R211 Discussion Thread

[Bill from Maspeth]

13 hours ago, Vulturious said:

We are definitely getting off topic, here are my two cents on the R211 issue. If Kawasaki needs more time to build trains, then there's really nothing we can do. However, saying the MTA should not really prioritize on the second order option isn't a good idea. We definitely need more trains to at least give the R68/A's some needed rest so they can last much longer at the very least.

While it sucks that we have to deal with this, I don't think there's much we can do other than getting the MTA to stop prioritizing some really dumb and very much not needed projects. They really need to start using their brains because the execution of some of these projects are very questionable it gives you headaches. I know I had a few, $30 million on a staircase and now we beating that with $61 million for a new mezanine or whatever. Oh well, that's my two cents, if there's anything y'all want to point me out for, go for it.

$30 Million on a staircase, $61 Million on a new mezzanine.......There is much work to be done on the subway.  TWU Local 100 has been saying for years they can do projects better and cheaper.  MTA/NYCT does not want to listen.  Transit could hire workers with the same skills as those workers provided by the private contractors and have better supervision over them.  Sure the numbers on the payroll would be higher, but look at the benefit: no more paying all this extra money to the private contracting companies who take MTA/NYCT to the cleaners because it's just more expensive to do business in New York.  Less capital money would be needed as some of those funds would be transferred to payroll and no more money to those big contracting companies.  MTA saves money in the long run.

But  MTA does not want to listen.

[subwaycommuter1983]

Check out this article:

https://www.ny1.com/nyc/all-boroughs/transit/2022/07/21/mta-faces-decades-of-debt-as-ridership-remains-low?cid=share_clip

The MTA executives need to stop talking so much nonsense and take some basic Math and Financial Literacy.

There is no way that ridership is low when trains are packed during rush hours and they are packed on Saturdays. I ride the trains every day, so I'm not talking nonsense.

There is no way that the MTA is in debt when they got billions of dollars from the federal government.

These executives DON'T know how to manage money.

I just hope they don't screw things up with the r211's and CBTC.

[Daniel The Cool]

2 hours ago, subwaycommuter1983 said:

Check out this article:

https://www.ny1.com/nyc/all-boroughs/transit/2022/07/21/mta-faces-decades-of-debt-as-ridership-remains-low?cid=share_clip

The MTA executives need to stop talking so much nonsense and take some basic Math and Financial Literacy.

There is no way that ridership is low when trains are packed during rush hours and they are packed on Saturdays. I ride the trains every day, so I'm not talking nonsense.

You do realize there's also the crew shortage that's affecting trips and crowd conditions in general. 

[Prospect]

17 hours ago, subwaycommuter1983 said:

Check out this article:

https://www.ny1.com/nyc/all-boroughs/transit/2022/07/21/mta-faces-decades-of-debt-as-ridership-remains-low?cid=share_clip

The MTA executives need to stop talking so much nonsense and take some basic Math and Financial Literacy.

There is no way that ridership is low when trains are packed during rush hours and they are packed on Saturdays. I ride the trains every day, so I'm not talking nonsense.

There is no way that the MTA is in debt when they got billions of dollars from the federal government.

These executives DON'T know how to manage money.

I just hope they don't screw things up with the r211's and CBTC.

Fewer people on the payroll means fewer trains, which means more packed trains... As a result, you need the available workforce to coordinate the implementation of CBTC and the R211's, which again, is also subject to delay for the reason stated above.

[Around the Horn]

Both R211 options are now funded in the new Capital Program Amendment (page 109)
https://new.mta.info/document/91711

Given the CBTC news today, I think its almost certain that they'll be running on the with occasional appearances on the and

[Vulturious]

8 minutes ago, Around the Horn said:

Both R211 options are now funded in the new Capital Program Amendment (page 109)
https://new.mta.info/document/91711

Given the CBTC news today, I think its almost certain that they'll be running on the with occasional appearances on the and

Oh that's interesting, I thought they were just pointing out how much it would've costed and was still in consideration, cool.

[R32 3838]

2 hours ago, Around the Horn said:

Both R211 options are now funded in the new Capital Program Amendment (page 109)
https://new.mta.info/document/91711

Given the CBTC news today, I think its almost certain that they'll be running on the with occasional appearances on the and

Watch idiots still think that the they won't be funded even though this is proof

 

This puts a smile on my face because the foamers are gonna cope with this news.

 

I still think the R160s will go to CI for the while Jamaica gets their batch of R211s. The , , and will get them. The probably will still go 8 cars

[darkstar8983]

33 minutes ago, R32 3838 said:

Watch idiots still think that the they won't be funded even though this is proof

 

This puts a smile on my face because the foamers are gonna cope with this news.

