R211 Discussion Thread

[darkstar8983]

27 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? 

From what I’ve seen on twitter updates the aren’t many instances of SIR R44s breaking down but that’s because of the fact that SIR runs as a railroad as opposed to a subway line meaning that the headway differences between rush hours and non rush hours is much greater. Trains run every 15 minutes express and every 15 minutes local rush hours, but during all other times, trains are every 30-60 minutes. This means that for most of the fleet, they’re needed for 1-2 round trips each rush hour and then back to the yard until next rush hour, so there’s much more opportunity for the cars to see shop time. 
 

this is why subway routes should either have a dramatic shift between rush hour and non-rush hour service, or a higher spare factor. Those that don’t have either are the ones that truly suffer from performance problems. 

[subwaycommuter1983]

Reducing subway service or eliminating subway lines will not solve the issues with the r46's.

You guys are not thinking about the straphangers.

Do straphangers really care if a subway yard has a high spare factor?? Absolutely not!! That's not even a priority for them.

For any straphanger, their priority is to wait 5 minutes or less for a train during rush hours and 10 minutes or less during non rush hours.

Straphangers are already upset because fares will go up this year. Any type of service reduction will add insult to injury.

[RandomRider0101]

10 hours ago, RandomRider0101 said:

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.

To add on to this post, I was also gonna say that I agree that the R179 order should've had more 5 car sets; whether that meant less 4 car sets or more cars included in the order in general (similar to the original plan for the order). But in hindsight, it kind of turned out to be a good thing that didn't buy more cars due to how the contract was handled by Bombardier.

They also bare partial blame (along with Albany & MTA) for our current problems as their constant screwups & overall incompetence contributed to us being forced to ride in 1960s relics all the way into the early 2020s. Them (Bombardier) leaving the rail market was the best thing they've done in years; what a terrible legacy to leave behind.

 

[U-BahnNYC]

11 hours ago, RandomRider0101 said:

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.

If you think Albany is "cheap" I have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell. New York regularly tops the list of most wasteful spending, highest debt states in the nation. Florida, despite having a larger population, manages to get by just fine with a budge half, yes half, the size of New York State. When you have agencies like the MTA wasting billions and perpetually bullying the taxpayers into coughing up more cash, its not the state's fault for being cheap, it's their fault for being too generous and not putting their foot down to teach the  a lesson. 

[RandomRider0101]

40 minutes ago, U-BahnNYC said:

If you think Albany is "cheap" I have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell. New York regularly tops the list of most wasteful spending, highest debt states in the nation. Florida, despite having a larger population, manages to get by just fine with a budge half, yes half, the size of New York State. When you have agencies like the MTA wasting billions and perpetually bullying the taxpayers into coughing up more cash, its not the state's fault for being cheap, it's their fault for being too generous and not putting their foot down to teach the  a lesson. 

I might've used the wrong choice of words there, but it is still Albany's fault for not making smart decisions. They can waste billions of dollars every year on unnecessary stuff, but can't send the right money to make sure can properly update their fleet; its just embarrassing & frustrating on many levels. I don't think there was any valid reason Albany couldn't allocate more money for MTA to order the R160 3rd option. Now that CBTC is being implemented systemwide, they really need to make sure there are more than enough subway cars available to use.

Edited January 15, 2023 by RandomRider0101
Added additional info.

[subwaycommuter1983]

41 minutes ago, U-BahnNYC said:

If you think Albany is "cheap" I have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell. New York regularly tops the list of most wasteful spending, highest debt states in the nation. Florida, despite having a larger population, manages to get by just fine with a budge half, yes half, the size of New York State. When you have agencies like the MTA wasting billions and perpetually bullying the taxpayers into coughing up more cash, its not the state's fault for being cheap, it's their fault for being too generous and not putting their foot down to teach the  a lesson. 

