R211 Discussion Thread

[Vulturious]

24 minutes ago, ABCDEFGJLMNQRSSSWZ said:

This is a weird question, but are there any sharp curves in the system the open gangway R211Ts won't be able to handle and hence eliminates said line(s) from ever getting them?

I tend to agree the  and  would be best served by the open gangways just cause of high ridership and crowding.

Seems like the MTA is upgrading the whole IND first and then will focus more on the BMT. Given the IND lines tend to have higher ridership, I think this is probably a good idea. The BMT has a lot of awkward junctions and merges where CBTC would be useful, but BMT trains can generally afford to be spaced further apart cause there's basically no high high ridership lines (outside the which is Independent at this point anyways).

I agree with what others have been saying though. No individual line or riders "deserve" the new cars any more than others. Consider too NYC is a very transient place and that there's probably little crossover between say regular  train riders of even just 10 years ago and  train riders now.

Also, there are probably a lot of folks who actually prefer the R46

The R211T ran the clearance test along the Eastern Division which is the tightest in the B division system and if I'm not mistaken, a yard lead from the  tracks to ENY Yard is the tightest. From what I heard, it ran perfectly fine so I'm going to safely assume the R211T's can handle any line.

As for whatever assignment the R211's are going to be on and potentially a lot more fleet swapping, I'd rather let the  do its thing than continue to speculate. All we know for sure is 8 Av needs NTT's and soon so will all of 6 Av. Nothing more that I will say on that since I don't know what the  is planning nor will care as much as long as they're doing their job and are keeping on top of everything (that and as long as  trains get some NTT love). 

[zacster]

57 minutes ago, ABCDEFGJLMNQRSSSWZ said:

This is a weird question, but are there any sharp curves in the system the open gangway R211Ts won't be able to handle and hence eliminates said line(s) from ever getting them?

I tend to agree the  and  would be best served by the open gangways just cause of high ridership and crowding.

Seems like the MTA is upgrading the whole IND first and then will focus more on the BMT. Given the IND lines tend to have higher ridership, I think this is probably a good idea. The BMT has a lot of awkward junctions and merges where CBTC would be useful, but BMT trains can generally afford to be spaced further apart cause there's basically no high high ridership lines (outside the which is Independent at this point anyways).

I agree with what others have been saying though. No individual line or riders "deserve" the new cars any more than others. Consider too NYC is a very transient place and that there's probably little crossover between say regular  train riders of even just 10 years ago and  train riders now.

Also, there are probably a lot of folks who actually prefer the R46

That question was just answered above, and the answer is no. They tested on the sharpest curve and it was fine going through. 

My understanding from reading the MTA documents online is that the IND is getting CBTC because some of the signals are so old they need replacing anyway.  They deferred doing Lexington with CBTC because it had more recent upgrades, and deferred the R262 order too. 

I've lived in the same place for over 30 years, and have lived in this part of Brooklyn most of my life.  Transient?  Yes, there is that too. 

And I heard a lot of grumbling when the NTTs were removed from the Q and R46s were put in their place.  They took the newest most reliable cars and replaced them with the junkiest of the R46s.  These cars are unreliable.  The signs don't work. The don't ride smoothly.  The PA systems don't work.  The crews don't like them, the passengers don't like them. 

[ABCDEFGJLMNQRSSSWZ]

47 minutes ago, zacster said:

That question was just answered above, and the answer is no. They tested on the sharpest curve and it was fine going through. 

My understanding from reading the MTA documents online is that the IND is getting CBTC because some of the signals are so old they need replacing anyway.  They deferred doing Lexington with CBTC because it had more recent upgrades, and deferred the R262 order too. 

I've lived in the same place for over 30 years, and have lived in this part of Brooklyn most of my life.  Transient?  Yes, there is that too. 

And I heard a lot of grumbling when the NTTs were removed from the Q and R46s were put in their place.  They took the newest most reliable cars and replaced them with the junkiest of the R46s.  These cars are unreliable.  The signs don't work. The don't ride smoothly.  The PA systems don't work.  The crews don't like them, the passengers don't like them. 

I see; thanks for this insight.