 

I still think the R160s will go to CI for the while Jamaica gets their batch of R211s. The , , and will get them. The probably will still go 8 cars

Probably the will be 1/2 R160 / 1/2 R68, while the  remains all R68s, but we shall see. Nothing's set in stone yet with regards to assignments. I posted in another thread about the issues regarding limiting where the SMEE cars can run and which corridors can have their trains rerouted onto should there be a problem, so maybe the full R211 order bears into mind potential subway service reductions so that way the R143s / R160s / R179s / R211s are enough for the entire B-division. Maybe a possible third option order to just outright mothball the R68s , but we dont know yet!!! thats the point! plans can change (service adjustments to better reflect ridership) - maybe the  won't be around anymore, or maybe the  will stay 5-cars, reducing the need for 8-car units, since ENY could have the R179s from the . 

[subwaycommuter1983]

27 minutes ago, darkstar8983 said:

Probably the will be 1/2 R160 / 1/2 R68, while the  remains all R68s, but we shall see. Nothing's set in stone yet with regards to assignments. I posted in another thread about the issues regarding limiting where the SMEE cars can run and which corridors can have their trains rerouted onto should there be a problem, so maybe the full R211 order bears into mind potential subway service reductions so that way the R143s / R160s / R179s / R211s are enough for the entire B-division. Maybe a possible third option order to just outright mothball the R68s , but we dont know yet!!! thats the point! plans can change (service adjustments to better reflect ridership) - maybe the  won't be around anymore, or maybe the  will stay 5-cars, reducing the need for 8-car units, since ENY could have the R179s from the . 

The only Broadway lines that get rerouted on 6th Avenue are the Q and R trains. The R already has NTTs. Also, the MTA can add more crew to change the roll signs in Astoria like they did before 2010. Therefore, the NQW will most likely become a mixed fleet of r160's/r68's until the r68's are fully retired.

If Jamaica is getting r211's, that means that a good chunk of the option orders will consist of open gangway trains.

[Trainmaster5]

2 hours ago, subwaycommuter1983 said:

The only Broadway lines that get rerouted on 6th Avenue are the Q and R trains. The R already has NTTs. Also, the MTA can add more crew to change the roll signs in Astoria like they did before 2010. Therefore, the NQW will most likely become a mixed fleet of r160's/r68's until the r68's are fully retired.

If Jamaica is getting r211's, that means that a good chunk of the option orders will consist of open gangway trains.

Since the option order for R211 cars is being added to the existing capital budget I have to admit that I was wrong about the issue. I read some of the  documents that appeared and noticed the BS funding assumptions spread throughout. Did anyone else see the plans for the SIRT ? Unless I missed it I don’t remember anything about R211 equipment. Likewise did anyone else notice that the R262 cars and the IRT CBTC project was kicked down the road ? Many of us were told 25 years ago that the IRT would never make the projected CBTC completion date. This came from the people in the know. On the subject of retrofitted B Division equipment for CBTC compliance which cars were they talking about ? My last point concerns the subway ridership numbers. Either the  or some posters are making up those numbers. Someone is flat out wrong. There’s an article about the  in Monday’s Daily News that also summarized the points that were made. BTW the points made about the Astoria line and the Broadway BMT also apply to the IRT Lexington Avenue and Seventh Avenue line. My take. Carry on.

[Lex]

1 hour ago, Trainmaster5 said:

Since the option order for R211 cars is being added to the existing capital budget I have to admit that I was wrong about the issue. I read some of the  documents that appeared and noticed the BS funding assumptions spread throughout. Did anyone else see the plans for the SIRT ? Unless I missed it I don’t remember anything about R211 equipment. Likewise did anyone else notice that the R262 cars and the IRT CBTC project was kicked down the road ? Many of us were told 25 years ago that the IRT would never make the projected CBTC completion date. This came from the people in the know. On the subject of retrofitted B Division equipment for CBTC compliance which cars were they talking about ? My last point concerns the subway ridership numbers. Either the  or some posters are making up those numbers. Someone is flat out wrong. There’s an article about the  in Monday’s Daily News that also summarized the points that were made. BTW the points made about the Astoria line and the Broadway BMT also apply to the IRT Lexington Avenue and Seventh Avenue line. My take. Carry on.

That's covered under the base order (75 R211S cars out of 535 total R211s).

