R211 Discussion Thread

[Travis Mcnonald]

On 9/28/2023 at 7:58 PM, Ale188 said:

Welp, that puts an end to R211s having the old R38 fleet then.

IIRC, the R38s were #3950-4149 weren't they? It's been almost 15 years since they last saw service.

[Missabassie]

On 9/10/2023 at 6:45 PM, Maxwell179 said:

On 4080-4084+4120-4124 now and I gotta say the train definitely feels really spacious and the acceleration is nice. The intercom system is trash though , cant hear being said and the FIND keeps going out every couple of stops, I bet that gets annoying to deal with

That's a Kawasaki problem recently, the 160s are the same way. Train crew could crank up the volume, but the audio is worse for it (I've experienced this personally). They need better suppliers. Probably same with the FINDs, everything's built on the cheap nowadays it seems. Just the world we live in.....

[Travis Mcnonald]

11 hours ago, FLX9304 said:

On the roster thread, since number plates get recycled into new train cars, I only used new tech trains with older SMEEs 

So we now got 6-7 sets active at this time?

[1998NewFlyer]

4 hours ago, Travis Mcnonald said:

So we now got 6-7 sets active at this time?

6 in revenue service 

[FLX9304]

On 9/30/2023 at 12:58 AM, Travis Mcnonald said:

IIRC, the R38s were #3950-4149 weren't they? It's been almost 15 years since they last saw service.

The numbers from the R10s weren’t used until the R179s came in (not counting the R110Bs) 

[Bill from Maspeth]

On 9/30/2023 at 1:06 AM, Missabassie said:

That's a Kawasaki problem recently, the 160s are the same way. Train crew could crank up the volume, but the audio is worse for it (I've experienced this personally). They need better suppliers. Probably same with the FINDs, everything's built on the cheap nowadays it seems. Just the world we live in.....

IMO the problem may get buried under the rug once air conditioning becomes less of a need, then next year the problem may magnify big time when we have lots more R211's on the road.  PA's, when a/c is not working to the max, becomes much more audible.

 

Edited October 1, 2023 by Bill from Maspeth

[JustTheSIR]

On 9/27/2023 at 12:12 PM, Ale188 said:

News flash: We are over 1/5 done with the base order. We are about 22% done with it, so here is my diagram to prove so:

Cars in service:

R211A: 4060-4099, 4110-4129, 60 cars or 6 10-car sets

Total number of cars in service: 60

Deliveries: Green text = Completed

R211A: 4060-4154, 95 cars or 9 10-car sets and 1 5-car set

R211T: 4040-4059, 20 cars or 2 10-car sets 

R211S: 100-104, 1 5-car set

Total number of cars delivered: 120

Cool, It's just growing!

Is the R211S going to test on the SIR before they send any more?

[Ale188]

5 minutes ago, JustTheSIR said:

Is the R211S going to test on the SIR before they send any more?

I believe so. They've already tested them on NYCT trackage.

[zacster]

1 hour ago, Ale188 said:

I believe so. They've already tested them on NYCT trackage.

Kind of ironic that they come to Brooklyn first by going through SI and now have to go back.  Is it still possible to car float them back?

[RedLine]

Yes but the new maintenance shop in Staten Island should be able to handle much more work than the old one was able to handle, which would make more trips to Coney Island unneeded.

[Lawrence St]

IMO, I feel like giving R211's to SIR is a gigantic waste of money. But hear me out why,

The R211's have a lot of features (such as LED screens, LCD screens, etc) that won't be needed for SIR since it's such a small line. I think that the original plan of giving them option order R179's or R160's would have better and cost-effective.

[Kamen Rider]

4 hours ago, zacster said:

Kind of ironic that they come to Brooklyn first by going through SI and now have to go back.  Is it still possible to car float them back?

There’s no float dock at Clifton Yard, so they would need to be craned off like the BLG20 work locomotives.

[FLX9304]

3 hours ago, Lawrence St said:

IMO, I feel like giving R211's to SIR is a gigantic waste of money. But hear me out why,

The R211's have a lot of features (such as LED screens, LCD screens, etc) that won't be needed for SIR since it's such a small line. I think that the original plan of giving them option order R179's or R160's would have better and cost-effective.

So you think Staten Island don’t deserve these R211s?? The Republican politicians in that boro wanna have a word with you. 

[Lawrence St]

7 minutes ago, FLX9304 said:

So you think Staten Island don’t deserve these R211s?? The Republican politicians in that boro wanna have a word with you. 

From a cost stand point, no. Do they deserve some type of NTT's? Yes. But not the R211's.

