R211 Discussion Thread

[darkstar8983]

6 hours ago, trainfan22 said:

 

Cause they was unreliable and expensive to run. Going by MDBF data the R32s were much worse than the R46s are now. MTA probably was like good riddance to that fleet. 

 

 

Not replying to you specifically but replying to the general thread. The R46s had two high profile breakdowns WHILE THE R32 WERE STILL IN SERVICE! (The one on the died between West 4th and Broadway - Lafayette and the one died on the and had to be towed). The R46 MDBF dropped 20,000 miles while the R32 were still in service from 2017 until the pandemic started in 2020. The R46s would be in the exact same shape they are in now if the R32s were still running. 

Oh don’t remind me of that infamous  train breakdown. My cousin visiting from overseas was on that train and it scarred her for life, considering that at the time she was a teenager. Don’t forget the  train derailment and the Queens Blvd  derailment.

Edited January 14, 2023 by darkstar8983

[NewFlyer 230]

The MTA always seems to never catch a break with being stuck with a bunch of old failing equipment while the new equipment is delayed. My question is if the R46’s are doing so terribly why not cut the  again to increase the spare factor? Now I know that isn’t a popular option but from what I read on here some of y’all make it seem like any day the R46’s could just break and fail completely. When I take the R46’s they seem to run the same way they did when they were on the  but then again I don’t take the subway nearly as much as I used to before 2022 .Then I would boost Q102 service in Queens so that riders can transfer to the   and  at Queens Plaza.  

That is why I hope as soon as all the R211’s have been delivered that they go ahead and start planning replacements for the R68/R68A’s. Yes they are about a decade newer and are holding up but personally I wouldn’t wait until almost 2040 to replace them. The MTA needs to see if they can push get them retired in the early 2030s in my opinion. It ends up costing the agency more money trying to fix up these old cars when their MDBF drops. 

[trainfan22]

3 hours ago, darkstar8983 said:

Oh don’t remind me of that infamous  train breakdown. My cousin visiting from overseas was on that train and it scarred her for life, considering that at the time she was a teenager. Don’t forget the  train derailment and the Queens Blvd  derailment.

Sorry to hear that about your cousin.

 

Those two derailments wasn't the train's fault, it was defects with the tracks that caused them to derail.

[Lawrence St]

1 hour ago, NewFlyer 230 said:

The MTA always seems to never catch a break with being stuck with a bunch of old failing equipment while the new equipment is delayed. My question is if the R46’s are doing so terribly why not cut the  again to increase the spare factor? Now I know that isn’t a popular option but from what I read on here some of y’all make it seem like any day the R46’s could just break and fail completely. When I take the R46’s they seem to run the same way they did when they were on the  but then again I don’t take the subway nearly as much as I used to before 2022 .Then I would boost Q102 service in Queens so that riders can transfer to the   and  at Queens Plaza.  

That is why I hope as soon as all the R211’s have been delivered that they go ahead and start planning replacements for the R68/R68A’s. Yes they are about a decade newer and are holding up but personally I wouldn’t wait until almost 2040 to replace them. The MTA needs to see if they can push get them retired in the early 2030s in my opinion. It ends up costing the agency more money trying to fix up these old cars when their MDBF drops. 

Yeah because most of the R46's were stuck on the  and Jamaica had mostly good maintence with them. CIY either does not care or isn't as good as Jamiaca to take care of the R46's, and the fact being that the R46's are running on longer routes almost always 24/7 is also contributing to the MBDF factor.

[subwaycommuter1983]

1 hour ago, NewFlyer 230 said:

The MTA always seems to never catch a break with being stuck with a bunch of old failing equipment while the new equipment is delayed. My question is if the R46’s are doing so terribly why not cut the  again to increase the spare factor? Now I know that isn’t a popular option but from what I read on here some of y’all make it seem like any day the R46’s could just break and fail completely. When I take the R46’s they seem to run the same way they did when they were on the  but then again I don’t take the subway nearly as much as I used to before 2022 .Then I would boost Q102 service in Queens so that riders can transfer to the   and  at Queens Plaza.  

