R211 Discussion Thread

[R32 3838]

2 hours ago, subwaycommuter1983 said:

 What is the MTA's current top priority in regards to the C:

- Make the C 100% NTTs for 8th Avenue CBTC?

Or 

-Make the C 100% full length?

That is a question that only time will tell.

Any delays with 8th Avenue CBTC may allow the r46's to stay longer on the A/C.

 

 

The can be full length before CBTC. 8th av CBTC is already delayed by 6 months to a year anyway so i wouldn't worry too much.

4 hours ago, subwaycommuter1983 said:

As long as the C has 8 car r179's, the 10 car r179's will stay on the A. It will be too confusing to run 8 and 10 car r179's on the C.

The 8 car r179's will most likely stay on the C until at least option order 1. 

The base order of r211's will just displace the r46's off the A/C. Just do the math.

As for congestion pricing, only time will tell if ALL subway lines will experience high ridership as a result of this. Keep in mind that there are drivers that will prefer to pay more on tolls than get on a train.

Low income to middle class people will not be able to afford it, Middle class people already get taxed to death, why do you think they been moving out of NYC. The ones who are still here due to their jobs will be forced to take mass transit. Low Income people with cars will be forced to take mass transit. The Subway by default is the cheapest option, Express buses is the 2nd option and the 3rd is commuter rail (if they do city ticket at all times then it'll be just as cheap as the subway)

 

People always want to discredit shit and they have been proven wrong time and time again all to make excuses for the which can't even handle their budget right. People claimed that ridership wouldn't grow due to work at home, Fast forward to present day and ridership is close to 2019 levels (i count people, not metrocard swipes like the does) Then you have thousands of migrants here that would add to the ridership.

 

The R211s will fix the car shortage issue when all option orders are taken.

 

I'm not going to make excuses for an agency who is beasting to tax people who drive while offering the same level of service that wouldn't meet the potential demand because they can't manage their money right. That's the issue with people on here and elsewhere.

 

 

[FLX9304]

1 hour ago, R32 3838 said:

 

The can be full length before CBTC. 8th av CBTC is already delayed by 6 months to a year anyway so i wouldn't worry too much.

Low income to middle class people will not be able to afford it, Middle class people already get taxed to death, why do you think they been moving out of NYC. The ones who are still here due to their jobs will be forced to take mass transit. Low Income people with cars will be forced to take mass transit. The Subway by default is the cheapest option, Express buses is the 2nd option and the 3rd is commuter rail (if they do city ticket at all times then it'll be just as cheap as the subway)

 

People always want to discredit shit and they have been proven wrong time and time again all to make excuses for the which can't even handle their budget right. People claimed that ridership wouldn't grow due to work at home, Fast forward to present day and ridership is close to 2019 levels (i count people, not metrocard swipes like the does) Then you have thousands of migrants here that would add to the ridership.

 

The R211s will fix the car shortage issue when all option orders are taken.

I'm not going to make excuses for an agency who is beasting to tax people who drive while offering the same level of service that wouldn't meet the potential demand because they can't manage their money right. That's the issue with people on here and elsewhere.

 

 

1. Low Income ppl WILL afford it because there is a special discount for them. 
 

2. It’s actually that ppl don’t give the MTA too much credit because they’ve been trying to do what they can do to get from point A to point B. 
 

3. R211s won’t solve problems either. You need R268s to take care of that. 
 

4. Making excuses won’t help neither. What do you expect? Autocracy? 

[R32 3838]

39 minutes ago, FLX9304 said:

1. Low Income ppl WILL afford it because there is a special discount for them. 
 

2. It’s actually that ppl don’t give the MTA too much credit because they’ve been trying to do what they can do to get from point A to point B. 
 

