R211 Discussion Thread

[DaPr03]

6 hours ago, Lawrence St said:

Is there a reason Siemens and Alstoms can't run together? They said the same thing about the 68/68A's running together and yet they still do.

Different question, once the entire base order of the R211's are here, what exactly is going to happen to the R46's on the ?

R160 trains with Siemens Propulsion has more HP than Alstom, leading to uneven acceleration and braking within the entire consist.

R68s can run with R68As despite having the same HP, but completely different braking systems. CIY runs mixed R68/R68A consists if other trains are unavailable due to maintenance, but they are quickly decoupled and mixed with their proper rolling stock (R68 with R68, R68A with R68A, etc.) afterwards which is within less than a month. 

[Lawrence St]

2 hours ago, NBTA said:

Well some will stay, not all will go to JAM. From what I know, the alignment will be this:

CIY: 68s mainly for Broadway, 160s mainly for 6th Av and some for Broadway. 
JAM: a mix of 160s and 211s.

PIT/207: 179s and 211s

The J is also supposed to be collaterally effected, I believe.

why would the  be affected it only has 4 car sets?

[subwaycommuter1983]

6 hours ago, NBTA said:

Gonna start dropping, 160s should start heading to CIY.

Any r160's that go to CIY will be for the B due to CBTC on 8th and 6th Avenue.

There has been instances where the both the "B" and "D" trains get rerouted along 8th Avenue.

[subwaycommuter1983]

7 hours ago, Lawrence St said:

Is there a reason Siemens and Alstoms can't run together? They said the same thing about the 68/68A's running together and yet they still do.

Different question, once the entire base order of the R211's are here, what exactly is going to happen to the R46's on the ?

The r46s on the "N" will be replaced by the r68's.

[Lawrence St]

16 minutes ago, subwaycommuter1983 said:

The r46s on the "N" will be replaced by the r68's.

Oh great, more SMEE's.

I don't think assigning R160's to the  and  is the best of ideas just for a "potential" reroute on 8th Av. And did we forget that SMEE equipment can run in CBTC territory?

Edited September 5 by Lawrence St

[R32 3838]

7 hours ago, Lawrence St said:

Which 160's? I thought they're all needed to run on Queens Blvd?

The R160's 8376-9974 are compatible to run on any CBTC route and it's not just tied to QB. The   and are different because they don't share lines. If they can find a way to make the current R160A-1 fleet 8376 and up and R179s compatible with the carnarsie line, That would drop the need for spares dramatically to the point they can make the 100% 8 cars again if they really wanted too since the and could share fleets thus reducing the spare factor and freeing up 10 car units for other lines from the . The R143s and 64 R160s are tied to the carnarsie line. One of the 's R160's did pop up on the post QB CBTC one time, Probably to test the compatibility. Hopefully they can fix this because this would require ENY to have less cars than it does now. 

 

As for the R211s i do wish and hope Concourse gets a batch. Concourse only need around 340 cars. The currently has 33.5 of R68s (268 75 foot cars) which = to 335 60 footers. The Option order is 640 cars. Jamaica could get the first 300 cars while concourse could get 340 cars and if option II is awarded then Jamaica can get the 405 cars while ENY gets the 32 cars. Honestly it would make total sense for the to get R211s due to it's heavy ridership. Jamaica can still get them regardless.

11 minutes ago, Lawrence St said:

Oh great, more SMEE's.

I don't think assigning R160's to the  and  is the best of ideas just for a "potential" reroute on 8th Av. And did we forget that SMEE equipment can run in CBTC territory?

 

The gets re-routed via 8th ave and culver which both are going to have CBTC. Y'all got to stop with the entitlement of broadway should get new cars. they do not need them. They have gotten new cars for years and it still boggles my mind that the   got the r160s first before the and (As a railfan this was great as that gave me more time with the R32s on the and ) But from a logical standpoint it was dumb and politically motivated. Half of the line was R68/R68A's while the busiest line in the B division was 100% R32s which were the oldest cars at the time. It shows how dumb NYCT planning department was at that time and the BS story about power drops in the rockaways to prevent the from seeing tech trains. Anyone who thinks it wasn't politically motivated are dumb. Then when Jamaica finally got the r160s, They wanted them on the   first and the line supt. wasn't having it. They had to fight to get the r160s to go on the first (The crews were R160 qualified already while the   crews weren't. they had to borrow a 4 car ENY set to do burn testing on the in 2008 and to qualify crews) I remember this like it was yesterday. 

 

It's about time south brooklyn takes a backseat for once.

 

 

Edited September 5 by R32 3838

[subwaycommuter1983]

58 minutes ago, Lawrence St said:

Oh great, more SMEE's.