That is why I hope as soon as all the R211’s have been delivered that they go ahead and start planning replacements for the R68/R68A’s. Yes they are about a decade newer and are holding up but personally I wouldn’t wait until almost 2040 to replace them. The MTA needs to see if they can push get them retired in the early 2030s in my opinion. It ends up costing the agency more money trying to fix up these old cars when their MDBF drops. 

Any typical commuter who rides the subway every day to/from work doesn't give a damn if a train yard has a high spare factor. All they care about and they demand frequent subway service.

To those who complain about how bad the r46's are were obviously not around when the redbirds were running in the 90's. Those were in my opinion the worst subway fleet that I've ever ridden. I rode them on the C in the early 90's and I rode them on the 2 and 7. The lights were always flickering. It didn't have air conditioning and water leaked inside whenever it rains. The r42's and r32's retired in much better shape than the redbirds.

[trainfan22]

2 hours ago, subwaycommuter1983 said:

Any typical commuter who rides the subway every day to/from work doesn't give a damn if a train yard has a high spare factor. All they care about and they demand frequent subway service.

To those who complain about how bad the r46's are were obviously not around when the redbirds were running in the 90's. Those were in my opinion the worst subway fleet that I've ever ridden. I rode them on the C in the early 90's and I rode them on the 2 and 7. The lights were always flickering. It didn't have air conditioning and water leaked inside whenever it rains. The r42's and r32's retired in much better shape than the redbirds.

You was around for the R30? Lucky you lol. For those not familiar the Redbirds on the were R30s which retired in the early 90s. I wish they would have stayed until the early 2000s when the R143 showed up so I would have had an chance to ride them. 

 

I do agree that there has been worse equipment in the subway history than the current day R46. IMO the R46 are in upgrade in comfort over older SMEE cars. Mechanical issues aside the cars are still pleasent to ride. Only complaint is the A/C can be weak during the summer months at times. They are also IMO the quietest cars in the fleet in the interior, even quieter than the Tech Trains. 

Edited January 14, 2023 by trainfan22

[RandomRider0101]

16 hours ago, JustTheSIR said:

Why tf did the MTA cut out the R32s because 2 years of low ridership anyway?

You kinda answered your own question here. Why would they keep ancient cars that were almost pushing 60 years in service, when the ridership really didn't and still doesn't warrant it?

Aside from the ridership, the R32s were already planned to be fully retired before COVID hit us & subsequently caused ridership to plummet. It was multiple reasons not just one; the lower ridership was just an extra nail in the coffin.

In the end, the R179s finished what the R160s couldn't, which was wipe out the remaining SMEES. Now that we've finally moved out of that era, we can focus fully on the next new era of trains coming in (the R211s), which will provide the extra cars needed for fleet expansion.

[subwaycommuter1983]

1 hour ago, trainfan22 said:

You was around for the R30? Lucky you lol. For those not familiar the Redbirds on the were R30s which retired in the early 90s. I wish they would have stayed until the early 2000s when the R143 showed up so I would have had an chance to ride them. 

 

I do agree that there has been worse equipment in the subway history than the current day R46. IMO the R46 are in upgrade in comfort over older SMEE cars. Mechanical issues aside the cars are still pleasent to ride. Only complaint is the A/C can be weak during the summer months at times. They are also IMO the quietest cars in the fleet in the interior, even quieter than the Tech Trains. 

Yes I was a child in the early 90's and the main reason the r30's were retired is because of no air conditioning, which is a safety hazard during the summer.

Also, it was very common during the early 90's to see many of the lettered lines to run 4 or 5 car trains during the weekends just like the G, even though the G runs 5 car trains 24/7.

[R32 3838]

26 minutes ago, RandomRider0101 said:

You kinda answered your own question here. Why would they keep ancient cars that were almost pushing 60 years in service, when the ridership really didn't and still doesn't warrant it?