3. R211s won’t solve problems either. You need R268s to take care of that. 
 

4. Making excuses won’t help neither. What do you expect? Autocracy? 

It would probably come with a catch, and most low in come people still use mass transit compared to driving in this city. The middle class would be the ones getting screwed the most

 

The R211s is going to solve the shortage issues since you only need 1,055 to fix the current shortage (110 cars to full the void of the R32s that retired and weren't replaced by the R179s and 945 cars to replace the R46s) the rest of the order is for fleet expansion. The R268s are going to be direct R68/R68A replacements

 

People tend to make excuses for this agency when they fail to keep up with the times. Every decade or more there is equipment shortages, The shouldn't be 300 feet in 2023 but yet it is due to stupidity of this agency and it's planners not keeping up with the increasing ridership on the line.

They need to up their game, No one wants to hear "We can't do this that and the third because we want to be cheap" When they, the city and state want people in cars to pay $23 below 23rd st.

 

Edited July 1, 2023 by R32 3838

[Around the Horn]

11 hours ago, subwaycommuter1983 said:

 What is the MTA's current top priority in regards to the C:

1. Make the C 100% NTTs for 8th Avenue CBTC?

Or 

2. Make the C 100% full length?

That is a question that only time will tell.

Any delays with 8th Avenue CBTC may allow the r46's to stay longer on the A/C.

 

I would assume that the short term goal is number 1 and the longer term goal is number 2.

[Kamen Rider]

1 is the only goal.

2 would at best be a bonus.

[Lawrence St]

13 hours ago, R32 3838 said:

It would probably come with a catch, and most low in come people still use mass transit compared to driving in this city. The middle class would be the ones getting screwed the most

 

The R211s is going to solve the shortage issues since you only need 1,055 to fix the current shortage (110 cars to full the void of the R32s that retired and weren't replaced by the R179s and 945 cars to replace the R46s) the rest of the order is for fleet expansion. The R268s are going to be direct R68/R68A replacements

 

People tend to make excuses for this agency when they fail to keep up with the times. Every decade or more there is equipment shortages, The shouldn't be 300 feet in 2023 but yet it is due to stupidity of this agency and it's planners not keeping up with the increasing ridership on the line.

They need to up their game, No one wants to hear "We can't do this that and the third because we want to be cheap" When they, the city and state want people in cars to pay $23 below 23rd st.

 

I am really disappointed with NYCTA’s decision to prematurely retire the R32’s and R42’s. They should have at least kept them as a reserve fleet, which was the original plan, before they started getting scrap happy.

They will never get out of a car shortage if they keep playing this game. In what universe is it a good idea to retire cars that you need when Option 1 & 2 isn’t even confirmed yet?

[R32 3838]

2 hours ago, Lawrence St said:

I am really disappointed with NYCTA’s decision to prematurely retire the R32’s and R42’s. They should have at least kept them as a reserve fleet, which was the original plan, before they started getting scrap happy.

They will never get out of a car shortage if they keep playing this game. In what universe is it a good idea to retire cars that you need when Option 1 & 2 isn’t even confirmed yet?

Option I is approved and Option II should be within six months to a year. People might be disappointed that option II might be standard R211A's, Transit (not itself but RTO) is not happy with the R211T's and the union has gotten involved.

 

With Option I they can replace all of the R46s and have a surplus of about 50 extra cars.

[RandomRider0101]

21 hours ago, subwaycommuter1983 said:

 What is the MTA's current top priority in regards to the C:

- Make the C 100% NTTs for 8th Avenue CBTC?

Or 

-Make the C 100% full length?

That is a question that only time will tell.

Any delays with 8th Avenue CBTC may allow the r46's to stay longer on the A/C.

 

We'll find out soon enough what the top priority is. Like you said, only time will tell. We're gonna see how this plays out.

2 hours ago, Lawrence St said:

I am really disappointed with NYCTA’s decision to prematurely retire the R32’s and R42’s. They should have at least kept them as a reserve fleet, which was the original plan, before they started getting scrap happy.

