprised still isn't addressed.

Good point about the fleet uniformity between the  and  but remember that if you increase train lengths on the  then the service frequency might be slashed because of the ridership along the Crosstown Line not warranting 600’ trains. Just something to keep in the back of our minds.

if they go with the 600’  trains then there would be enough 480’ trains for a potential 4 Av  extension, but if the  goes 480’, then the R160s would need to be shared from the  pool and additional R211s would displace the R160s from the , while the  uses almost exclusively R179s, but with no South Brooklyn extension unless there are substantially more 4-car units of R211s ordered. Just my two cents

Edited October 24, 2022 by darkstar8983

[RandomRider0101]

30 minutes ago, R32 3838 said:

They would have more than enough cars. ENY has a very large spare factor since their Fleets are used in groups. The uses 64 R160A-1s (8313-76) and all of the R143s. The uses It's own R160A-1 group (8377-8612, * 9551-54 and others outside of 8612 has also been used) The uses all of the R179s, R160A-1 8613-8652/9943-74 and the R143/R160A-1 spares from the / groups.

Them losing a portion the 8 car R160s isn't going to hurt them because they will gain the 8 car R179s from 207th st which by then will be equipped with CBTC to run on the line meaning the & can share both R160s and R179s meaning you can slightly reduce the spare factor by 5-10%.

 

The R211 order only calls for 32 4 car units that would help the line or allow more cars to run on the line.

 

IMO if the stays at Jamaica which is very likely, It should just be full length of 10 cars for fleet uniformity (share with the fleet) which i think might happen. 

Have the 8 car R179s at ENY and either create a new line between chambers st and Bay ridge or just extend the to south Brooklyn (9th ave) Have every other go to 9th ave during the rush hour this way it wouldn't screw up skip stop service.

4th ave need an additional local anyway which I'm surprised still isn't addressed.

I forgot to mention in my last post that the already uses 5-car R160s; so if they were to send 8-car trains of R160s there, the would be mixed length with the same train type. That would cause confusion among riders and possibly operators; at least the doesn't have that issue.

The doesn't need to be 10 cars; 8 cars would be more than enough. Ridership is not THAT high; if that were the case, the would've been 8 cars a long time ago.

Also, the MTA didn't actually state that there would be 32 cars in 4-car sets. That was the number people came up with based on the number of sets MTA said there would be (89) out of the 437 cars in Option 2; 32 cars is the smallest possible 4-car estimate, and it is likely they may have not yet decided how many cars will be in 4-car sets yet. So I'm pretty sure that number is subject to change.

I once saw an MTA document that said that 112 cars of R160s were getting CBTC installed for 8th Ave. CBTC. That number is equivalent to 4-car sets. Why would a specific number of 4-car R160s be getting CBTC installed for 8th Ave. When it should be cross-compatible with Queens Blvd. CBTC, and 8th Ave. is expected to be all full length? Didn't make sense to me when I saw it; so I guessed it was a discrepancy.

I'm sure the set count for R211 option 2 will be adjusted later, as 32 cars is a very small amount. We don't need any more oddballs roaming the system .

[R32 3838]

27 minutes ago, RandomRider0101 said:

I forgot to mention in my last post that the already uses 5-car R160s; so if they were to send 8-car trains of R160s there, the would be mixed length with the same train type. That would cause confusion among riders and possibly operators; at least the doesn't have that issue.

The doesn't need to be 10 cars; 8 cars would be more than enough. Ridership is not THAT high; if that were the case, the would've been 8 cars a long time ago.

Also, the MTA didn't actually state that there would be 32 cars in 4-car sets. That was the number people came up with based on the number of sets MTA said there would be (89) out of the 437 cars in Option 2; 32 cars is the smallest possible 4-car estimate, and it is likely they may have not yet decided how many cars will be in 4-car sets yet. So I'm pretty sure that number is subject to change.

I once saw an MTA document that said that 112 cars of R160s were getting CBTC installed for 8th Ave. CBTC. That number is equivalent to 4-car sets. Why would a specific number of 4-car R160s be getting CBTC installed for 8th Ave. When it should be cross-compatible with Queens Blvd. CBTC, and 8th Ave. is expected to be all full length? Didn't make sense to me when I saw it; so I guessed it was a discrepancy.