I don't think assigning R160's to the  and  is the best of ideas just for a "potential" reroute on 8th Av. And did we forget that SMEE equipment can run in CBTC territory?

Oh well deal with it.

6th Avenue CBTC and Culver are getting CBTC. With more reason, the "B" and "D" (which have high ridership) need NTTs.

It doesn't make sense to put NTTs on lines that are not getting CBTC.

Y'all Astoria people need to stop being so spoiled and entitled. People in Upper Manhattan and the Bronx pay the same fare as the people in Astoria.

[Comrade96]

1 hour ago, Lawrence St said:

Oh great, more SMEE's.

I don't think assigning R160's to the  and  is the best of ideas just for a "potential" reroute on 8th Av. And did we forget that SMEE equipment can run in CBTC territory?

it happens more often than you think plus 2 D trains always run light over culver as lafayette specials

running smees over cbtc equipped lines slows the whole line down

[Lawrence St]

14 minutes ago, subwaycommuter1983 said:

Oh well deal with it.

6th Avenue CBTC and Culver are getting CBTC. With more reason, the "B" and "D" (which have high ridership) need NTTs.

It doesn't make sense to put NTTs on lines that are not getting CBTC.

Y'all Astoria people need to stop being so spoiled and entitled. People in Upper Manhattan and the Bronx pay the same fare as the people in Astoria.

I live in Westchester what are you talking about "you astoria people" 

[SimplyMyself]

So I was scrolling through the MTA Capital Program Dashboard and came across this:

https://imgur.com/a/cZKcS3k
 

In November of last year, the  ordered CBTC units for the Option II R211 cars. Interestingly, the description denotes to the option as 89 five-car sets, which would equate to 445 cars. This could be a typo from the MTA’s end. I guess we shall wait and see what happens in the coming weeks, as they’re slated to be ordered very soon. I also attached a link to the current CPD below.

2020-2024 Capital Program Dashboard:

http://web.mta.info/capitaldashboard/CPDPlan.html?PLN=8&AGY=a

Edited September 5 by SimplyMyself

[R32 3838]

13 minutes ago, SimplyMyself said:

So I was scrolling through the MTA Capital Program Dashboard and came across this:

https://imgur.com/a/cZKcS3k
 

In November of last year, the  ordered CBTC units for the Option II R211 cars. Interestingly, the description denotes to the option as 89 five-car sets, which would equate to 445 cars. This could be a typo from the MTA’s end. I guess we shall wait and see what happens in the coming weeks, as they’re slated to be ordered very soon. I also attached a link to the current CPD below.

2020-2024 Capital Program Dashboard:

http://web.mta.info/capitaldashboard/CPDPlan.html?PLN=8&AGY=a

It doesn't surprise me if they do 445 cars since ordering 32 8 car units would be a small oddball fleet. They just added 8 more cars or Kawasaki is giving 8 free cars for the delays.

1 minute ago, Vulturious said:

Speaking of 6 Av CBTC, when it comes time for construction, the  and  are definitely going to be needing NTT's. Well moreso for the  since the is weekday only. Regardless of my personal preference of what NTT I'd want to see running along the , it and the  are going to be swapping routes pretty much every weekend. Especially with Culver already active at least along a portion (I haven't been paying much attention to Culver's CBTC outside of knowing it's active), only NTT's can be running around it unless people don't mind seeing slowdowns along the route. 

 

Yeah, There's going to be a lot of GOs where both and will get re-routed more often. So they will will need techs regardless.

 

Edited September 5 by R32 3838

[Vulturious]

32 minutes ago, subwaycommuter1983 said:

Oh well deal with it.

6th Avenue CBTC and Culver are getting CBTC. With more reason, the "B" and "D" (which have high ridership) need NTTs.

It doesn't make sense to put NTTs on lines that are not getting CBTC.

Y'all Astoria people need to stop being so spoiled and entitled. People in Upper Manhattan and the Bronx pay the same fare as the people in Astoria.

31 minutes ago, Comrade96 said:

it happens more often than you think plus 2 D trains always run light over culver as lafayette specials

running smees over cbtc equipped lines slows the whole line down

Speaking of 6 Av CBTC, when it comes time for construction, the  and  are definitely going to be needing NTT's. Well moreso for the  since the is weekday only. Regardless of my personal preference of what NTT I'd want to see running along the , it and the  are going to be swapping routes pretty much every weekend. Especially with Culver already active at least along a portion (I haven't been paying much attention to Culver's CBTC outside of knowing it's active), only NTT's can be running around it unless people don't mind seeing slowdowns along the route. 