[darkstar8983]

7 hours ago, subwaycommuter1983 said:

The only Broadway lines that get rerouted on 6th Avenue are the Q and R trains. The R already has NTTs. Also, the MTA can add more crew to change the roll signs in Astoria like they did before 2010. Therefore, the NQW will most likely become a mixed fleet of r160's/r68's until the r68's are fully retired.

If Jamaica is getting r211's, that means that a good chunk of the option orders will consist of open gangway trains.

Sorry I meant spontaneous reroutes when there are issues along a subway line. I know that during off peak hours only the  and  are rerouted to 6 Av since their terminals can be reached via either a Broadway or 6 Av. The MTA is too cheap to hire extra people to just change rollsigns - they’ll probabaly task that to conductors and Train operators when trains arrive at their terminals, which is almost no time since trains arrive usually late.
 

As for weekend reroutes, yes in theory the  could be given NTTs similar to how the  was given NTTs and full length trains when it was extended to Stillwell Av on weekends. Note that during that service change, all the R68s on the  had to go to the yard and we’re replaced with the s fleet of R46s and R160s (although yes in this case the  was operated with  train crews), but the principle is there where train cars can be swapped in and out for weekend service if need be.

 

This might also happen during the Queensboro Plaza station rehab, where the R160s will likely run on the main  route from Coney Island to Lexington then via the  to 71 Av, and the Astoria shuttle will use its regular fleet. This would have to be the case unless the service change is adjusted to just suspend the  between Times Sq-42 St and Ditmars Blvd which has been done in the past, and just call it a day

[R32 3838]

16 hours ago, Trainmaster5 said:

Since the option order for R211 cars is being added to the existing capital budget I have to admit that I was wrong about the issue. I read some of the  documents that appeared and noticed the BS funding assumptions spread throughout. Did anyone else see the plans for the SIRT ? Unless I missed it I don’t remember anything about R211 equipment. Likewise did anyone else notice that the R262 cars and the IRT CBTC project was kicked down the road ? Many of us were told 25 years ago that the IRT would never make the projected CBTC completion date. This came from the people in the know. On the subject of retrofitted B Division equipment for CBTC compliance which cars were they talking about ? My last point concerns the subway ridership numbers. Either the  or some posters are making up those numbers. Someone is flat out wrong. There’s an article about the  in Monday’s Daily News that also summarized the points that were made. BTW the points made about the Astoria line and the Broadway BMT also apply to the IRT Lexington Avenue and Seventh Avenue line. My take. Carry on.

I see the R262 order being pushed back since Lexington CBTC is pushed back. The R62/62A fleet are still in decent shape so they can last up to 50 years with good maintenance.

[subwaycommuter1983]

4 hours ago, R32 3838 said:

I see the R262 order being pushed back since Lexington CBTC is pushed back. The R62/62A fleet are still in decent shape so they can last up to 50 years with good maintenance.

The main issue with the r62's especially on the #1 train is the terrible air conditioning during the summer. Other than that, there are in good shape for now.

[RandomRider0101]

On 7/5/2022 at 11:01 PM, VIP said:

I don’t Know if that model is gonna pass testing… the brakes are horrible.

Uh-oh, that's not a good sign. This seems to be a recurring issue with trains having bad brakes. I know part of it is the 's fault for altering the brakes on certain fleets, which in turn caused them to be less reliable, but what is the reasoning behind all of it? Is it connected to the system's speed restrictions, or is it something else?

[BenTheMiner]

On 8/3/2021 at 1:51 PM, BenTheMiner said:

Sorry, but this looks quite inaccurate. I am also replicating the font right now, and I am striving for accuracy. It's not completed yet as not all the characters have not been seen, and therefore not released. Here is how my font looks like.

R211 overhead

[darkstar8983]

13 hours ago, BenTheMiner said:

R211 overhead

While the large font seems great for the visually impaired, its large text is not enough to display longer destination signs (i.e. to Jamaica-179 St, Forest Hills-71 Av, and it will likely need to flip to the next available display:

 

 - To Forest

 - Hills-71

 - The Next Stop Is

 - Woodhaven

 - Blvd

 - 9:45AM

*too much to  flip through. 

Maybe if the Text size  is  made slightly smaller so that all parts of the destination fit on the same screen like they do on the R160s.  

 - To Forest Hills-71 (even though it should display Forest Hills-71 Av)

 - The Next Stop Is

 - Grand Av-Newtown 

 - 10:45AM

[BenTheMiner]

59 minutes ago, darkstar8983 said:

While the large font seems great for the visually impaired, its large text is not enough to display longer destination signs (i.e. to Jamaica-179 St, Forest Hills-71 Av, and it will likely need to flip to the next available display:

 

 - To Forest

 - Hills-71

 - The Next Stop Is

 - Woodhaven

 - Blvd

 - 9:45AM

*too much to  flip through. 