 

There are some cases where I actually prefer R46 or 68s; if I'm going on a longer ride on a less crowded line, but I think that may be in part because I'm autistic and find the dimmer light levels better. Generally though the NTTs are objectively superior.

[U-BahnNYC]

1 hour ago, zacster said:

That question was just answered above, and the answer is no. They tested on the sharpest curve and it was fine going through. 

My understanding from reading the MTA documents online is that the IND is getting CBTC because some of the signals are so old they need replacing anyway.  They deferred doing Lexington with CBTC because it had more recent upgrades, and deferred the R262 order too. 

I've lived in the same place for over 30 years, and have lived in this part of Brooklyn most of my life.  Transient?  Yes, there is that too. 

And I heard a lot of grumbling when the NTTs were removed from the Q and R46s were put in their place.  They took the newest most reliable cars and replaced them with the junkiest of the R46s.  These cars are unreliable.  The signs don't work. The don't ride smoothly.  The PA systems don't work.  The crews don't like them, the passengers don't like them. 

I'm really curious who exactly is this "grumbling" coming from? Us here on these forums tend to care much, much more about rolling stock and technicalities than 'normie' riders out there - to most subway users a train is a train and as long as it gets them from point A to point B in a timely fashion that's all that matters.

The bigger problem with the  service in general is the constant problems, random delays, long waits for trains at peak hours, trains standing between stations with no crew communication, etc. 

Edited February 11, 2023 by U-BahnNYC

[subwaycommuter1983]

30 minutes ago, U-BahnNYC said:

I'm really curious who exactly is this "grumbling" coming from? Us here on these forums tend to care much, much more about rolling stock and technicalities than 'normie' riders out there - to most subway users a train is a train and as long as it gets them from point A to point B in a timely fashion that's all that matters.

The bigger problem with the  service in general is the constant problems, random delays, long waits for trains at peak hours, trains standing between stations with no crew communication, etc. 

Let's also add to the list long wait times during off peak hours and trains being held in station for no valid reason.

Wait times of over 5 minutes during rush hours and over 10 minutes during off peak hours are NOT acceptable.

[Jemorie]

7 hours ago, ABCDEFGJLMNQRSSSWZ said:

Seems like the MTA is upgrading the whole IND first and then will focus more on the BMT. Given the IND lines tend to have higher ridership, I think this is probably a good idea. The BMT has a lot of awkward junctions and merges where CBTC would be useful, but BMT trains can generally afford to be spaced further apart cause there's basically no high high ridership lines (outside the which is Independent at this point anyways).

Sigh. So many people here in the transit buff community tend to ignore the real reason why Canarsie, Flushing and now currently the IND are being upgraded is because of aging signals that were eventually bound for replacement. Ridership is part of it, but it’s not the entire reason.

But anyways, moving on…

[RTOMan]

6 hours ago, subwaycommuter1983 said:

Let's also add to the list long wait times during off peak hours and trains being held in station for no valid reason.

Wait times of over 5 minutes during rush hours and over 10 minutes during off peak hours are NOT acceptable.

There’s always a reason for them to hold us and usually it’s because there’s a delay behind or a issue in front of us…sorry if you don’t find it valid Hey even we just shrug our shoulders …Now if the crew isn’t communicating with the passengers that’s another story..

Edited February 11, 2023 by RTOMan

[RTOMan]

Oh BTW y’all folks would be surprised how many NEW PEOPLE are actually quitting this job because they can’t hack it.. I guess a job paying almost 40 bucks a hour isn’t worth it… Hence the problem no people to move the trains trains don’t move…

[Jemorie]

3 hours ago, RTOMan said:

Oh BTW y’all folks would be surprised how many NEW PEOPLE are actually quitting this job because they can’t hack it.. I guess a job paying almost 40 bucks a hour isn’t worth it… Hence the problem no people to move the trains trains don’t move…

So that could partially explain why the  was running on a 12 minute headway during the  shutdown during the two weekends last month (I forgot the dates). Before back in between April 2019 and May 2020, when the was shutdown, the ran on an 8 minute headway. Also could partially explain why the    is now reduced to a 20 minute headway and cut back to 34 St during the  shutdown so far as of late.

