R211 Discussion Thread

[Ale188]

Sounds Great!

[NBTA]

If I’m not mistaken, we’re up to 4080 being the next car. So that means at least two sets are here. 

[Ale188]

Yeah, but 4080-84 are already delivered in NYC, so 2 and a half sets are here.

[AZthefoamer]

Do we have any idea when they will put the R211 on the C? (Assuming they have not done so already.) They said they would put them on the A/C before other lines.

[Kamen Rider]

Everything about the project save for its most basic details is in up in the air, magic 8 ball "ask again later" territory.

 

They could move the 10 car R179s over to the C and slowly make the A pure R211 for as far as we know. I mean, when I took the familiarization course for them, they said they'd be ready for service in late spring... only for them to enter service that Friday. 

[Ale188]

Makes sense. 4070-74 just transferred back to Coney Island Yard after (what I'm assuming) testing. I'm guessing those cars, along with 75-79, might enter service hopefully this week or next week. Maybe later. The production car tests are supposed to be MUCH shorter than what the pilot set did. I just hope to catch an R211A ride when I go to NY in June.

[AZthefoamer]

1 hour ago, Kamen Rider said:

They could move the 10 car R179s over to the C and slowly make the A pure R211 for as far as we know. I mean, when I took the familiarization course for them, they said they'd be ready for service in late spring... only for them to enter service that Friday. 

That might work. I was wondering if they might move the 8 car R179s on the C over to BMT Eastern if they needed to. The C legitimately needs better service.

[U-BahnNYC]

5 hours ago, AZthefoamer said:

That might work. I was wondering if they might move the 8 car R179s on the C over to BMT Eastern if they needed to. The C legitimately needs better service.

Right now, IMO it doesn't really make sense to put the R179/R211 on the  over the  because the  just doesn't really see the crowding the does. Kind of how they don't put the 10-car R179s on the  and instead use only R46 if a full length train is running. 

[Vulturious]

I guess they're going to be running in service soon? Wouldn't really make much of a difference since production sets are already here and will start service soon.

[subwaycommuter1983]

8 hours ago, Kamen Rider said:

Everything about the project save for its most basic details is in up in the air, magic 8 ball "ask again later" territory.

 

They could move the 10 car R179s over to the C and slowly make the A pure R211 for as far as we know. I mean, when I took the familiarization course for them, they said they'd be ready for service in late spring... only for them to enter service that Friday. 

The C still has 8 car r179's. Therefore, it is not a good idea for the C to have 8 and 10 car r179's.

According to the MTA, the A will get r211's first, then the C.

IMO the C should keep the 8 car r179's until there are enough first option order of r211's to displace the 8 car trains off the C. The base order should be used to retire the worst performing r46's, while CI keeps the best performing r46's. The first option order of r211's should be used to make the C 100% full length and make the B and D mostly or fully NTTs.

Edited April 12, 2023 by subwaycommuter1983

[Calvin]

The R211T's are going to have a map difference compared to the current 4060-4069. Instead of horizontal, it'll be vertical but smaller sized. 

Edited April 12, 2023 by Calvin

[Chris89292]

40 minutes ago, Vulturious said:

I guess they're going to be running in service soon? Wouldn't really make much of a difference since production sets are already here and will start service soon.

This doesn’t necessarily mean the train will enter service “soon”, it’s been confirmed already that it’ll enter service this fall, it’s just doing usual testing

[subwaycommuter1983]

7 hours ago, AZthefoamer said:

That might work. I was wondering if they might move the 8 car R179s on the C over to BMT Eastern if they needed to. The C legitimately needs better service.

Not yet. It seems that the MTA wants to make the C fully NTTs before making the C 100% full length due to 8th Avenue CBTC. They basically want to displace the r46's off the A/C as quickly as possible.  So, don't be surprised if the 8 car r179's stay on the C until the first option order.

[T to Dyre Avenue]

12 minutes ago, Chris89292 said:

This doesn’t necessarily mean the train will enter service “soon”, it’s been confirmed already that it’ll enter service this fall, it’s just doing usual testing

Either way, I’m very much looking forward to riding the R211T. I want to experience riding an open gangway train here at home after riding them elsewhere.