I'm sure the set count for R211 option 2 will be adjusted later, as 32 cars is a very small amount. We don't need any more oddballs roaming the system .

They already have more than enough 8 car units. The has about 92 R179s which is 11.5 sets. There is no need to order more 8 car units than what is being ordered with the R211 order. It's better to consolidate the 8 car R179s in one yard instead of having them in 2 yards.

ENY already have a large fleet of 8 car units. When The R179s are CBTC equipped, They Can run on the line. This would reduce the need for spares since now the can use the R179s instead of using a dedicated fleet of R160s. Meaning the can share it's fleet except the R143s and R160 8313-8376 (a set in this pool did make an appearance on the post.  CBTC but it for that one day).

 

Jamaica can't get the R179s since it would already add another car type to their fleet and has to potential to get the R211s. R160s would be the better option. The only need 13 trains which it uses now with 5 cars.

 

They wouldn't have mixed length trains running on the because there will be more than enough 8 car R160s needed for the and it could use the spares (2 sets are laid up in Jamaica Yard) during the off peak hours (weekends)

 

And The reason why the never had lengthened trains because TA decided to reef 75% of the 60 foot SMEE fleet on top of having R44s with frame issues. This is also the reason why the never went full length because there weren't enough cars to make it happen. The has ridership and it will grow even more if congestion pricing goes into effect. The is a crosstown line so people coming from Downtown Brooklyn, Williamsburg, Bed-Sty and etc. will use the line more to transfer to the and lines to get into the city. So the being 10 cars would help and would be better off that way instead of being 8 cars anyway. 

 

Also All R160s 8377 and up, R179s and R211s CBTC has to be cross compatible with all current and upcoming CBTC lines except the line (this could change) for flexibility

Edited October 24, 2022 by R32 3838

[RandomRider0101]

36 minutes ago, R32 3838 said:

They already have more than enough 8 car units. The has about 92 R179s which is 11.5 sets. There is no need to order more 8 car units than what is being ordered with the R211 order. It's better to consolidate the 8 car R179s in one yard instead of having them in 2 yards.

ENY already have a large fleet of 8 car units. When The R179s are CBTC equipped, They Can run on the line. This would reduce the need for spares since now the can use the R179s instead of using a dedicated fleet of R160s. Meaning the can share it's fleet except the R143s and R160 8313-8376 (a set in this pool did make an appearance on the post.  CBTC but it for that one day).

 

Jamaica can't get the R179s since it would already add another car type to their fleet and has to potential to get the R211s. R160s would be the better option. The only need 13 trains which it uses now with 5 cars.

 

They wouldn't have mixed length trains running on the because there will be more than enough 8 car R160s needed for the and it could use the spares (2 sets are laid up in Jamaica Yard) during the off peak hours (weekends)

 

And The reason why the never had lengthened trains because TA decided to reef 75% of the 60 foot SMEE fleet on top of having R44s with frame issues. This is also the reason why the never went full length because there weren't enough cars to make it happen. The has ridership and it will grow even more if congestion pricing goes into effect. The is a crosstown line so people coming from Downtown Brooklyn, Williamsburg, Bed-Sty and etc. will use the line more to transfer to the and lines to get into the city. So the being 10 cars would help and would be better off that way instead of being 8 cars anyway. 

 

Also All R160s 8377 and up, R179s and R211s CBTC has to be cross compatible with all current and upcoming CBTC lines except the line (this could change) for flexibility

Maybe they don't need so many 4-car sets, but 32 cars is a very small amount; so either it would be adjusted to be closer to 100 cars, or they should just not order any 4-car sets at all. Microfleets can lead to bad maintenance.

I don't disagree with the becoming 8 cars; I think it should be 8 cars. But I don't think the needs to be 10 cars; that's probably a little too generous.

You really think they can reduce ENY's overall fleet to accomodate the getting 8-car R160s? I don't know, I guess time will tell; let's see what happens when the becomes full length.