Aside from the ridership, the R32s were already planned to be fully retired before COVID hit us & subsequently caused ridership to plummet. It was multiple reasons not just one; the lower ridership was just an extra nail in the coffin.

In the end, the R179s finished what the R160s couldn't, which was wipe out the remaining SMEES. Now that we've finally moved out of that era, we can focus fully on the next new era of trains coming in (the R211s), which will provide the extra cars needed for fleet expansion.

R179s didn't replace all the R32s. The R211s are the replacements of the remaining ones that were on paper planned to retire in 2022 (which in turn they did, They only sat in storage from 2020-2021 when the decision was to retire them.)  The plans changed due to politics which in turn the was going to see a reduction in service which the former governor signed on and then covid hit which was the nail in the coffin. 

 

R179s really replaced the void that the R44s that didn't get replaced by the R160s as well as replacing all of the R42s and half of the R32 fleet. The R211 order both base and Option order I is fixing the shortage by replacing R46s and fulling the void of the already retired R32s and a surplus of extra cars .

 

 

We can't keep on letting scrap subway cars without proper replacements, Because just like in 2010, We will be waiting 7 to 10 years to fix the shortage of cars again which in this day in age isn't a good idea. This is why other systems around the world is better than ours, they don't do shit like that.

3 hours ago, subwaycommuter1983 said:

Any typical commuter who rides the subway every day to/from work doesn't give a damn if a train yard has a high spare factor. All they care about and they demand frequent subway service.

To those who complain about how bad the r46's are were obviously not around when the redbirds were running in the 90's. Those were in my opinion the worst subway fleet that I've ever ridden. I rode them on the C in the early 90's and I rode them on the 2 and 7. The lights were always flickering. It didn't have air conditioning and water leaked inside whenever it rains. The r42's and r32's retired in much better shape than the redbirds.

 

Waiting 20-30 mintues for a or train due to an equipment shortage in 2022 is unacceptable, That's the issue. Unlike CI yard, The and really don't have a back up.

It's not like the 80s which was worse but things shouldn't be the way they are today esp with today's political climate. People want better service but complain about the older subway cars. Then caves in and thus we have a shortage of cars. Thats my issue.

 

5 hours ago, NewFlyer 230 said:

The MTA always seems to never catch a break with being stuck with a bunch of old failing equipment while the new equipment is delayed. My question is if the R46’s are doing so terribly why not cut the  again to increase the spare factor? Now I know that isn’t a popular option but from what I read on here some of y’all make it seem like any day the R46’s could just break and fail completely. When I take the R46’s they seem to run the same way they did when they were on the  but then again I don’t take the subway nearly as much as I used to before 2022 .Then I would boost Q102 service in Queens so that riders can transfer to the   and  at Queens Plaza.  

That is why I hope as soon as all the R211’s have been delivered that they go ahead and start planning replacements for the R68/R68A’s. Yes they are about a decade newer and are holding up but personally I wouldn’t wait until almost 2040 to replace them. The MTA needs to see if they can push get them retired in the early 2030s in my opinion. It ends up costing the agency more money trying to fix up these old cars when their MDBF drops.

There's no need to cut the train, It wouldn't really help, CI has the R68s to fall back on. Yeah it's still a small spare factor but weekends and nights there are plenty of R68s laid up that they can use. The and barely has anything and the amount of R179s doesn't help, The is dominated by R46s and the at least is 60/40.

[subwaycommuter1983]

30 minutes ago, R32 3838 said:

R179s didn't replace all the R32s. The R211s are the replacements of the remaining ones that were on paper planned to retire in 2022 (which in turn they did, They only sat in storage from 2020-2021 when the decision was to retire them.)  The plans changed due to politics which in turn the was going to see a reduction in service which the former governor signed on and then covid hit which was the nail in the coffin. 

 

R179s really replaced the void that the R44s that didn't get replaced by the R160s as well as replacing all of the R42s and half of the R32 fleet. The R211 order both base and Option order I is fixing the shortage by replacing R46s and fulling the void of the already retired R32s and a surplus of extra cars .