They will never get out of a car shortage if they keep playing this game. In what universe is it a good idea to retire cars that you need when Option 1 & 2 isn’t even confirmed yet?

The r42s were not prematurely retired. They were already gonna be replaced by the r179s regardless. There were only 50 of them left vs. over 300 R179s. You already knew this so I'm not sure why you even brought them up.

Also option 1 is already confirmed. It's option 2 that is still pending confirmation. And even if option 1 was yet to be confirmed, the base order alone is enough to only require the R46s to be kept on reserve. Some of your points are pretty moot.

[RandomRider0101]

24 minutes ago, R32 3838 said:

Option I is approved and Option II should be within six months to a year. People might be disappointed that option II might be standard R211A's, Transit (not itself but RTO) is not happy with the R211T's and the union has gotten involved.

 

With Option I they can replace all of the R46s and have a surplus of about 50 extra cars.

Does it have something to do with the way the cars were made, or is it just the fact that they're open gangways in general?

Either way, that's not good news for the MTA since they have been touting this as the future of the NYC subway. The deliveries would be faster if option 2 is standard cars. I'll be satisfied either way as long as we get option 2.

[Lawrence St]

39 minutes ago, RandomRider0101 said:

We'll find out soon enough what the top priority is. Like you said, only time will tell. We're gonna see how this plays out.

The r42s were not prematurely retired. They were already gonna be replaced by the r179s regardless. There were only 50 of them left vs. over 300 R179s. You already knew this so I'm not sure why you even brought them up.

Also option 1 is already confirmed. It's option 2 that is still pending confirmation. And even if option 1 was yet to be confirmed, the base order alone is enough to only require the R46s to be kept on reserve. Some of your points are pretty moot.

You need to chill with the attitude, I don’t know what is your problem with anyone that remotely has a different opinion then you.

[R32 3838]

30 minutes ago, RandomRider0101 said:

Does it have something to do with the way the cars were made, or is it just the fact that they're open gangways in general?

Either way, that's not good news for the MTA since they have been touting this as the future of the NYC subway. The deliveries would be faster if option 2 is standard cars. I'll be satisfied either way as long as we get option 2.

 

There are various things but for now these are all rumors that are going around from NYCT employess. I'm hoping it isn't true.

Edited July 2, 2023 by R32 3838

[Kamen Rider]

8 minutes ago, Lawrence St said:

You need to chill with the attitude, I don’t know what is your problem with anyone that remotely has a different opinion then you.

dude... you presented your opinion about them as fact. 

 

3 hours ago, Lawrence St said:

I am really disappointed with NYCTA’s decision to prematurely retire the R32’s and R42’s.

And... to be honest... that wasn't a premature decision. They were being held togther with faith and ducktape...

 

to be frank, i keep hearing many people crying about a car shortage... when: 

A: they never really share serious evidence of its effects. I'm not saying it's not there, just that no one ever seems to show how there is a problem...

 

B: you ignore the real shortage that is affecting service... PEOPLE. we are not done building back up our employee roster post Covid. We still have a crew shortage which is much worse than a car shortage. 

 

furthermore... given the circumstances they were retired in... a deadly viral pandemic... having a set up where I, as conductor, would have to exit into the passenger compartment every time I needed to change which side I was operating was not an ideal situation. 

[Lawrence St]

4 minutes ago, Kamen Rider said:

dude... you presented your opinion about them as fact. 

 

And... to be honest... that wasn't a premature decision. They were being held togther with faith and ducktape...

 

to be frank, i keep hearing many people crying about a car shortage... when: 

A: they never really share serious evidence of its effects. I'm not saying it's not there, just that no one ever seems to show how there is a problem...

 

B: you ignore the real shortage that is affecting service... PEOPLE. we are not done building back up our employee roster post Covid. We still have a crew shortage which is much worse than a car shortage. 