I’ll remember this information. Thanks.

[zacster]

19 hours ago, U-BahnNYC said:

I'm really curious who exactly is this "grumbling" coming from? Us here on these forums tend to care much, much more about rolling stock and technicalities than 'normie' riders out there - to most subway users a train is a train and as long as it gets them from point A to point B in a timely fashion that's all that matters.

The bigger problem with the  service in general is the constant problems, random delays, long waits for trains at peak hours, trains standing between stations with no crew communication, etc. 

From neighbors, other riders.  The cars are unreliable, announcements can't be heard.  They are jerky. People do notice these things.  The R160s were modern and reliable, these just aren't.  The N, Q and W went from the newest cars in the system to the oldest.  You don't think people would notice?

When they replaced the standards with the R9s in the Eastern Division, everybody thought they were replacing one old car with another.  But the R9s at that point were only 30 years old.  The R46 is 50!  Both the R9 at the time and the R46 now though were pretty beat up.

Edited February 12, 2023 by zacster

[JustTheSIR]

12 hours ago, RTOMan said:

Oh BTW y’all folks would be surprised how many NEW PEOPLE are actually quitting this job because they can’t hack it.. I guess a job paying almost 40 bucks a hour isn’t worth it… Hence the problem no people to move the trains trains don’t move…

Wait what do you mean "they can't hack it"

Something like just being able to stay on your phone the whole time without having to get up?

[Vulturious]

These two images are meant to show the  program which is said to exist on the R211, unfortunately the programming wasn't complete. The image is cut off, but it says 6 Av Local and Canarsie Local going to Rockaway Parkway. It's meant to show the 6 Av orange colors on the FIND, but took the 8 Av colors instead. I believe the transfers when showing the strip map is normal the whole way through, with the exception of when arriving at a station showing the transfer info not being entirely accurate.

I doubt the MTA will get to it since they didn't bother having the Last Stop program recycle through on the Overhead when arriving at a terminal shown in Tech and Transit's video riding it. 

[U-BahnNYC]

13 hours ago, RTOMan said:

There’s always a reason for them to hold us and usually it’s because there’s a delay behind or a issue in front of us…sorry if you don’t find it valid Hey even we just shrug our shoulders …Now if the crew isn’t communicating with the passengers that’s another story..

This happens way more often than it should. I can't count how many times I've been stuck underground with absolutely 0 communication, or mumble jumble, from the crew. It is a real problem and frankly more people ought to be reporting crews that fail to properly communicate. 

[U-BahnNYC]

1 hour ago, zacster said:

From neighbors, other riders.  The cars are unreliable, announcements can't be heard.  They are jerky. People do notice these things.  The R160s were modern and reliable, these just aren't.  The N, Q and W went from the newest cars in the system to the oldest.  You don't think people would notice?

When they replaced the standards with the R9s in the Eastern Division, everybody thought they were replacing one old car with another.  But the R9s at that point were only 30 years old.  The R46 is 50!  Both the R9 at the time and the R46 now though were pretty beat up.

Oh well, deal with it. Some lines are going to have the R46 until they are gone. 

[ABCDEFGJLMNQRSSSWZ]

2 hours ago, Vulturious said:

These two images are meant to show the  program which is said to exist on the R211, unfortunately the programming wasn't complete. The image is cut off, but it says 6 Av Local and Canarsie Local going to Rockaway Parkway. It's meant to show the 6 Av orange colors on the FIND, but took the 8 Av colors instead. I believe the transfers when showing the strip map is normal the whole way through, with the exception of when arriving at a station showing the transfer info not being entirely accurate.

I doubt the MTA will get to it since they didn't bother having the Last Stop program recycle through on the Overhead when arriving at a terminal shown in Tech and Transit's video riding it. 

Honestly the  train is not coming back at least in it's pre-2010 form. The  train was quite an effective and popular merger of the lines, and it's def the favored train on the Jamacia Line in terms of ridership.

I imagine down the road it'd be relatively easy for the MTA to change or add programming to the R211s as needed.