That's because Florida treats their working class like garbage. The salaries are too low and very few jobs offer benefits. Yes, things in Florida may be cheaper than NY, but for the amount of money that Floridians are making, it's too expensive for them.

Going back to NY, let's remember that the r38's, r40's and r44's were retired during the recession of 2008-2011, which was a national recession, which impacted everything including the MTA. That recession caused the MTA to eliminate the W, V trains and a bunch of bus lines and it prevented the MTA from purchasing more r160's.

Edited January 15, 2023 by subwaycommuter1983

[RandomRider0101]

3 hours ago, subwaycommuter1983 said:

That's because Florida treats their working class like garbage. The salaries are too low and very few jobs offer benefits. Yes, things in Florida may be cheaper than NY, but for the amount of money that Floridians are making, it's too expensive for them.

Going back to NY, let's remember that the r38's, r40's and r44's were retired during the recession of 2008-2011, which was a national recession, which impacted everything including the MTA. That recession caused the MTA to eliminate the W, V trains and a bunch of bus lines and it prevented the MTA from purchasing more r160's.

Well that makes sense; I knew there had to be a reason for that. About earlier, just wanted to clarify- I don't hate the R179s, I actually really like them despite all their flaws. My issue was with Bombardier since it was them that messed up the order. They were already 2+ years late, then when the cars finally came they were still riddled with many issues, on top of that they were rushed into service.

Since the company is no longer in the rail market, it's not really as big of a deal as before; But they still left us with hundreds of troubled cars. Most of the issues can be fixed during SMS time, but some issues may be permanant. I'm hopeful it will be a much better experience with the R211s' entry into service.

[Calvin]

Not to go off-topic but with the R179 amount, was it supposed to replace the 222 R32s that were in the system back then with 50 R42s? Or was it an expansion to have at least 100 R32s still in-service waiting future R211 delivery plan back when it was first delivered?

Edited January 16, 2023 by Calvin
edit in-case of confusion to question

[darkstar8983]

13 minutes ago, Calvin said:

Not to go off-topic but with the R179 amount, was it supposed to replace the 222 R32s that were in the system back then with 50 R42s? Or was it an expansion to have at least 100 R32s still in-service waiting for the R211 to be delivered with back when it was first delivered?

Originally it was supposed to replace the 272 leftover R32 and R42s, but the Sandy related repairs to the  and anticipate fleet expansion had initially changed the MTA’s plan and the fleet was just supposed to retire the R42s, with the R32s left over to provide rush hour service either on the  or , but the R32s were going to be removed from the  regardless due to performance problems and the issue of the  train cars running 7-days a week the whole day, while the  and  have several drop out trips during rush hours that could have used R32s (the Rockaway Park  trips and the  to be specific)

[RandomRider0101]

8 minutes ago, Calvin said:

Not to go off-topic but with the R179 amount, was it supposed to replace the 222 R32s that were in the system back then with 50 R42s? Or was it an expansion to have at least 100 R32s still in-service waiting for the R211 to be delivered with back when it was first delivered?

The original plan was to replace all the SMEES; then in response to the growing ridership at the time, that's when they decided they were keeping 100+ R32s for fleet expansion, since they didn't order enough R179s to do it.

[U-BahnNYC]

5 hours ago, subwaycommuter1983 said:

That's because Florida treats their working class like garbage. The salaries are too low and very few jobs offer benefits. Yes, things in Florida may be cheaper than NY, but for the amount of money that Floridians are making, it's too expensive for them.

Going back to NY, let's remember that the r38's, r40's and r44's were retired during the recession of 2008-2011, which was a national recession, which impacted everything including the MTA. That recession caused the MTA to eliminate the W, V trains and a bunch of bus lines and it prevented the MTA from purchasing more r160's.

I highly doubt they treat them like garbage - would be quite contrary to the fact that Florida is rapidly growing while New York is dwindling, especially its middle class which is the primary tax base (that also happens to gets screwed over by New York's taxation). 