 

 

We can't keep on letting scrap subway cars without proper replacements, Because just like in 2010, We will be waiting 7 to 10 years to fix the shortage of cars again which in this day in age isn't a good idea. This is why other systems around the world is better than ours, they don't do shit like that.

 

Waiting 20-30 mintues for a or train due to an equipment shortage in 2022 is unacceptable, That's the issue. Unlike CI yard, The and really don't have a back up.

It's not like the 80s which was worse but things shouldn't be the way they are today esp with today's political climate. People want better service but complain about the older subway cars. Then caves in and thus we have a shortage of cars. Thats my issue.

 

There's no need to cut the train, It wouldn't really help, CI has the R68s to fall back on. Yeah it's still a small spare factor but weekends and nights there are plenty of R68s laid up that they can use. The and barely has anything and the amount of R179s doesn't help, The is dominated by R46s and the at least is 60/40.

Of course it's unacceptable and that is another example of why the A/C trains are the most neglected subway lines in the system.

If I'm not mistaken the C was supposed to get the majority of the 8 car r179's, while ENY was only going to get enough r179's to replace the r42's. It didn't happen and C train riders got screwed again by sharing the r46's with the A. I also agree that most of the r179's should have been 10 car trains.

What the MTA doesn't seem to understand is that a massive subway car shortage will cripple the whole system. Why?? Because subway service on the B division will be reduced, which will cause severe overcrowding on the B division as well as the A division and more traffic in the city.

Edited January 14, 2023 by subwaycommuter1983

[RandomRider0101]

3 hours ago, R32 3838 said:

R179s didn't replace all the R32s. The R211s are the replacements of the remaining ones that were on paper planned to retire in 2022 (which in turn they did, They only sat in storage from 2020-2021 when the decision was to retire them.)  The plans changed due to politics which in turn the was going to see a reduction in service which the former governor signed on and then covid hit which was the nail in the coffin. 

 

R179s really replaced the void that the R44s that didn't get replaced by the R160s as well as replacing all of the R42s and half of the R32 fleet. The R211 order both base and Option order I is fixing the shortage by replacing R46s and fulling the void of the already retired R32s and a surplus of extra cars .

 

 

We can't keep on letting scrap subway cars without proper replacements, Because just like in 2010, We will be waiting 7 to 10 years to fix the shortage of cars again which in this day in age isn't a good idea. This is why other systems around the world is better than ours, they don't do shit like that.

 

Waiting 20-30 mintues for a or train due to an equipment shortage in 2022 is unacceptable, That's the issue. Unlike CI yard, The and really don't have a back up.

It's not like the 80s which was worse but things shouldn't be the way they are today esp with today's political climate. People want better service but complain about the older subway cars. Then caves in and thus we have a shortage of cars. Thats my issue.

 

There's no need to cut the train, It wouldn't really help, CI has the R68s to fall back on. Yeah it's still a small spare factor but weekends and nights there are plenty of R68s laid up that they can use. The and barely has anything and the amount of R179s doesn't help, The is dominated by R46s and the at least is 60/40.

I know what you mean, but I'm talking about in the sense of a 1 for 1 replacement. Prior to the R179s, the B-division had even less cars available to use; the 179s provided a slight increase in car availability. It may not have been enough overall, but it was still an increase. They had enough cars to wipe out the SMEES, regardless of low car availability.

We know that when certain groups of ppl speak out on transit related issues, the is more likely to listen. Well in this case, the unions & politicians spoke out on behalf of riders who said "we want the R32s gone"; the MTA listened and changed their plans accordingly. We can debate all day on whether we think it was the right or wrong decision, but at the end of the day it was a final decision that was made and will remain unchanged.