 

furthermore... given the circumstances they were retired in... a deadly viral pandemic... having a set up where I, as conductor, would have to exit into the passenger compartment every time I needed to change which side I was operating was not an ideal situation. 

I have to disagree. We were all here when the whole R44 fiasco happened and we got stuck into a car shortage for the next 13 years. The  should have been 10 cars already since 2015. I’ll go into more detail when I get to my computer.

[subwaycommuter1983]

4 hours ago, Lawrence St said:

I am really disappointed with NYCTA’s decision to prematurely retire the R32’s and R42’s. They should have at least kept them as a reserve fleet, which was the original plan, before they started getting scrap happy.

They will never get out of a car shortage if they keep playing this game. In what universe is it a good idea to retire cars that you need when Option 1 & 2 isn’t even confirmed yet?

They weren't retired prematurely. The r179's were supposed to replace the r42's and some r32's.

The r32's were retired because of COVID. They were a health hazard for train crews who have to be switching cars to open and close the doors.

Both options orders will eliminate car shortage.

[subwaycommuter1983]

6 minutes ago, Lawrence St said:

I have to disagree. We were all here when the whole R44 fiasco happened and we got stuck into a car shortage for the next 13 years. The  should have been 10 cars already since 2015. I’ll go into more detail when I get to my computer.

The C will get 10 car trains. The G will get 8 car trains.

Let's not forget that option 2 includes four 8 car trains (32 cars).

[AZthefoamer]

8 minutes ago, subwaycommuter1983 said:

The G will get 8 car trains.

Do we have enough 8 car sets to do that, or will it be mixed? And Eastern Division may still need more cars.

[subwaycommuter1983]

2 minutes ago, AZthefoamer said:

Do we have enough 8 car sets to do that, or will it be mixed? And Eastern Division may still need more cars.

There are enough 8 car trains to make the G full length. The problem is that there are not enough 10 car trains to make the C full length. We would have to wait for option order 1 to make both the C and G full length.

[RandomRider0101]

43 minutes ago, Lawrence St said:

You need to chill with the attitude, I don’t know what is your problem with anyone that remotely has a different opinion then you.

You're entitled to your opinions, but you're not entitled to your own facts.

Those 50 R42s were always planned to be replaced by the R179s. It was the R32s that were planned to be kept, 100+ to be specific. If they were already keeping over 100 R32s, why would they then need to keep those 50 r42s? Keeping 200+ R32s would've made more sense than keeping 50 oddball r42s.

These are all things you already knew, that was my point. I wasn't trying to have an attitude. I even considered putting an 'Lol' in my post to make it lighter. You often say silly things on here, and it's hard to tell sometimes when you're being sarcastic or you're actually being serious. Some of this stuff you already know, and yet you still act like you're outraged and/or surprised when certain decisions are made. Sometimes all you have to do is use common sense.

[Kamen Rider]

2 hours ago, Lawrence St said:

The  should have been 10 cars already since 2015.

Why? Was that ever said that was the plan? or are you just assuming... again... much like this constant assumption everyone has that the C will go to all 600 feet...

[R32 3838]

I will explain this again regarding the

2 hours ago, subwaycommuter1983 said:

There are enough 8 car trains to make the G full length. The problem is that there are not enough 10 car trains to make the C full length. We would have to wait for option order 1 to make both the C and G full length.

Again, Making the 8 cars would be more costly than it being full length. the would have to have a dedicated fleet of 8 car trains meaning the yard that houses the would need additional cars as spares. If the is 10 cars, It can share with the exsiting 10 car fleet reducing spare factor and allowing for more flexibility

 

2 hours ago, Kamen Rider said:

dude... you presented your opinion about them as fact. 

 

And... to be honest... that wasn't a premature decision. They were being held togther with faith and ducktape...

 

to be frank, i keep hearing many people crying about a car shortage... when: 

A: they never really share serious evidence of its effects. I'm not saying it's not there, just that no one ever seems to show how there is a problem...