[subwaycommuter1983]

38 minutes ago, Vulturious said:

Speaking of 6 Av CBTC, when it comes time for construction, the  and  are definitely going to be needing NTT's. Well moreso for the  since the is weekday only. Regardless of my personal preference of what NTT I'd want to see running along the , it and the  are going to be swapping routes pretty much every weekend. Especially with Culver already active at least along a portion (I haven't been paying much attention to Culver's CBTC outside of knowing it's active), only NTT's can be running around it unless people don't mind seeing slowdowns along the route. 

The B will still need NTTs.

This video is proof that the B has been rerouted whenever there are issues on 6th Avenue.

 

[ArchytectAnthony]

2 hours ago, R32 3838 said:

It's about time south brooklyn takes a backseat for once.

I mean, South Brooklyn is still seeing the new techs anyways bc the and all run down there lol. If you meant Sea beach specifically, trains get rerouted via Sea Beach semi-often so even they're sorta getting something. Its mainly Astoria thats getting the hand me downs ig.

33 minutes ago, subwaycommuter1983 said:

This video is proof that the B has been rerouted whenever there are issues on 6th Avenue

Tbf, just because it has happened before doesnt really mean its super often. If something screws up on 6th ave exp, most of the time the just goes *poof* (suspended). I've seen and trains go down 8th ave more often then 's and even then, at most, 1 or 2  goes down 8th ave in those cases, so it shouldnt screw up the future 8th avenue CBTC too much. I'm sure the at least can still get away with using R68/A's during 8th ave CBTC until theres enough R211's to make the fully NTT of some type in the near future. 

 

[slantfan4281]

1 hour ago, R32 3838 said:

It doesn't surprise me if they do 445 cars since ordering 32 8 car units would be a small oddball fleet. They just added 8 more cars or Kawasaki is giving 8 free cars for the delays.

 

Yeah, There's going to be a lot of GOs where both and will get re-routed more often. So they will will need techs regardless.

 

Speaking of oddball fleets, I wonder if they'll order single cars when the time comes to replace the R68s on the , or if they'll just extend the platforms to 240 or 300 ft to use a 4 or 5 car R160 set. I feel like with potential delays in the R268 order it wouldn't hurt to order as many R211s as possible in case they're needed to retire the worst performing R68/As if the R268s come in later than expected

[Lawrence St]

45 minutes ago, slantfan4281 said:

Speaking of oddball fleets, I wonder if they'll order single cars when the time comes to replace the R68s on the , or if they'll just extend the platforms to 240 or 300 ft to use a 4 or 5 car R160 set. I feel like with potential delays in the R268 order it wouldn't hurt to order as many R211s as possible in case they're needed to retire the worst performing R68/As if the R268s come in later than expected

Like with the R211S's for Richmond Valley, they can just install or spec a switch that cuts out a certain number of car doors so they don't have to spend any extra money to extend the platforms. IIRC, I think most of those platforms fit 3 cars,

[Kamen Rider]

sigh... "the definition of insanity is rehashing the same argument over and over again and expecting yourself to suddenly be right...

 

So... we're come round to this again...

feel like we've hashed this out a good six or seven times by now... will the eight time be a charm?

 

As i have said in the past, if it's one or two trains, it's not really going to be a problem. the CBTC system is designed to handle non-reporting equipment on mainline tracks. Like the ever-present bane on my day, "Pickup Number 9", the QBL trash train, which is powered by two sets of R42s.  

the computers know something is there from the still in situ track circuits. there is still a traditional model board. You will not have a CBTC train plowing into the back of a non-reporting train, it just creates a much larger buffer zone behind it, which can and will slow down service... But that also happens on CBTC equipped trains that have suffered a CBTC malfunction and are running in CBTC bypass mode.

 

What the movers and shakers are more concerned with is stuff like Fastrack, sending the Delta down the Fox. 

 

Cause if the situation is bad enough to require all B and D service down 8th avenue... then CBTC is not going to matter even if the entire fleet was equipped. It's just too crowded. 

[Trainmaster5]

3 hours ago, Kamen Rider said:

sigh... "the definition of insanity is rehashing the same argument over and over again and expecting yourself to suddenly be right...

 

So... we're come round to this again...

feel like we've hashed this out a good six or seven times by now... will the eight time be a charm?

 

As i have said in the past, if it's one or two trains, it's not really going to be a problem. the CBTC system is designed to handle non-reporting equipment on mainline tracks. Like the ever-present bane on my day, "Pickup Number 9", the QBL trash train, which is powered by two sets of R42s.  

the computers know something is there from the still in situ track circuits. there is still a traditional model board. You will not have a CBTC train plowing into the back of a non-reporting train, it just creates a much larger buffer zone behind it, which can and will slow down service... But that also happens on CBTC equipped trains that have suffered a CBTC malfunction and are running in CBTC bypass mode.