Passengers shouldn't have to choose between better service and brand new modern equipment. But we're constantly put in positions where we have to make these choices due to the MTA and everyone else's poor decisions. Riders wanted the oldest cars gone, and you can't fault them for that. Average riders don't know about spares and car availability, but they sure know about ancient cars. They also don't know that subway cars take a long time to plan out, build, deliver, test and approve for service; not to mention delivery delays that can come up at any point, like what's been happening over the past decade and is still going on now.

Most of the blame for these issues is on the MTA not because they retired the R32s, but because of all the past decisions they made that caused the 32s to be in service for so long, while still not ordering enough cars to prepare for future increases. They finally got it right with the R211 order; we just need the cars to be reliable and everything else will work itself out.

[U-BahnNYC]

On 1/10/2023 at 6:36 PM, darkstar8983 said:

Cars can go up to 4999 or as low as 3328. Can’t wait for these R211s to hit service - these F*** R46s are driving me up the wall and the effort I have to make to avoid them on the  and  lines, which is worse since these are the two lines I take to get to work.

Is it because you simply don't like the R46, or because you are uneasy about riding the 75-footers in general? I don't mind the R46s themselves, what bothers me more is the fact that you're essentially "trapped" on those 75 footers because they just refuse to keep the damn storm doors open. 

[U-BahnNYC]

On 1/11/2023 at 9:12 PM, subwaycommuter1983 said:

Exactly. NQW riders need to take a chill pill. They had NTTs before and they will eventually get NTTs in less than 10 years from now. Just because a few rich people ride the NQW trains doesn't mean that they are entitled to new trains. Low income people pay the same fare as the rich people.

At least the MTA is using some common sense in regards to CBTC. 6th Avenue needs to go after 8th Avenue.

Rich people don't regularly ride the subway so this whole "rich people influence things" I keep seeing repeated on these threads is a naive and moot point. At least, not people rich enough to be influencing any decisions. 

And no neighborhood along the NQW is "rich", save for a few Manhattan areas like billionaires row (definitely not people who use the subway LOL) or the Upper East Side, which have redundant subway service on other lines so there really is no reason to use the NQW alone. 

[U-BahnNYC]

On 1/12/2023 at 9:44 AM, Lex said:

I shouldn't have to say this, but the MTA does not cater to you. You are not so important that thousands who live, work, or play in that part of Queens -- nor those that switch trains at Queensboro Plaza to travel to/from other parts of Queens or NYC as a whole -- should be inconvenienced just because old trains that have replacements on order are being used right now in an attempt to serve people, even if it's arguably half-hearted at times. You are a single person who chooses to avoid a single car class entirely, only to bitch and moan about "having" to do so (which you've repeatedly been told is insane bullshit in some form or other). You are your problem.

Personally, I have developed some anxiety about riding any 75 footer because of several unfortunate incidents I experienced last year - namely, one of them being stuck on a 75 footer underground with a crazy person onboard and no way to leave the train or call for help. I know I'm not the only person who has anxiety about riding these trains and I think that is more of a valid reason to avoid them over someone simply not *liking* them. 

[Lex]

7 minutes ago, U-BahnNYC said:

Is it because you simply don't like the R46, or because you are uneasy about riding the 75-footers in general? I don't mind the R46s themselves, what bothers me more is the fact that you're essentially "trapped" on those 75 footers because they just refuse to keep the damn storm doors open. 

If you take a look at some of those curves, you can see why.

[U-BahnNYC]

2 minutes ago, Lex said:

If you take a look at some of those curves, you can see why.

I think 99% of people would rather take a chance with those curves than be stuck onboard a stalled train underground with a mentally ill homeless man smoking up a storm. 

At least, that is what traumatized me. And the conductor did not make a SINGLE announcement or explanation for almost 20 mins. 

[Kamen Rider]

1 hour ago, U-BahnNYC said:

I think 99% of people would rather take a chance with those curves than be stuck onboard a stalled train underground with a mentally ill homeless man smoking up a storm. 

At least, that is what traumatized me. And the conductor did not make a SINGLE announcement or explanation for almost 20 mins. 