 

B: you ignore the real shortage that is affecting service... PEOPLE. we are not done building back up our employee roster post Covid. We still have a crew shortage which is much worse than a car shortage. 

 

furthermore... given the circumstances they were retired in... a deadly viral pandemic... having a set up where I, as conductor, would have to exit into the passenger compartment every time I needed to change which side I was operating was not an ideal situation. 

The evidence is and was clearly there. Why do you think they combined the   and . The sudden R44 retirement caused a big shortage due to NYCT reefing 70% of the 60 foot SMEE fleet. The being cut was basically a result of 2nd ave construction rather than a cut, we knew it was coming back which it did 6 years later. If they didn't reef as many SMEE's back then, the   would have been full length R32s and R46s with the A-A units being housed at 207th st. The was always planned to go full length dating back to 2009 when they thought at the time the R32s would retire back in 2010.

 

The has been getting slammed with more ridership and should have been 8 or 10 cars at that time and the plan was to make the 8 car R32s and R179s when the shutdown was going to happen but that got canned. 

 

 

 

15 minutes ago, Kamen Rider said:

Why? Was that ever said that was the plan? or are you just assuming... again... much like this constant assumption everyone has that the C will go to all 600 feet...

I mean it already is kinda. They way the is set up right now is dumb since it's confusing to both the passengers and crew and they tried this back in 2017 but they banned the R46s off the until they lifted the ban in order to get rid of the R32s due to politics (before covid)

 

 

 

Ridership is growing and is going to grow even more if Congestion pricing starts next year. has to prepare for that, current service levels atm is not ideal to handle the influx of more people when you have short and trains and other problems.

 

This is why and the state should delay congestion pricing until 2026 because clearly they aren't ready and having a crew shortage only makes it worse. The over entitled will take out their frustrations out on TA workers instead of the folks at 2 Broadway. 

Edited July 2, 2023 by R32 3838

[Fan Railer]

3 hours ago, Lawrence St said:

You need to chill with the attitude, I don’t know what is your problem with anyone that remotely has a different opinion then you.

You are literally the last person to be telling someone else to chill lol. Half the drama on this topic alone involves you to some capacity or another.

[Lawrence St]

15 minutes ago, Kamen Rider said:

Why? Was that ever said that was the plan? or are you just assuming... again... much like this constant assumption everyone has that the C will go to all 600 feet...

The point I meant was making it full length, 8 or 10 cars.

1 minute ago, Fan Railer said:

You are literally the last person to be telling someone else to chill lol. Half the drama on this topic alone involves you to some capacity or another.

Considering the fact that’s not even remotely close to being true, more then half the comments in this thread are about fleet allotment and the .

Everyone is entitled to their opinion, we should each respect it, period.

[darkstar8983]

The  going 8-cars would be tight regarding spare factor for the following (assuming only 32 R211s are arranged as 8-car trains (4-car sets))

the total number of cars available in that case would be 212 R143, 372 R160, 188 R179, and 32 R211.

for service requirements, you need:

192 cars for  service, and minimally 48 cars as spares = 212 R143 + 32 R160s taken

192 cars for  service and minimally 48 cars as spares = 240 R160s taken

(Already here, you have all R143s taken and 272 R160s taken)

160 cars for  service and minimally 32 cars as spares = 188 R179s + 8 R160s taken

(Now all R179s and R143s are off the table along with 280 of the R160s)

 

The  (assuming no service frequency increases) needs 13 trainsets = 104 cars, and a minimal spare factor of 3 trainsets.

88 R160s are available to make 11 trains, and four spare trains of R211s available (from 32 cars)  you’d end up one train short, unless you pool the spare factor for the  and  together, similar to how the  and  have pooled their cars (the  train sets can come into service to/from Coney Island Yard vía the Culver Line).

 

again, I went with just the minimal service requirements and spares to make the numbers work, so this may be a nonstarter.