10 minutes ago, subwaycommuter1983 said:

Not yet. It seems that the MTA wants to make the C fully NTTs before making the C 100% full length due to 8th Avenue CBTC. They basically want to displace the r46's off the A/C as quickly as possible.  So, don't be surprised if the 8 car r179's stay on the C until the first option order.

The sooner they can get the  to 100% full length, the better. It is foolish to be operating trains of different lengths at the same time on the same line because the cars are operated in inflexible perma-linked sets. Unless there’s some way to alert riders on the platform ahead of time as to whether the next  train will be a 480ft train or a 600ft train so they can position themselves accordingly.

Edited April 12, 2023 by T to Dyre Avenue

[FLX9304]

5 minutes ago, T to Dyre Avenue said:

Either way, I’m very much looking forward to riding the R211T. I want to experience riding an open gangway train here at home after riding them elsewhere.

The sooner they can get the  to 100% full length, the better. It is foolish to be operating trains of different lengths at the same time on the same line because the cars are operated in inflexible perma-linked sets. Not unless there’s some way to alert riders on the platform to know ahead of time whether the next  train will be a 480ft train or a 600ft train so they can position themselves accordingly.

They’ve been doing that since the R32s were operating on the  before they were retired for good. They would operate 1 10 car like set (8 car R46) per ever 3 8 car R32 trains. So they alert riders about where to stand. 

[FLX9304]

24 minutes ago, subwaycommuter1983 said:

The C still has 8 car r179's. Therefore, it is not a good idea for the C to have 8 and 10 car r179's.

According to the MTA, the A will get r211's first, then the C.

IMO the C should keep the 8 car r179's until there are enough first option order of r211's to displace the 8 car trains off the C. The base order should be used to retire the worst performing r46's, while CI keeps the best performing r46's. The first option order of r211's should be used to make the C 100% full length and make the B and D mostly or fully NTTs.

Plus, look at the yards where it’s assigned: the  is mainly 207th St yard and the  &  is out of PITKIN (Pitskins, say it with me) so it would be the R211s to be at Pitkin. 

[ABCDEFGJLMNQRSSSWZ]

1 hour ago, T to Dyre Avenue said:

Either way, I’m very much looking forward to riding the R211T. I want to experience riding an open gangway train here at home after riding them elsewhere.

The sooner they can get the  to 100% full length, the better. It is foolish to be operating trains of different lengths at the same time on the same line because the cars are operated in inflexible perma-linked sets. Unless there’s some way to alert riders on the platform ahead of time as to whether the next  train will be a 480ft train or a 600ft train so they can position themselves accordingly.

Honestly, I don't find the difference that annoying cause you have time to see if it's a NTT or R46 and have time to adjust where you're standing on the platform accordingly. Something like the  train where people literally have to run when they see how short it is far more problematic imo. Also the  train never seems to be all that busy; 10 cars is nice but not required from a ridership perspective.

[RandomRider0101]

15 hours ago, AZthefoamer said:

Do we have any idea when they will put the R211 on the C? (Assuming they have not done so already.) They said they would put them on the A/C before other lines.

R211s running on the (subject to change) will most likely not happen until the is fully NTT first. The is a much more demanding line in comparison to the .

 

8 hours ago, U-BahnNYC said:

Right now, IMO it doesn't really make sense to put the R179/R211 on the  over the  because the  just doesn't really see the crowding the does. Kind of how they don't put the 10-car R179s on the  and instead use only R46 if a full length train is running. 

They can't put 10-car R179s on the right now anyways. They're still using 8-car r179s.

 

Edited April 12, 2023 by RandomRider0101

[AZthefoamer]

The is obviously the first priority at this point, but the is just after that. If you ride them regularly, you may notice that service is not great on either, and I think retiring the R46s and adding more trains onto the are the main solutions. I still do not understand why the MTA ordered 8 car R179s for the C.

[RandomRider0101]

6 hours ago, subwaycommuter1983 said:

The C still has 8 car r179's. Therefore, it is not a good idea for the C to have 8 and 10 car r179's.

According to the MTA, the A will get r211's first, then the C.