 

What the movers and shakers are more concerned with is stuff like Fastrack, sending the Delta down the Fox. 

 

Cause if the situation is bad enough to require all B and D service down 8th avenue... then CBTC is not going to matter even if the entire fleet was equipped. It's just too crowded. 

Thank you for pointing that out. For 15 years I’ve tried to get it through some thick heads about IRT service around President St in Brooklyn but some people can’t understand the concept. Last Thanksgiving I was asked by my old timers to ask a simple question about service delivery to Manhattan from the Brooklyn IRT. This week I was reminded by 3 people that no one ever answered that simple question. Your example of all  and  service being forced down 8th Avenue is the type of question that many folks on the forums have never thought about before yet to a thinking person the answer is rather obvious. I’ve been asked by my colleagues if some posters are trolling or are they really that dumb. Some of them started posting 15 years ago when I started and they gave up the ship when they saw that some people were asking questions that were already answered by previous posters. Look at the start dates of many threads about subways, surface, railroads, and such. I get asked all the time “ are they really that dumb “. We were taught that there are no stupid questions but I’ve pretty much given up on some folks. I used to be called “ the Professor “ by my instructors and some students but I have lost faith in many posters. Just my opinion and some of my classmates. Agree or not. No hard feelings either way. Carry on.

Edited September 6 by Trainmaster5

[Kamen Rider]

45 minutes ago, Trainmaster5 said:

Your example of all  and  service being forced down 8th Avenue is the type of question that many folks on the forums have never thought about before yet to a thinking person the answer is rather obvious.

It is a perspective issue.

When problems occur, we don’t get to walk away. We have to see them through.

I was caught up in the transformer failure back in Mid-July that shut down the sixth Avenue line for hours and the tracks over the Williamsburg bridge until the next day.

i watched as control, 34 Master and World Trade Center tried desperately to figure out what to do. Because you had the entire 6th Avenue corridor who could not be turned trying to ram themselves through on 8th.

 

hell, I was making my station stop at 5th Avenue when everything went to hell and was ordered down 8th with our destination now the World Trade Center.

the congestion was horrible.

 

if one of them had been on the train, they could have “NOPED” themselves out the door and found a different way to their destination.

Me…

it took us about an hour to work our way down to the Trade Center from 5/53rd. Long enough that with just enough time for my partner to change ends, we made a departure at the same time we would have left Metropolitan under normal circumstances.

 

and the entire time repeating the same conversation.

”is this train going to (station in Brooklyn)?”

”no, there’s no power in the area around the bridge, we’re going to the World Trade Center…”

”so you’re not going to (station)?”

”no. Power is off. We can’t go that way. Again We’re going to the World Trade Center.”

Lather rinse repeat.

 

 

 

[darkstar8983]

I thought CCY was going full R211s, and leftover R211s for JAM, with lowest number R160s to CIYD

[darkstar8983]

12 hours ago, Vulturious said:

Speaking of 6 Av CBTC, when it comes time for construction, the  and  are definitely going to be needing NTT's. Well moreso for the  since the is weekday only. Regardless of my personal preference of what NTT I'd want to see running along the , it and the  are going to be swapping routes pretty much every weekend. Especially with Culver already active at least along a portion (I haven't been paying much attention to Culver's CBTC outside of knowing it's active), only NTT's can be running around it unless people don't mind seeing slowdowns along the route. 

Yeah I think transit can do 6 Av CBTC much faster than 8 Av since reroutes that close 6 Av can be done seamlessly

 - Bronx to 59 St-Columbus Circle, then via 8 Av to Jay St MetroTech, then to Coney Island vía Culver

 - Queens to Lexington Av-63 St, then via Broadway / 4 Av Express thru the Manhattan Bridge, then via West End to Coney Island

 - Shifted to local service via Lower Manhattan (still maybe 4 Av Express)

 

and if this closure also has to be done during low-ridership weekdays like the presidents week where children are off from school or the Christmas week, add in the following changes 

 

 - Metropolitan Av to Essex St then via the  to Chambers St

 - Brighton Beach to DeKalb Av, then via Broadway to 96 St-2 Av

 - suspended

 - 168 St to World Trade Center only

 - local service in Brooklyn

[darkstar8983]

14 hours ago, R32 3838 said:

The R160's 8376-9974 are compatible to run on any CBTC route and it's not just tied to QB. The   and are different because they don't share lines. If they can find a way to make the current R160A-1 fleet 8376 and up and R179s compatible with the carnarsie line, That would drop the need for spares dramatically to the point they can make the 100% 8 cars again if they really wanted too since the and could share fleets thus reducing the spare factor and freeing up 10 car units for other lines from the . The R143s and 64 R160s are tied to the carnarsie line. One of the 's R160's did pop up on the post QB CBTC one time, Probably to test the compatibility. Hopefully they can fix this because this would require ENY to have less cars than it does now. 