You are assuming quite a bit there. Let's say I'm standing by the right hand side window (what we call "onside') of my cab. Facing foward, I should be seeing the route Bullet out the front window. 

 

When the R46 takes a really tight curve... I'm seeing the other cab's plug door and straight through to the other car's passenger compartment. Something I should not be able to look straight into standing next to the cab window.

[U-BahnNYC]

31 minutes ago, Kamen Rider said:

You are assuming quite a bit there. Let's say I'm standing by the right hand side window (what we call "onside') of my cab. Facing foward, I should be seeing the route Bullet out the front window. 

 

When the R46 takes a really tight curve... I'm seeing the other cab's plug door and straight through to the other car's passenger compartment. Something I should not be able to look straight into standing next to the cab window.

There aren't many tight curves on any of the R46 routes, maybe except the running through the financial district. 

What is more worrisome to me is how there is no way to communicate with the outside world on a 75 footer in case of an emergency. How has this even been allowed to go on? 

[R32 3838]

49 minutes ago, RandomRider0101 said:

I know what you mean, but I'm talking about in the sense of a 1 for 1 replacement. Prior to the R179s, the B-division had even less cars available to use; the 179s provided a slight increase in car availability. It may not have been enough overall, but it was still an increase. They had enough cars to wipe out the SMEES, regardless of low car availability.

We know that when certain groups of ppl speak out on transit related issues, the is more likely to listen. Well in this case, the unions & politicians spoke out on behalf of riders who said "we want the R32s gone"; the MTA listened and changed their plans accordingly. We can debate all day on whether we think it was the right or wrong decision, but at the end of the day it was a final decision that was made and will remain unchanged.

Passengers shouldn't have to choose between better service and brand new modern equipment. But we're constantly put in positions where we have to make these choices due to the MTA and everyone else's poor decisions. Riders wanted the oldest cars gone, and you can't fault them for that. Average riders don't know about spares and car availability, but they sure know about ancient cars. They also don't know that subway cars take a long time to plan out, build, deliver, test and approve for service; not to mention delivery delays that can come up at any point, like what's been happening over the past decade and is still going on now.

Most of the blame for these issues is on the MTA not because they retired the R32s, but because of all the past decisions they made that caused the 32s to be in service for so long, while still not ordering enough cars to prepare for future increases. They finally got it right with the R211 order; we just need the cars to be reliable and everything else will work itself out.

 

I agree 100% on that part, But also blame Albany, There were talks of doing an Option Order III for the R160 order in 2010 to pretty much replace the void of the R44s and retire the R32/R42 fleet but they didn't go with it which I'm shocked. The R179s would have just been for fleet expansion or to replace anything that didn't get replaced. The R142S (r142A) Supplemental order they did granted it was just 80 cars with the last 10 cars  (7801-7810) being delivered in February of 2005 if I'm correct due to correcting a shortage of cars. 80 R33MLs were sidelined for service just in case anything went wrong but instead they never went back in service, most of them became work cars (refuse motors) and 14 cars (12 cars) became which would become  the Train of many colors. 8950/51 was also saved but they turned that pair into rider cars, these were the last pairs to be converted to rider cars.

 

I just wished the R179s were mostly 10 cars instead of 8, This would have allowed them to get more 8 car R211s for ENY since those cars would have been better off for the due to it's larger doors and the parts would have been shared since half of the parts of the R211s are the same as the R143 and R160s. The R179s use different parts.

 

[Vulturious]

1 hour ago, U-BahnNYC said:

There aren't many tight curves on any of the R46 routes, maybe except the running through the financial district. 

What is more worrisome to me is how there is no way to communicate with the outside world on a 75 footer in case of an emergency. How has this even been allowed to go on? 