[FLX9304]

14 minutes ago, Lawrence St said:

From a cost stand point, no. Do they deserve some type of NTT's? Yes. But not the R211's.

Now hear me out on this: the previous NTTs, the R160s and the R179s are not equipped for railroading. They wouldn’t even survive on railroad service if they were to be put on it. Most areas require canatary for overhead power. Both R160s and R179s would cost an extra $5K to put 2 over the car power and feeders to power them. No third rail shoes. For non electrical railroads, the R160s and R179s will have to put special trucks with one square box on top of A cars, while B cars lose ALL propulsions. The B cars would be “trailers”. 

[Ale188]

14 minutes ago, Lawrence St said:

From a cost stand point, no. Do they deserve some type of NTT's? Yes. But not the R211's.

They needed to order more than 15 trains for SIR IMO. They needed  to order 20 or 25 for more frequency so you won't have to wait 15 minutes for a train.

[Lawrence St]

7 minutes ago, FLX9304 said:

Now hear me out on this: the previous NTTs, the R160s and the R179s are not equipped for railroading. They wouldn’t even survive on railroad service if they were to be put on it. Most areas require canatary for overhead power. Both R160s and R179s would cost an extra $5K to put 2 over the car power and feeders to power them. No third rail shoes. For non electrical railroads, the R160s and R179s will have to put special trucks with one square box on top of A cars, while B cars lose ALL propulsions. The B cars would be “trailers”. 

What are you going on about? uses the same power system like we do. And for heavens sake, stop calling it a railroad. Logically, It hasn't been a railroad since the North Shore was abandoned. 

[FLX9304]

9 minutes ago, Lawrence St said:

What are you going on about? uses the same power system like we do. And for heavens sake, stop calling it a railroad. Logically, It hasn't been a railroad since the North Shore was abandoned. 

I say it how I call it, whether you like it or not. & what do you mean “We”?! 

Edited October 2, 2023 by FLX9304

[Ale188]

2 minutes ago, FLX9304 said:

I say it how I call it, whether you like it or not. & what do you mean “We”?! 

We as in like the NYCT

[Lawrence St]

3 minutes ago, FLX9304 said:

I say it how I call it, whether you like it or not. & what do you mean “We”?! 

[Ale188]

1 minute ago, Lawrence St said:

BRO PULLED UP THE DICTIONARY!!! IM DYIN!

[LGA Link N Train]

42 minutes ago, Lawrence St said:

What are you going on about? uses the same power system like we do. And for heavens sake, stop calling it a railroad. Logically, It hasn't been a railroad since the North Shore was abandoned. 

 considers it one and Operates it as if it were Such…

[trainfan22]

1 hour ago, FLX9304 said:

Now hear me out on this: the previous NTTs, the R160s and the R179s are not equipped for railroading. They wouldn’t even survive on railroad service if they were to be put on it. Most areas require canatary for overhead power. Both R160s and R179s would cost an extra $5K to put 2 over the car power and feeders to power them. No third rail shoes. For non electrical railroads, the R160s and R179s will have to put special trucks with one square box on top of A cars, while B cars lose ALL propulsions. The B cars would be “trailers”. 

All they would have to do is put cab signaling in the older B div NTT and boom! They could run there.

 

 

To the naked eye, the SIR R211s and NYCT R211s appear to be exactly the same. Only difference is cab signaling.

 

 

TBH the subway is a harsher operating environment for rolling stock than SIR, if the older NTT can survive the line then they could survive SIR.

 

 

Edited October 2, 2023 by trainfan22

[Lawrence St]

4 minutes ago, trainfan22 said:

All they would have to do is put cab signaling in the older B div NTT and boom! They could run there.

 

 

To the naked eye, the SIR R211s and NYCT R211s appear to be exactly the same. Only difference is cab signaling.

 

 

TBH the subway is a harsher operating environment for rolling stock than SIR, if the older NTT can survive the line then they could survive SIR.

 

 

That's exactly my point. They should take 75 R143 cars from the  and send them to SIRT and convert the remaining R211S's into R211A's. 

[Ale188]

5 minutes ago, Lawrence St said:

That's exactly my point. They should take 75 R143 cars from the  and send them to SIRT and convert the remaining R211S's into R211A's. 

That's just gonna make L train commuters pissed. How? You're literally just decreasing L train frequency. Those trains are needed for Canarsie CBTC. That's like saying putting R62As back on the 7 line. (which is sort of a different story)

Also, remember, L trains were built in 4 car consists, not 5. So how are you gonna take 75 cars out the L when you have one oddball? You can't just switch them so many times, can you? I'd rather say take some of Jamaica's R160Bs or R160A-2s and put them on SIR.