Maybe if the Text size  is  made slightly smaller so that all parts of the destination fit on the same screen like they do on the R160s.  

 - To Forest Hills-71 (even though it should display Forest Hills-71 Av)

 - The Next Stop Is

 - Grand Av-Newtown 

 - 10:45AM

Correct. The issue is the size of the sign available for this (it's 16 x 160 which seems to be a common size for signs) as well as the camera to the side of it. Unfortunately, the issue is mainly the sign size and not the font. Compared to the current ones, the size of the font is mostly the same (only stretched vertically compared to B division overheads). Vertical size does not affect how much text the sign can fit, so the issue is horizontal size. Unfortunately, if horizontal size was to be decreased, the text would become smaller than the current overheads and harder to see.

[darkstar8983]

3 hours ago, BenTheMiner said:

Correct. The issue is the size of the sign available for this (it's 16 x 160 which seems to be a common size for signs) as well as the camera to the side of it. Unfortunately, the issue is mainly the sign size and not the font. Compared to the current ones, the size of the font is mostly the same (only stretched vertically compared to B division overheads). Vertical size does not affect how much text the sign can fit, so the issue is horizontal size. Unfortunately, if horizontal size was to be decreased, the text would become smaller than the current overheads and harder to see.

Maybe they could have a scrolling sign like some of the R160 displays used to have on the exterior for some of the routes.

i.e.

 via  63 St to 21 St Queensbridge had the scrolling 21 St-Queensbridge sign

 towards Coney Island used to say "Broadway/4 Av Exp" scrolling (and now the  has it Astoria-bound from 86 St as "4 Av/Broadway Lcl")

 towards Jamaica Center had "Queens Blvd Express" Scrolling

 

 

Thiss way, the  for example could have a scrolling sign "To Forest Hills-71 Av", followed by "The Next Stop Is (static)", and whatever the next stop is (scrolling if long name, static if short name"), then the time as static. I forgot about the camera - looks like those cameras and hardware take up a lot of space. 

Same thing with the exterior displays - a lot of lines will have their destination signs cropped / abbreviated because off how little space the R211s have to display the route.

 

When I first saw the mockup of the R211s, I thought the exterior signs were going to be like FIND displays instead of LEDs/LCDs 

Edited August 7, 2022 by darkstar8983

[BenTheMiner]

On 8/7/2022 at 4:57 PM, darkstar8983 said:

Maybe they could have a scrolling sign like some of the R160 displays used to have on the exterior for some of the routes.

i.e.

 via  63 St to 21 St Queensbridge had the scrolling 21 St-Queensbridge sign

 towards Coney Island used to say "Broadway/4 Av Exp" scrolling (and now the  has it Astoria-bound from 86 St as "4 Av/Broadway Lcl")

 towards Jamaica Center had "Queens Blvd Express" Scrolling

 

 

Thiss way, the  for example could have a scrolling sign "To Forest Hills-71 Av", followed by "The Next Stop Is (static)", and whatever the next stop is (scrolling if long name, static if short name"), then the time as static. I forgot about the camera - looks like those cameras and hardware take up a lot of space. 

Same thing with the exterior displays - a lot of lines will have their destination signs cropped / abbreviated because off how little space the R211s have to display the route.

 

When I first saw the mockup of the R211s, I thought the exterior signs were going to be like FIND displays instead of LEDs/LCDs 

That's a good idea! The current overheads already scroll (message animations as well as "Listen for train crew announcements"). I wonder if the R211 overhead has animations for messages and a listen for announcement message.

[rbrome]

Does anyone know when this might enter revenue testing? 

[RedLine]

Nope.

[trainfan22]

1 hour ago, rbrome said:

Does anyone know when this might enter revenue testing? 

An exact date hasn't been giving, an time period was given which would be sometime in the fall, around November IIRC. The source was an MTA document posted on here a while back.

[subwaycommuter1983]

On 9/1/2022 at 2:58 PM, trainfan22 said:

An exact date hasn't been giving, an time period was given which would be sometime in the fall, around November IIRC. The source was an MTA document posted on here a while back.

The MTA doesn't publicly give exact dates when new subway cars enter service.

It may happen in November, it may happen sooner or it may happen later.

It makes more sense for the MTA to fix as many issues as possible before the r211's enter service to avoid a repeat of the r179's.

Let's be patient. The r211's will enter service and the r46's will retire.

[rbrome]

Thanks. It just seemed like it was coming sooner, given that the MTA was teasing it on social media.