What are you talking about? There are plenty of tight curves on any of the 75 footer's routes outside of Financial District which I'll include anyway:

• Between 57 St-7 Av and 5 Av-59 St is a bit of a tight curve
• Just north of 57 St-7 Av on the local tracks
• I would assume the 34 St switches is one
• Same thing with the Canal St switches 
• Canal St curve on the express tracks
• The Cortlandt St/City Hall curve, probably the tightest for 75 footers in general
• The Dekalb Junction both north and south of the station
• Montague tunnel portion between Court St and Dekalb Av can be tight
• Hoyt St switches if I'm not mistaken (a lot of switches aren't high speed switches)
• 36 St junction
• 59 St switches in Brooklyn
• 9 Av/Fort Hamilton Parkway curve
• West 8 St curve
• Coney Island curve

There are probably more, but I'm pointing out those that are in use by 75 footers currently. The steps under the bonnets aren't like 60 footers covering the width of the bonnets, they are just a little wider than the storm doors. Which if I'm not mistaken is still pretty dangerous for even someone to walk through on some of the more tame curves like the 18 Av curve along West End. Last I checked, people got injured so because of this so the  had no choice but to lock the storm doors to avoid anymore people getting injured. 

I'm not saying they should stay closed, but I definitely think it would've been even worse if it was open. Not because the shooter would've been able to also go to the next car anyway, but because people would've been panicking trying to get to another car trampling over everyone. Especially with how narrow those steps are at the bottom of the bonnet ends, idk just food for thought I guess.

[U-BahnNYC]

39 minutes ago, Vulturious said:

What are you talking about? There are plenty of tight curves on any of the 75 footer's routes outside of Financial District which I'll include anyway:

• Between 57 St-7 Av and 5 Av-59 St is a bit of a tight curve
• Just north of 57 St-7 Av on the local tracks
• I would assume the 34 St switches is one
• Same thing with the Canal St switches 
• Canal St curve on the express tracks
• The Cortlandt St/City Hall curve, probably the tightest for 75 footers in general
• The Dekalb Junction both north and south of the station
• Montague tunnel portion between Court St and Dekalb Av can be tight
• Hoyt St switches if I'm not mistaken (a lot of switches aren't high speed switches)
• 36 St junction
• 59 St switches in Brooklyn
• 9 Av/Fort Hamilton Parkway curve
• West 8 St curve
• Coney Island curve

There are probably more, but I'm pointing out those that are in use by 75 footers currently. The steps under the bonnets aren't like 60 footers covering the width of the bonnets, they are just a little wider than the storm doors. Which if I'm not mistaken is still pretty dangerous for even someone to walk through on some of the more tame curves like the 18 Av curve along West End. Last I checked, people got injured so because of this so the  had no choice but to lock the storm doors to avoid anymore people getting injured. 

I'm not saying they should stay closed, but I definitely think it would've been even worse if it was open. Not because the shooter would've been able to also go to the next car anyway, but because people would've been panicking trying to get to another car trampling over everyone. Especially with how narrow those steps are at the bottom of the bonnet ends, idk just food for thought I guess.

Then why were emergency intercoms never installed on all 75 foot trains? I'm shocked the MTA hasn't had a lawsuit about that yet

[RandomRider0101]

3 hours ago, R32 3838 said:

 

I agree 100% on that part, But also blame Albany, There were talks of doing an Option Order III for the R160 order in 2010 to pretty much replace the void of the R44s and retire the R32/R42 fleet but they didn't go with it which I'm shocked. The R179s would have just been for fleet expansion or to replace anything that didn't get replaced. The R142S (r142A) Supplemental order they did granted it was just 80 cars with the last 10 cars  (7801-7810) being delivered in February of 2005 if I'm correct due to correcting a shortage of cars. 80 R33MLs were sidelined for service just in case anything went wrong but instead they never went back in service, most of them became work cars (refuse motors) and 14 cars (12 cars) became which would become  the Train of many colors. 8950/51 was also saved but they turned that pair into rider cars, these were the last pairs to be converted to rider cars.

 

I just wished the R179s were mostly 10 cars instead of 8, This would have allowed them to get more 8 car R211s for ENY since those cars would have been better off for the due to it's larger doors and the parts would have been shared since half of the parts of the R211s are the same as the R143 and R160s. The R179s use different parts.