IMO the C should keep the 8 car r179's until there are enough first option order of r211's to displace the 8 car trains off the C. The base order should be used to retire the worst performing r46's, while CI keeps the best performing r46's. The first option order of r211's should be used to make the C 100% full length and make the B and D mostly or fully NTTs.

 

6 hours ago, subwaycommuter1983 said:

Not yet. It seems that the MTA wants to make the C fully NTTs before making the C 100% full length due to 8th Avenue CBTC. They basically want to displace the r46's off the A/C as quickly as possible.  So, don't be surprised if the 8 car r179's stay on the C until the first option order.

Ultimately, it all comes down to priority. If getting rid of the r46s ASAP is the biggest priority, then this will more than likely happen. If making the line one consistent length is a bigger priority, then that will happen first. Either way, it's really not that big of a deal as both will happen eventually.

 

[Ale188]

I Think the R211 base order will only be used on the A and C lines (excluding the SIR) because that's the MTA's focus right now. Then, when the option order kicks in, then it's time for the B and D. And maybe the A and C can share the fleet (which is what the N and W are doing right now. They share the same exact fleet) together. When the 46s retire, the 68s/68As are the only 75-footers left in the NYC subway system. It's gonna be very weird with 'paint' on the trains again (I mean the 211 front and A car sides). The last car with paint on the sides was the R33s, or all the redbirds in general, but I'm pretty sure the 26s retired before the 33s. So, I do agree that the MTA was stupid enough to order 8 car 179s, but with so many things to focus on at once, like the 8th ave CBTC, It might be weird to see a 10 car R211 C train to C train riders.

[RandomRider0101]

11 minutes ago, AZthefoamer said:

The is obviously the first priority at this point, but the is just after that. If you ride them regularly, you may notice that service is not great on either, and I think retiring the R46s and adding more trains onto the are the main solutions. I still do not understand why the MTA ordered 8 car R179s for the C.

I've been on the & many times and can confirm that neither line has great service. The R211s will definitely help with this, but they won't solve every issue. The can't really run more trains than it currently does due to capacity restrictions. It would be much easier to just make the 100% full length.

The reason why the is currently using 8-car R179s is because the ordered too many 4-car sets & not enough 5-car sets. The entire r179 order was botched & screwed up from the start; so many mistakes were made that Idek where to begin. Long story short, they weren't thinking about the future.

[darkstar8983]

4 minutes ago, RandomRider0101 said:

I've been on the & many times and can confirm that neither line has great service. The R211s will definitely help with this, but they won't solve every issue. The can't really run more trains than it currently does due to capacity restrictions. It would be much easier to just make the 100% full length.

The reason why the is currently using 8-car R179s is because the ordered too many 4-car sets & not enough 5-car sets. The entire r179 order was botched & screwed up from the start; so many mistakes were made that Idek where to begin. Long story short, they weren't thinking about the future.

Actually I see it as an advantage that we are now going to have a temporary “surplus” of 8-car R179s, because this will fill out ENY’s car requirements, but I think even more 8-car units should have been ordered to consider future Eastern Division service enhancements 

[Ale188]

8 minutes ago, RandomRider0101 said:

I've been on the & many times and can confirm that neither line has great service. The R211s will definitely help with this, but they won't solve every issue. The can't really run more trains than it currently does due to capacity restrictions. It would be much easier to just make the 100% full length.

The reason why the is currently using 8-car R179s is because the ordered too many 4-car sets & not enough 5-car sets. The entire r179 order was botched & screwed up from the start; so many mistakes were made that Idek where to begin. Long story short, they weren't thinking about the future.

Makes a lot of sense. They should have only ordered 4 car sets for the J and Z, not the J, C and Z. 8th Ave should stay 5 car but the MTA didn't think that far as you said. Now, they are actually using their brains to order 5 car sets for all of 8th Ave except the E.

[RandomRider0101]

2 minutes ago, darkstar8983 said:

Actually I see it as an advantage that we are now going to have a temporary “surplus” of 8-car R179s, because this will fill out ENY’s car requirements, but I think even more 8-car units should have been ordered to consider future Eastern Division service enhancements 

I do agree that they should utilize the extra 8 car r179s for the BMT East. However, Idk about ordering even more 4 car sets. If they do order 4 car r211s, they should be for the so that they can run 8 car trains.