 

As for the R211s i do wish and hope Concourse gets a batch. Concourse only need around 340 cars. The currently has 33.5 of R68s (268 75 foot cars) which = to 335 60 footers. The Option order is 640 cars. Jamaica could get the first 300 cars while concourse could get 340 cars and if option II is awarded then Jamaica can get the 405 cars while ENY gets the 32 cars. Honestly it would make total sense for the to get R211s due to it's heavy ridership. Jamaica can still get them regardless.

 

The gets re-routed via 8th ave and culver which both are going to have CBTC. Y'all got to stop with the entitlement of broadway should get new cars. they do not need them. They have gotten new cars for years and it still boggles my mind that the   got the r160s first before the and (As a railfan this was great as that gave me more time with the R32s on the and ) But from a logical standpoint it was dumb and politically motivated. Half of the line was R68/R68A's while the busiest line in the B division was 100% R32s which were the oldest cars at the time. It shows how dumb NYCT planning department was at that time and the BS story about power drops in the rockaways to prevent the from seeing tech trains. Anyone who thinks it wasn't politically motivated are dumb. Then when Jamaica finally got the r160s, They wanted them on the   first and the line supt. wasn't having it. They had to fight to get the r160s to go on the first (The crews were R160 qualified already while the   crews weren't. they had to borrow a 4 car ENY set to do burn testing on the in 2008 and to qualify crews) I remember this like it was yesterday. 

 

It's about time south brooklyn takes a backseat for once.

 

 

1. The R211 order will help buff up spares on every B division line in the interim while Phase 2 of the SAS is built hence the large order.

2. the  getting the R160s first was political I’ll admit that - what people don’t remember is that the  were consistently the worst performing subway lines from 2001-2006 and at the time, the bureaucrats thought  it was a rolling stock problem that could be corrected. Turns out it was a mix of rolling stock (neither route had a dedicated fleet - instead getting all leftover cars at CIY), route operation (the  has to do so much switching and merging), and sharing Ditmars Blvd with the  didn’t help. And that’s why the  couldn’t be all R160s until the  was cut in 2010 (originally there were just enough R160s for the  to be covered and the  was supposed to stay R68s) - politics played a hand here. They also played a hand in making sure the  stayed fully R160s when SAS opened and making the  cover its fleet with some R68s.

3. From what I had read earlier back, the  / Concourse yard was supposed to get 405 cars.

4. I wonder how the new math for 445 cars will affect the number of 8-car vs 10’car consists. Probably either zero 8-car consists or a significant number of them. Can someone run the math by me. Because if it’s 89 sets as 445 cars then we get zero 8-car units, and that means the R179s would really be out of place outside of ENY yard

 

[FLX9304]

3 hours ago, darkstar8983 said:

Yeah I think transit can do 6 Av CBTC much faster than 8 Av since reroutes that close 6 Av can be done seamlessly

 - Bronx to 59 St-Columbus Circle, then via 8 Av to Jay St MetroTech, then to Coney Island vía Culver

 - Queens to Lexington Av-63 St, then via Broadway / 4 Av Express thru the Manhattan Bridge, then via West End to Coney Island

 - Shifted to local service via Lower Manhattan (still maybe 4 Av Express)

 

and if this closure also has to be done during low-ridership weekdays like the presidents week where children are off from school or the Christmas week, add in the following changes 

 

 - Metropolitan Av to Essex St then via the  to Chambers St

 - Brighton Beach to DeKalb Av, then via Broadway to 96 St-2 Av

 - suspended

 - 168 St to World Trade Center only

 - local service in Brooklyn

What does the  service have to do with all this? 

[darkstar8983]

1 hour ago, FLX9304 said:

What does the  service have to do with all this? 

Not enough space on the available tracks should a weekday 6 Av closure be necessary to accelerate CBTC installation 

8 Av -

 Express

 local

*both the  need the Cranberry Tunnel so the  can’t run past World Trade Center

 

Broadway

 Express

 Local

* there’s really no room for the  and it would be repetitive to duplicate the  

[TrainGamingKing9928]

Returning to the topic of R211’s, has there been any word on when 4335-4339 or any other sets will be delivered?