R179 Procurement Delivery and Acceptance

[jtrain22]

This is so friggin' depressing. Soon there will be no cars left with front railfan windows, except on the #7 Flushing Line. Those should be around another 10 years at least, maybe 20 if they rebuild them soon.

Those R32s are going to be around until 2015 and those R62As on the 7 arent going anywhere anytime soon. The 7 was going to get the 6 lines R142As but being that the 6 lines R142A are in bad shape. The R62As are going to stay on the 7 for the rest of their lifes. And plus it will cost to much money to refit the R142As with CBTC and this info came from an A div TSS.

But you are right its very depressing that the railfan window is going. Once these R160s take over the system there wont be any point in railfanning anymore. Just like theres no point in railfanning the 2 4 5 and 6 lines anymore thanks to those hidious R142/As but the 1 3 and 7 lines is still fun to ride though. Even though the 7 line is the only IRT line with a railfan window..

[UpperHarlemLine4ever]

Not to get off topic but what's wrong with the 142A's? Is it just the cars assigned to the 6 or are they all having trouble?

[Head-end View]

Jtrain: I'm still not understanding this. You say some R-32's will be in-service until 2015? Why would they keep those older cars, while junking the newer R-38, 40, 42's? Is there something special about those R-32's that make them worth keeping longer? Why wouldn't they just junk the cars in the order that they originally came into service ?

[Kamen Rider]

the 38s I don't know, but there are 40s and 42 out there held together with Duck tape. if that doesn't say "you're outta here"...

[jtrain22]

Jtrain: I'm still not understanding this. You say some R-32's will be in-service until 2015? Why would they keep those older cars, while junking the newer R-38, 40, 42's? Is there something special about those R-32's that make them worth keeping longer? Why wouldn't they just junk the cars in the order that they originally came into service ?

The R32s are modern day BMT standards the 32s have stainless steal bodies which are holding up great. While the R38s are rusting and the R42s are just falling apart but an SMS could extend the life of R42s another five years. And the R40s roof are being held togther with duct tape.

But the R38s R40s and R42s are still great cars though. They are better than the R160s which will NOT last as long as these great SMEE car classes did.

[jtrain22]

Not to get off topic but what's wrong with the 142A's? Is it just the cars assigned to the 6 or are they all having trouble?

They all having trouble even the R142s. They are showing the wear and tear of running though the system after a mere eight years of service. These NTT cant last in the nyc subway when the redbirds R10s R32s R38s R40s were eight years old they were holding up great. SMEE car classes and the arnies car classes are more reliable than the NTT. These NTT can only perform well in the nyc subway for only five to six years then they just fall apart. While the SMEE car classes have peform well for 40 years most SMEE car clsses gave 30 or more great years of service.

But the main problems with the R142/As is that the B cars brakes get worn out quick. And the other yards cant kept up with them so the cars get sent to 207th yard. Since they get so worn out the yards in the bronx cant even fix them. If you go to 207th street yard you will will always see a bunch of OOS R142/As at that shop. Its even gotten so bad with the R142/As that the IRT has been having car shortages due so many R142/As OOS.

[jtr1962]

Jtrain: I'm still not understanding this. You say some R-32's will be in-service until 2015? Why would they keep those older cars, while junking the newer R-38, 40, 42's? Is there something special about those R-32's that make them worth keeping longer? Why wouldn't they just junk the cars in the order that they originally came into service ?

R38, R40, R42 (and also R44) have carbon steel underframes which are rusting away. The R32 are 100% stainless steel. I'm actually glad to hear they'll be in service until 2015. They're running well, the bodies are in great shape. There's no reason at all to scrap them.

[jtr1962]

But the main problems with the R142/As is that the B cars brakes get worn out quick. And the other yards cant kept up with them so the cars get sent to 207th yard. Since they get so worn out the yards in the bronx cant even fix them. If you go to 207th street yard you will will always see a bunch of OOS R142/As at that shop. Its even gotten so bad with the R142/As that the IRT has been having car shortages due so many R142/As OOS.

To me this sounds more like a minor design flaw than a major issue. Once the reason why the brakes get worn out is fixed, the cars should be reliable. The NTTs have dynamic braking to 3 mph. If they have DC injection they can brake to a stop and hold, without using mechanical brakes at all. I don't understand why they should be having brake problems. Do the other NTTs experience the same thing? My main concern would really be how the bodies and trucks are holding up. The brake problem seems minor in the scheme of things.

Granted, SMEE was great in its day, but those days are gone. Nobody is building new equipment which uses DC traction. AC traction has far less maintenance, better acceleration, longer life. My guess is once the teething pains of the NTT equipment are worked out, 50 or 60 year service life will be the norm. These trains can't rust, there are no motor brushes to wear out, the wheels can be trued or replaced as needed. All of the mechanical control components on the SMEEs have more reliable electronic counterparts on the NTTs. If these components fail, it's a simple board swap, not a long day in the repair shop. To me anyway the NTTs seem better in every way. Those who work with them are still on a learning curve. I think it was the same when the SMEEs first appeared. Look how well things eventually turned out. It'll be the same thing with the NTTs.

[jtrain22]

But the main problems with the R142/As is that the B cars brakes get worn out quick. And the other yards cant kept up with them so the cars get sent to 207th yard. Since they get so worn out the yards in the bronx cant even fix them. If you go to 207th street yard you will will always see a bunch of OOS R142/As at that shop. Its even gotten so bad with the R142/As that the IRT has been having car shortages due so many R142/As OOS.