 

[subwaycommuter1983]

2 hours ago, R32 3838 said:

I will explain this again regarding the

Again, Making the 8 cars would be more costly than it being full length. the would have to have a dedicated fleet of 8 car trains meaning the yard that houses the would need additional cars as spares. If the is 10 cars, It can share with the exsiting 10 car fleet reducing spare factor and allowing for more flexibility

 

The evidence is and was clearly there. Why do you think they combined the   and . The sudden R44 retirement caused a big shortage due to NYCT reefing 70% of the 60 foot SMEE fleet. The being cut was basically a result of 2nd ave construction rather than a cut, we knew it was coming back which it did 6 years later. If they didn't reef as many SMEE's back then, the   would have been full length R32s and R46s with the A-A units being housed at 207th st. The was always planned to go full length dating back to 2009 when they thought at the time the R32s would retire back in 2010.

 

The has been getting slammed with more ridership and should have been 8 or 10 cars at that time and the plan was to make the 8 car R32s and R179s when the shutdown was going to happen but that got canned. 

 

 

 

I mean it already is kinda. They way the is set up right now is dumb since it's confusing to both the passengers and crew and they tried this back in 2017 but they banned the R46s off the until they lifted the ban in order to get rid of the R32s due to politics (before covid)

 

 

 

Ridership is growing and is going to grow even more if Congestion pricing starts next year. has to prepare for that, current service levels atm is not ideal to handle the influx of more people when you have short and trains and other problems.

 

This is why and the state should delay congestion pricing until 2026 because clearly they aren't ready and having a crew shortage only makes it worse. The over entitled will take out their frustrations out on TA workers instead of the folks at 2 Broadway. 

It would be ideal for both the C and the G to have 10 car trains, but there are not enough 10 car trains to allow this change to happen. We would have to wait for option 2. Option 1 will only make the C full length.

This would have happen much  sooner if the MTA would have ordered 50 8-car r179's to retire the r42's and make the rest of the r179 order 10 car trains in addition to the extra 10 car trains the MTA received as a result of the r179 delays.

Also, both the A and C need to be 100% NTTs by the end of 2024 due to CBTC.

In addition, the V and W weren't eliminated due to train shortage. They were both eliminated due to budget cuts that also eliminated several bus routes. These budget cuts were a result of the 2008-2010 recession.

The train shortage was caused by the premature retirement of the r44's and the MTAs dumb decision of not ordering extra r179's.

 

[R32 3838]

26 minutes ago, subwaycommuter1983 said:

It would be ideal for both the C and the G to have 10 car trains, but there are not enough 10 car trains to allow this change to happen. We would have to wait for option 2. Option 1 will only make the C full length.

This would have happen much  sooner if the MTA would have ordered 50 8-car r179's to retire the r42's and make the rest of the r179 order 10 car trains in addition to the extra 10 car trains the MTA received as a result of the r179 delays.

Also, both the A and C need to be 100% NTTs by the end of 2024 due to CBTC.

In addition, the V and W weren't eliminated due to train shortage. They were both eliminated due to budget cuts that also eliminated several bus routes. These budget cuts were a result of the 2008-2010 recession.

The train shortage was caused by the premature retirement of the r44's and the MTAs dumb decision of not ordering extra r179's.

 

There would be enough cars, They can delay the R46 retirement by 6 months to a year until there is enough R211s to boot the remaining R46s which would be at coney island. Option I would pretty much kill off the last batch of R46s out of pitkin if the were to be 10 cars before it goes fully tech. And it's imposible to make the and fully tech when the R211 order and 8th ave CBTC have been delayed. 2025 is when the last of the base order is completed.

 

The shortage did cause them to combine the and . once they did that, it freed up to 15 sets of R46s that killed off the remaining R44s that weren't replaced by the R160s. The decision to retire the R44s were made in the fall of 2009, almost a year before the cuts took place.

Edited July 2, 2023 by R32 3838