 

Yeah, Albany definitely deserves much blame for these problems due to them being cheap in general. They're the reason why chose Bombardier over Alskaw for the R179 contract, despite Alskaw (joint venture of Alstom & Kawasaki) having the better R179. All bc of that stupid law which requires them to take the lowest bid; it's a setup for disaster.

Giving the R179 contract to Bombardier turned out to be a huge mistake; they screwed up that order so bad, the severe delays were the least of the issues. They shrunk the cab space which created more passenger space, making it uncomfortable for bigger/taller ppl to operate in the cabs. Just one of the many issues with that car class.

I learned about that 3rd option of R160s before, and wonder how differently things could've been now had they just gone through with that in the first place. So many mistakes made along the way, and it created a domino effect.

Edited January 15, 2023 by RandomRider0101

[Vulturious]

1 hour ago, U-BahnNYC said:

Then why were emergency intercoms never installed on all 75 foot trains? I'm shocked the MTA hasn't had a lawsuit about that yet

Your guess is just as good as mine in all honesty. I'm not going to try and pretend like I know why they haven't done this since there is almost no reason as to why. This just reminds me of the few times the  were testing out equipment on the R68 on the  like current NTT door chimes, electronic signages, as well as I believe upgraded PA system. Hard to believe this wasn't fully implemented in every other R68/A at the very least in terms of PA system and electronic signages. If they could do this, there should be absolutely no reason they can't install emergency intercoms.

[NewFlyer 230]

19 hours ago, R32 3838 said:

R179s didn't replace all the R32s. The R211s are the replacements of the remaining ones that were on paper planned to retire in 2022 (which in turn they did, They only sat in storage from 2020-2021 when the decision was to retire them.)  The plans changed due to politics which in turn the was going to see a reduction in service which the former governor signed on and then covid hit which was the nail in the coffin. 

 

R179s really replaced the void that the R44s that didn't get replaced by the R160s as well as replacing all of the R42s and half of the R32 fleet. The R211 order both base and Option order I is fixing the shortage by replacing R46s and fulling the void of the already retired R32s and a surplus of extra cars .

 

 

We can't keep on letting scrap subway cars without proper replacements, Because just like in 2010, We will be waiting 7 to 10 years to fix the shortage of cars again which in this day in age isn't a good idea. This is why other systems around the world is better than ours, they don't do shit like that.

 

Waiting 20-30 mintues for a or train due to an equipment shortage in 2022 is unacceptable, That's the issue. Unlike CI yard, The and really don't have a back up.

It's not like the 80s which was worse but things shouldn't be the way they are today esp with today's political climate. People want better service but complain about the older subway cars. Then caves in and thus we have a shortage of cars. Thats my issue.

 

There's no need to cut the train, It wouldn't really help, CI has the R68s to fall back on. Yeah it's still a small spare factor but weekends and nights there are plenty of R68s laid up that they can use. The and barely has anything and the amount of R179s doesn't help, The is dominated by R46s and the at least is 60/40.

I was suggesting eliminating the  temporarily to increase the spare factor for the  and  lines. I would have a few freed up sets go to Piktin until the R211’s start to come in. However at this point it may not make sense since the R211 I assume should start its delivery any month now. 

Aren’t the R44’s in Staten Island in worst shape then the R46’s NYCT has? 

[subwaycommuter1983]

16 minutes ago, NewFlyer 230 said:

I was suggesting eliminating the  temporarily to increase the spare factor for the  and  lines. I would have a few freed up sets go to Piktin until the R211’s start to come in. However at this point it may not make sense since the R211 I assume should start its delivery any month now. 

Aren’t the R44’s in Staten Island in worst shape then the R46’s NYCT has? 

You actually think that straphangers will be happy if the W trains is eliminated?? What excuse the MTA is going to tell them??

Straphangers don't care about spare factors. They care about frequent service.