To me this sounds more like a minor design flaw than a major issue. Once the reason why the brakes get worn out is fixed, the cars should be reliable. The NTTs have dynamic braking to 3 mph. If they have DC injection they can brake to a stop and hold, without using mechanical brakes at all. I don't understand why they should be having brake problems. Do the other NTTs experience the same thing? My main concern would really be how the bodies and trucks are holding up. The brake problem seems minor in the scheme of things.

Granted, SMEE was great in its day, but those days are gone. Nobody is building new equipment which uses DC traction. AC traction has far less maintenance, better acceleration, longer life. My guess is once the teething pains of the NTT equipment are worked out, 50 or 60 year service life will be the norm. These trains can't rust, there are no motor brushes to wear out, the wheels can be trued or replaced as needed. All of the mechanical control components on the SMEEs have more reliable electronic counterparts on the NTTs. If these components fail, it's a simple board swap, not a long day in the repair shop. To me anyway the NTTs seem better in every way. Those who work with them are still on a learning curve. I think it was the same when the SMEEs first appeared. Look how well things eventually turned out. It'll be the same thing with the NTTs.

Yep its only the R142/As thats having this problem. The R143 and the R160s have thier fair share of problems too. Like the R143s have been having dead motor issues the past few months. And the siemens R160s have been having some problems too. But one of the good thing about the NTT is their energy effient brakes which gives power back to the third rail.


But you gotta remember though the nyc subway is a tough place for a subway car. With lots of bad weather overcrowding stored outside in cold weather short revoery time at terimals. Ive seen R142s on the 2 come to go at flatbush ave terimal less than 30 seconds. And remember that the 2 line is one of the longest lines in the system. Same goes for R143s on the L line running on short headways. And these cars have to run 24/7 wheres other subway systems close down late at night

The SMEE car classes went though some crazy abuse. But the question is can the NTT last though all that abuse that comes with the nyc subway. My guess is that the NTT will only last 30 to 35 years at most the lex is getting to those R142/As.

And being that the R142/As are on lines that are always crowded this brake problem will stay with the R142s for thier whole lifes. The MTA had an fix for it but it cost to much money...

[Head-end View]

Well that explains it; thanks guys. It's interesting that the older equipment was better built. Or, I wonder if the TA no longer specified stainless steel bodies for a reason, like maybe it got too expensive. But, they got 40 years out of those R-38's and 40's which still isn't bad at all.

[Kamen Rider]

Well that explains it; thanks guys. It's interesting that the older equipment was better built. Or, I wonder if the TA no longer specified stainless steel bodies for a reason, like maybe it got too expensive. But, they got 40 years out of those R-38's and 40's which still isn't bad at all.

well, carbon is lighter and is probably less expensive. they also did have some very high hopes on getting rid of the older cars much earlier.

http://www.nycsubway.org/articles/histo ... 1980s.html

scroll down to "wacky ideas and odds & ends"

it lists these dates as the planed retirement of these cars from a plain in 1981

R-26: 1994
R-27: 1995
R-28: 1995
R-29: 1997
R-30: 1997
R-32: 2000
R-33: 1998
R-36: 1999
R-38: 2002
R-40: 2003
R-42: 2004
R-44: 2007
R-46: 2011

[lirr56890 from youtube]

are the r149's going to have tv's on every seat or no and when are they coming out.

[Kamen Rider]

are the r149's going to have tv's on every seat or no and when are they coming out.

R149 was a contract to overhaul 9 crane cars.

And why would they have tvs at every seat on a subway car?

[Robert Paniagua]

Another change the NYCTA ought to make in addition to bringing back the 75-feet length which I applaud, they should also manufacture them as "married pairs" instead of 4-car sets, this way, they can run two-car Shuttles on the Rockaway Park on weekends or dead-day travels, or six cars, like the G. Also, the should get 600 of these not only to relieve the R44 and R44SI, but to relieve some of the worst-performing R46 units, especially the B cars, I think the R179s ought to be like the R46 6208-6258, married pairs, and the R179 cab should also be as big and roomy as the R46, and yes, I also support transverse bucket seats NOT longitudonal bench seats and straight standee bars with rubber strap holders like the MBTA cars in Boston. That's how my R179s should be.

[Kamen Rider]

Another change the NYCTA ought to make in addition to bringing back the 75-feet length which I applaud, they should also manufacture them as "married pairs" instead of 4-car sets, this way, they can run two-car Shuttles on the Rockaway Park on weekends or dead-day travels, or six cars, like the G. Also, the should get 600 of these not only to relieve the R44 and R44SI, but to relieve some of the worst-performing R46 units, especially the B cars, I think the R179s ought to be like the R46 6208-6258, married pairs, and the R179 cab should also be as big and roomy as the R46, and yes, I also support transverse bucket seats NOT longitudonal bench seats and straight standee bars with rubber strap holders like the MBTA cars in Boston. That's how my R179s should be.

4 car sets are easier to mantain than 2 cars (which are easier than singles) even though their operational felxabilty is the oposite. the fewer the parts the better.

bench seating, reguardless of transvers or longitudonal, is a slightly more comfortable option, as not every NY's rear end fits into the bucket seats