 

 

 

[trainfan22]

News article released today on the R211 option order...

 

The MTA board will vote this week on whether to spend $1.78 billion purchasing 640 brand-new train cars to replace its aging rolling stock.

The brand new R211 cars, produced by Japanese multinational Kawasaki, would come on top of 535 cars previously purchased from the same company for $1.4 billion, whose arrival in the Big Apple has been delayed by over a year owing to the COVID-19 pandemic, supply chain issues, and labor shortages.

If approved, the MTA would execute an option from its original 2018 contract to purchase more conditioned on good performance, although no R211s presently operate in passenger service and only a few have been delivered for testing. Further options could bring the number of R211s in the system to over 1,600 should they be executed. The contract is financed by the federal government, and could ultimately be worth about $4 billion.

The shiny new carriages could be expected for delivery to New York between February 2025 and December 2026, per MTA procurement documents, and would replace the 1970s-era R46 cars on the A and C lines

 

 

https://www.amny.com/transit/mta-spending-new-subway-cars/

 

 

 

I'm 100 percent sure they will vote yes haha

[Calvin]

Quote from the article: 

"The shiny new carriages could be expected for delivery to New York between February 2025 and December 2026, per MTA procurement documents, and would replace the 1970s-era R46 cars on the A and C lines."

They didn't mention the R46s from the and  . From the thought of it, when CBTC is going to be in progress over 6th Av for the  and  lines, the R68 and R68As used on both lines will be covered to the three Broadway lines minus the  . So, Coney Island is going to be using the entire R68 and R68A class cars for a while. 

[R32 3838]

23 minutes ago, Calvin said:

Quote from the article: 

"The shiny new carriages could be expected for delivery to New York between February 2025 and December 2026, per MTA procurement documents, and would replace the 1970s-era R46 cars on the A and C lines."

They didn't mention the R46s from the and  . From the thought of it, when CBTC is going to be in progress over 6th Av for the  and  lines, the R68 and R68As used on both lines will be covered to the three Broadway lines minus the  . So, Coney Island is going to be using the entire R68 and R68A class cars for a while. 

 

They pretty much saying the entire R46 fleet (* on paper*) is being replaced. People Think the Base order is going somewhere else when it says in the MTA Document

 

" The Cars to be Purchased under Option I will provide replacements for the R46 fleet that runs on the and lines . These Cars , Like the cars in the Base contract (Base order cars), Will be CBTC equipped and to facilitate the continued expansion of CBTC on the 8th ave Line."

 

 

 

Meaning pitkin will  still get the base order cars and a small chunk of the option I cars (150 cars i would say) to make the 100% full length.

 

 

[texassubwayfan555]

1 hour ago, trainfan22 said:

I'm 100 percent sure they will vote yes haha

Yes they will totally replace the rest of the R46s before they literally fall apart (/s just incase)

[LGA Link N Train]

Let this sink in…

 

 

the 30 day passenger testing is allegedly next month or December 

[texassubwayfan555]

Wow its been over half a decade since the R211 was announced and now we are finally getting to ride it.

[Reptile]

11 hours ago, texassubwayfan555 said:

Wow its been over half a decade since the R211 was announced and now we are finally getting to ride it.

The R179 wait was longer, I think it was 2011-2018 or something? On the bright side if there's no more pandemics in the future we could see the R262s coming in much quicker

[texassubwayfan555]

5 minutes ago, Reptile said:

R262s coming in much quicker

I hope so, but I am not betting on it. The R142/A CBTC upgrade will need to start soon too.

[RandomRider0101]

14 hours ago, LGA Link N Train said:

Let this sink in…

 

 

the 30 day passenger testing is allegedly next month or December 

Correct, The last MTA document stated November. If it gets pushed back again (don't wanna jinx it), we'll find out soon enough.

According to that same document, the first 10-car R211T should be arriving anytime between now & next week; basically any day now.

Edited October 25, 2022 by RandomRider0101

[Trainmaster5]

1 hour ago, RandomRider0101 said:

Correct, The last MTA document stated November. If it gets pushed back again (don't wanna jinx it), we'll find out soon enough.