But that aside, my point is this: throwing more money at the  will never be enough. Ever. You could give them $1 trillion tomorrow and it would all disappear like a black hole, then the next day they'd be complaining about how a trillion is not enough and they need "more money." 

The  needs a serious audit and learn what the rest of us do: start budgeting and live within your means. 

[U-BahnNYC]

In more related topics: what is the update with R211 test run and delivery? Is it still happening by this spring? Are there any sets already manufactured, waiting to be delivered like there were when the R179 started its 30 day run? 

[VIP]

6 hours ago, U-BahnNYC said:

In more related topics: what is the update with R211 test run and delivery? Is it still happening by this spring? Are there any sets already manufactured, waiting to be delivered like there were when the R179 started its 30 day run? 

The R211 probably won’t see passenger service until the summer or fall of 2023. The cars are having many many technical issues and malfunctions. 

[Princelex]

On 1/14/2023 at 11:18 PM, 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.

 

The 3rd Option Order wasn’t approved because the MTA was in the middle of a fiscal crisis in 2010 & that was the same time those infamous service cuts with the subway & buses took place. I remember when that news came out and I was very disappointed that we weren’t getting anymore R160’s. 

[RandomRider0101]

3 hours ago, VIP said:

The R211 probably won’t see passenger service until the summer or fall of 2023. The cars are having many many technical issues and malfunctions. 

Good grief, we just can't catch a break can we? Well someone said they heard that the R211T is doing fine while the R211A is the one having all the issues; you have any insight on that?

[NewFlyer 230]

20 hours ago, subwaycommuter1983 said:

Reducing subway service or eliminating subway lines will not solve the issues with the r46's.

You guys are not thinking about the straphangers.

Do straphangers really care if a subway yard has a high spare factor?? Absolutely not!! That's not even a priority for them.

For any straphanger, their priority is to wait 5 minutes or less for a train during rush hours and 10 minutes or less during non rush hours.

Straphangers are already upset because fares will go up this year. Any type of service reduction will add insult to injury.

We know that the average rider can care less about spare factors and let alone what train shows up as long as they can get to their destination. Quite frankly I don’t particularly care what train shows up myself, but a lot of folks on here are talking about how beat the R46’s are so I proposed a possible solution. I don’t like the idea of cutting a subway line but shoot the agencies got to do what they need to do to make sure they can provide adequate service especially to higher ridership lines like the  and  which from my understanding barely has a spare factor.

 

7 hours ago, VIP said:

The R211 probably won’t see passenger service until the summer or fall of 2023. The cars are having many many technical issues and malfunctions. 

This is why I believe the MTA & the state need to retire the R68/R68A’s towards the end of this decade and the beginning of next. With all these technical issues the past few NTT orders have had before delivery, I don’t think the MTA can afford to keep putting money into old cars that are only becoming more unreliable as time goes on. If they have learned anything from the R32/R42 and R46 situation, I wouldn’t wait until trains are 45-50 before retiring them because I’m sure having to keep the R32’s and R42’s running well past their retirement age probably cost the MTA a lot of unnecessary money that could have been used towards a new fleet. I know there were outside forces that made things difficult especially the recession of 08-09 and the R44 situation but there should be some type of priority by the state at least to make sure places like NYC aren’t running trains that are almost a half century old in the capacity that they are. 

[Lawrence St]

On 1/15/2023 at 3:35 AM, Vulturious said:

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.

That was a huge waste of money, and didn’t one of those companies get into hot water with the  for the camera fiasco?