[T to Dyre Avenue]

2 hours ago, Vulturious said:

These two images are meant to show the  program which is said to exist on the R211, unfortunately the programming wasn't complete. The image is cut off, but it says 6 Av Local and Canarsie Local going to Rockaway Parkway. It's meant to show the 6 Av orange colors on the FIND, but took the 8 Av colors instead. I believe the transfers when showing the strip map is normal the whole way through, with the exception of when arriving at a station showing the transfer info not being entirely accurate.

I doubt the MTA will get to it since they didn't bother having the Last Stop program recycle through on the Overhead when arriving at a terminal shown in Tech and Transit's video riding it. 

Interesting how it shows the  which isn’t a 6th Ave line at all. In fact I don’t think I’ve ever even seen the  rerouted via 6th Ave during emergencies, both pre-2010 and post-2016.

[Vulturious]

3 minutes ago, T to Dyre Avenue said:

Interesting how it shows the  which isn’t a 6th Ave line at all. In fact I don’t think I’ve ever even seen the  rerouted via 6th Ave during emergencies, both pre-2010 and post-2016.

Well, it's a glitched program because it's incomplete. Sorta like how the  to 145 St originally was where instead of it announcing service to 145 St, it went the the next available program with announcements and glitched to Myrtle-Wyckoff announcements. I believe this is what's happening here, only instead of announcements, it's the FIND. 

[T to Dyre Avenue]

51 minutes ago, ABCDEFGJLMNQRSSSWZ said:

Honestly the  train is not coming back at least in it's pre-2010 form. The  train was quite an effective and popular merger of the lines, and it's def the favored train on the Jamacia Line in terms of ridership.

I imagine down the road it'd be relatively easy for the MTA to change or add programming to the R211s as needed.

Is it? I rode the Queens Blvd Line every day for three years (2012-15) and I seem to recall the  having much greater ridership than the . Even in these post-Covid times I can’t see how the  would be more popular than the other three QBL services, especially since it doesn’t run there on weekends and it’s almost always the first to get booted off the QBL whenever it has a meltdown in service and the last to get restored. 

[ABCDEFGJLMNQRSSSWZ]

54 minutes ago, T to Dyre Avenue said:

Is it? I rode the Queens Blvd Line every day for three years (2012-15) and I seem to recall the  having much greater ridership than the . Even in these post-Covid times I can’t see how the  would be more popular than the other three QBL services, especially since it doesn’t run there on weekends and it’s almost always the first to get booted off the QBL whenever it has a meltdown in service and the last to get restored. 

Mb, I meant the  is favored by customers between the  and  because it provides direct service to midtown. For QBLVD, conventional wisdom and anecdotal evidence seems to suggest the  is the most heavily favored and faces overcrowding, followed by the , with the  and  being about equal in being the "least favored" (though certainly still used).

Only having the  as a QBLVD local on the weekends isn't great cause the  tends to have very spotty service in non-rush hours, and many of the QBLVD local stops are still pretty high ridership. Furthermore, growth patterns suggest going forwards the QBLVD local services will get busier as growth in Queens is concentrated closer to Manhattan, especially in the stretch between Jackson Heights Roosevelt Av and Queens Plaza. Either make weekend  service a bit beefier with regular 8 minute intervals or make the  run on weekends.

[subwaycommuter1983]

1 hour ago, ABCDEFGJLMNQRSSSWZ said:

Mb, I meant the  is favored by customers between the  and  because it provides direct service to midtown. For QBLVD, conventional wisdom and anecdotal evidence seems to suggest the  is the most heavily favored and faces overcrowding, followed by the , with the  and  being about equal in being the "least favored" (though certainly still used).

Only having the  as a QBLVD local on the weekends isn't great cause the  tends to have very spotty service in non-rush hours, and many of the QBLVD local stops are still pretty high ridership. Furthermore, growth patterns suggest going forwards the QBLVD local services will get busier as growth in Queens is concentrated closer to Manhattan, especially in the stretch between Jackson Heights Roosevelt Av and Queens Plaza. Either make weekend  service a bit beefier with regular 8 minute intervals or make the  run on weekends.