According to that same document, the first 10-car R211T should be arriving anytime between now & next week; basically any day now.

What did the last document say about the SAS ?  I've been reading the PR from the agency since it's founding and I take it all with a grain of salt. Color me cynical but experience is a good teacher.  My take.  Carry on 

Edited October 25, 2022 by Trainmaster5

[RandomRider0101]

34 minutes ago, Trainmaster5 said:

What did the last document say about the SAS ?  I've been reading the PR from the agency since it's founding and I take it all with a grain of salt. Color me cynical but experience iis a good teacher.  My take.  Carry on 

I'm not sure about the SAS, but I agree that everything should be taken with a grain of salt. I should probably add that all things are subject to change until they actually happen.

[R32 3838]

4 hours ago, texassubwayfan555 said:

I hope so, but I am not betting on it. The R142/A CBTC upgrade will need to start soon too.

All of that is being pushed back, I wouldn't expect the R262 order to be awarded until at least 2024-2025. Lexington CBTC has been pushed back in favor for 6th ave and crosstown CBTC. So When it comes to that, The Conversions are up in the air.

[RandomRider0101]

16 minutes ago, R32 3838 said:

All of that is being pushed back, I wouldn't expect the R262 order to be awarded until at least 2024-2025. Lexington CBTC has been pushed back in favor for 6th ave and crosstown CBTC. So When it comes to that, The Conversions are up in the air.

I agree; and at that rate, we shouldn't expect to see an R262 touch MTA property until at least 2028-2029. The R211 order should hopefully be finished by then.

[Railfanner Mario]

2 hours ago, RandomRider0101 said:

Correct, The last MTA document stated November. If it gets pushed back again (don't wanna jinx it), we'll find out soon enough.

According to that same document, the first 10-car R211T should be arriving anytime between now & next week; basically any day now.

And I Believe (correct me if I’m wrong) the R211S will be here mid 2023 right?

[RandomRider0101]

1 hour ago, Railfanner Mario said:

And I Believe (correct me if I’m wrong) the R211S will be here mid 2023 right?

If I remember correctly, the R211S is expected to arrive a couple months after the 2nd R211T in December; it should be here early 2023 (subject to change).

[texassubwayfan555]

2 hours ago, RandomRider0101 said:

we shouldn't expect to see an R262 touch MTA property until at least 2028-2029

Why does everything have to take forever with the  ?

[RandomRider0101]

2 hours ago, texassubwayfan555 said:

Why does everything have to take forever with the  ?

This isn't really the MTA's fault. The COVID-19 Pandemic has affected everything. Kawasaki has been having issues at their plant(s) with a supposed high turnover rate AND supply chain shortages (like most other companies throughout this pandemic).

We should've had most of the R211 base order in now, and that's assuming Kawasaki doesn't screw up the order like Bombardier did the R179s (no jinx). Even when the cars are finally delivered, the rate of delivery will take even longer now due to the parts supply shortage (thanks alot, COVID).

This is all on top of the fact that everything today takes longer to build already, in addition to everything needing to be thoroughly tested ahead of time before service. If anything, MTA should take all of this as a warning not to wait too long to order new subway cars going forward. You never know what will happen, and everything has a domino effect.

[texassubwayfan555]

8 minutes ago, RandomRider0101 said:

MTA should take all of this as a warning not to wait too long to order new subway cars going forward

Yes, I think considering how long the R179 and R211 took, the  should be ordering the R262 (and probably the R68/A replacement) right now before the older cars are falling apart.

Also just how much testing do new subway cars do? The R211 has been testing for over 1 year now!

[RandomRider0101]

32 minutes ago, texassubwayfan555 said:

Yes, I think considering how long the R179 and R211 took, the  should be ordering the R262 (and probably the R68/A replacement) right now before the older cars are falling apart.

Also just how much testing do new subway cars do? The R211 has been testing for over 1 year now!

1+ year of testing is normal today for subway cars, although the parts shortage has caused the testing to take longer.

I agree that MTA should be ready to order replacements for the older cars. But even then, subway car orders have to be exercised consecutively, not simultaneously. This is to avoid a bigger headache in case all the cars have major issues.