Edited January 16, 2023 by Lawrence St

[darkstar8983]

I also haven’t seen any new R211. YouTube videos in the past month. The mechanical issues must be very extensive that the train is likely sitting in the yard. Better now than in the future when you’d have to pull the whole fleet out of service like we did with the R179s and how the Washington Metro is doing now with the 7000-series trains (also Kawasaki). However I’ve been hearing that the issues with Washington Metro cars may be a track related issue affecting every car in the entire fleet but that the 7000s are worse off

[subwaycommuter1983]

3 hours ago, NewFlyer 230 said:

We know that the average rider can care less about spare factors and let alone what train shows up as long as they can get to their destination. Quite frankly I don’t particularly care what train shows up myself, but a lot of folks on here are talking about how beat the R46’s are so I proposed a possible solution. I don’t like the idea of cutting a subway line but shoot the agencies got to do what they need to do to make sure they can provide adequate service especially to higher ridership lines like the  and  which from my understanding barely has a spare factor.

 

This is why I believe the MTA & the state need to retire the R68/R68A’s towards the end of this decade and the beginning of next. With all these technical issues the past few NTT orders have had before delivery, I don’t think the MTA can afford to keep putting money into old cars that are only becoming more unreliable as time goes on. If they have learned anything from the R32/R42 and R46 situation, I wouldn’t wait until trains are 45-50 before retiring them because I’m sure having to keep the R32’s and R42’s running well past their retirement age probably cost the MTA a lot of unnecessary money that could have been used towards a new fleet. I know there were outside forces that made things difficult especially the recession of 08-09 and the R44 situation but there should be some type of priority by the state at least to make sure places like NYC aren’t running trains that are almost a half century old in the capacity that they are. 

At this point it just makes much more sense for the MTA to do a third option order of r211's than doing a separate order to replace the r68's. Why?? Because that separate order would be included in 2025-2030 capital program, which IMO is late. They are already late with the r262's.

The third option order of r211's would take a long time, but it would be delivered faster than a separate car order for the r68's

Also, r68's cannot run on CBTC lines. That is why they need to be retired by 2030.

 

[R179 8258]

1 hour ago, subwaycommuter1983 said:

At this point it just makes much more sense for the MTA to do a third option order of r211's than doing a separate order to replace the r68's. Why?? Because that separate order would be included in 2025-2030 capital program, which IMO is late. They are already late with the r262's.

The third option order of r211's would take a long time, but it would be delivered faster than a separate car order for the r68's

Also, r68's cannot run on CBTC lines. That is why they need to be retired by 2030.

 

The R68 classes are going to Broadway Lines where CBTC is non active 

[subwaycommuter1983]

3 hours ago, R179 8258 said:

The R68 classes are going to Broadway Lines where CBTC is non active 

Sorry NQW riders. There's no other choice.

Plus 6th Avenue will be the next corridor to get CBTC after 8th Avenue. It's common sense.

[U-BahnNYC]

7 hours ago, darkstar8983 said:

I also haven’t seen any new R211. YouTube videos in the past month. The mechanical issues must be very extensive that the train is likely sitting in the yard. Better now than in the future when you’d have to pull the whole fleet out of service like we did with the R179s and how the Washington Metro is doing now with the 7000-series trains (also Kawasaki). However I’ve been hearing that the issues with Washington Metro cars may be a track related issue affecting every car in the entire fleet but that the 7000s are worse off

How extensive can they be if they've been running the train for 18 months now and it all seemed to be fine? what happened between then and now? 

[U-BahnNYC]

13 hours ago, RandomRider0101 said:

Good grief, we just can't catch a break can we? Well someone said they heard that the R211T is doing fine while the R211A is the one having all the issues; you have any insight on that?

Does the R211T need to undergo the same 18 months of testing the R211A had, or can it be the one to go on the 30-day test and enter service? 

[RedLine]

They did clearance testing too so maybe the whole thing.

[Vulturious]

11 hours ago, Lawrence St said:

That was a huge waste of money, and didn’t one of those companies get into hot water with the  for the camera fiasco?

I don't think I ever mentioned anything about the cameras because I remembered hearing news about. I also was speaking in terms of emergency intercoms and other tech like the LCD screens and upgraded PA systems, can't tell if you read my comment correctly. I literally could not care about the cameras or the LCD screens, but the upgraded PA system and emergency intercoms should be a must.