Same situation with CPW during the weekends. Weekend head ways on the C (which is used by tourists visiting the museums) are terrible. I just hope the MTA uses the first option order of r211's to either beef weekend service on the C or to run the B during the weekends between 145th Street and Brighton Beach.

[ABCDEFGJLMNQRSSSWZ]

37 minutes ago, subwaycommuter1983 said:

Same situation with CPW during the weekends. Weekend head ways on the C (which is used by tourists visiting the museums) are terrible. I just hope the MTA uses the first option order of r211's to either beef weekend service on the C or to run the B during the weekends between 145th Street and Brighton Beach.

Mhm, on some of these lines I would honestly rather have one of the express trains be local on the weekends if the sole local service is gonna run only every 10 minutes, simillar to how the  converts to B-way local on weekends.

[U-BahnNYC]

48 minutes ago, subwaycommuter1983 said:

Same situation with CPW during the weekends. Weekend head ways on the C (which is used by tourists visiting the museums) are terrible. I just hope the MTA uses the first option order of r211's to either beef weekend service on the C or to run the B during the weekends between 145th Street and Brighton Beach.

CPW and Queens Blvd Local are a disaster on weekends. it's not unusual to see 15 minute headways mid-day which is just unacceptable. I think for CPW the natural solution is weekend  service, maybe just to 34th St or 2Av. For Queens Blvd the  and  should remain express since its a long stretch, but either better  headways or maybe have the  go to 71Av on weekends like in the old days. 

[ABCDEFGJLMNQRSSSWZ]

4 minutes ago, U-BahnNYC said:

CPW and Queens Blvd Local are a disaster on weekends. it's not unusual to see 15 minute headways mid-day which is just unacceptable. I think for CPW the natural solution is weekend  service, maybe just to 34th St or 2Av. For Queens Blvd the  and  should remain express since its a long stretch, but either better  headways or maybe have the  go to 71Av on weekends like in the old days. 

Ik this isn't the subway, but the worst is PATH on the weekends. They only run trains to WTC every 20 minutes regardless of the time of day, which means most midday trains are jam-packed.

The JSQ-33rd via HOB service is also very awkward cause the train just sits in Hoboken for like 10 minutes. From the few experiences I've had it's been extremely maddening.

What's sad is PATH actually runs remarkably close headways during rush-hour. It's like on the weekends Port Authority just forgets the system exists.

[Vulturious]

37 minutes ago, ABCDEFGJLMNQRSSSWZ said:

Mhm, on some of these lines I would honestly rather have one of the express trains be local on the weekends if the sole local service is gonna run only every 10 minutes, simillar to how the  converts to B-way local on weekends.

Obviously, the  can't be the one to run local along CPW since it doesn't have the line up at all and already has to travel a very far distance from one point of NYC to another. Unfortunately, I have to say neither can the . The line already during weekdays normally doesn't run as much as it should, especially during weekends, it's like nothing really different. It would need to also compensate for the fact that it would need to make more stops during weekends to help cover the  as well as itself, pretty much thickening the gaps.

29 minutes ago, U-BahnNYC said:

CPW and Queens Blvd Local are a disaster on weekends. it's not unusual to see 15 minute headways mid-day which is just unacceptable. I think for CPW the natural solution is weekend  service, maybe just to 34th St or 2Av. For Queens Blvd the  and  should remain express since its a long stretch, but either better  headways or maybe have the  go to 71Av on weekends like in the old days. 

As good of a reason the  remaining express during weekends is, personally, it shouldn't. The  is a line by itself, the  wouldn't solve that issue since it's already got issues of its own. Jamaica would need to compensate running some  trains to Forest Hills. Sure they can use the trains that are laid up along Hillside Av express, but they would still need to be running the full 10 car length. The  is already a short line, I doubt it's going to hurt much since the  would still be express. QBL local stations are far spaced trains can run quickly in between that it's going to make too much of a difference. 

As for CPW, I definitely think the  to 2 Av at least would help. It's better than the alternative of having to run the  or  local.

[NBTA]

I was gonna comment..but that would be a waste of energy. I’m just glad we’re finally getting these trains on the road. Speculation, schmeculation, just be happy we’re getting new cars.