Talk:R211 (New York City Subway car)

Requested move
R211 (New York City Subway car) → R211 – There is no reason to disambiguate the page, per WP:DAB. Tb hotch .™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions.  02:45, 4 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment what about route 211 ? -- 65.92.181.190 (talk) 06:33, 4 November 2012 (UTC)
 * "Route 211" is redirected to List of highways numbered 211, a hatnote is enough. Tb hotch .™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it!  See terms and conditions.  19:01, 4 November 2012 (UTC)
 * "R#" is a frequently used abbreviation for "route #" -- 65.92.181.190 (talk) 05:57, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:R160 (New York City Subway car) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 03:15, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

No open gangway cars in the R211 order.
I have seen no source which claims that the Open gangway cars are part of the R-211 order. The cited source makes no such claim. Quotes from the source: " New York City Transit proposes to invest $2.956 billion for 940 new 60-foot R-211 railcars and 10 new open-gangway prototype cars that will replace the R-46 class on the B division" "The proposed 2015-2019 Capital Program includes the purchase of 940 R-211 railcars, 10 open-gangway prototype cars and 1,391 buses" If we were to take this sentence as meaning the R-211 order includes open gangway prototype cars, that also would mean it includes 1,391 buses! I am removing the source as it contradicts the claim, adding a cite source note, and will re-remove the statement later if no source (which actually states these open gangway cars are R-211s) is added. 216.165.95.67 (talk) 14:29, 25 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Ok, I see what you mean. Its a separate order/plan.Tdorante10 (talk) 17:32, 25 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Certainly solves the problem from the perspective of truth. That said, I still don't think it belongs on this page- I think the NYCS rolling stock page is where this belongs. I'd say you've successfully changed my opposition from very strong to soft with the current phrasing. 216.165.95.67 (talk) 17:51, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

At least 100 by 2019?
From R179 page:

"MTA plans to spend another $49.2 million to refurbish and maintain 132 R32 cars through 2018 and then 110 R32 cars through 2019, before finally replacing the remaining cars with the R211As. "

So I updated this and the R32 page to reflect the 55 year old age of the final cars when retired in 2019, but is that even up to date? That seems plausible for late R179 cars, but too soon for R211s? B137 (talk) 06:26, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on R211 (New York City Subway car). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://web.mta.info/nyct/procure/contracts/R34211sol-1.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160129071849/http://web.mta.info/mta/news/books/pdf/160125_1345_CPOC.pdf to http://web.mta.info/mta/news/books/pdf/160125_1345_CPOC.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160129071849/http://web.mta.info/mta/news/books/pdf/160125_1345_CPOC.pdf to http://web.mta.info/mta/news/books/pdf/160125_1345_CPOC.pdf
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://web.mta.info/mta/news/books/pdf/160321_1030_Transit.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 17:37, 6 June 2017 (UTC)

Number under construction
The lead paragraph says: “The base order consists of 535 cars, with options for up to 1,177 additional cars.“ 535+1,177=1,712  SportsFan007  (talk) 00:42, 21 January 2018 (UTC)SportsFan007

It is 535+1077. See here:http://web.mta.info/mta/news/books/pdf/180122_1400_CPOC.pdf --Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 00:47, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

You just posted a broken link.  SportsFan007  (talk) 00:49, 21 January 2018 (UTC)SportsFan007

R68 and R68A
Is the R211 going to repeplace those cars too if not which car will? And why does my discussion keep getting removed? Do not remove it. RedProofHill123 (talk) 21:39, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

The R211s are only replacing the remaining R32s and R42s and all R44s and 46s. The remaining cars are for fleet expansion.--Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 22:17, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

What’s going to replace the R68 and R68As around 2025-2030 then? RedProofHill123 (talk) 23:51, 25 January 2018 (UTC)


 * A separate order.--Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 00:06, 26 January 2018 (UTC)

Like R214 or something? RedProofHill123 (talk) 12:21, 26 January 2018 (UTC)


 * Out of curiosity, where did you get the R214 from? SportsFan007 (talk) 18:07, 25 February 2018 (UTC)SportsFan007

I dont know im just guessing maybe the R211 will replace them because by 2020s the R68/As are going to be 40 years old and reach th end of there life. The R68 and R68As have setted retirement year from 2026 to 2028.

Ten car sets
Look guys the R211A and R211S are the no open gangway ones so that means it will be five car formation. The R211T is the open gangway ones so it will be 10 car sets. It can’t stop in the middle it would be ugly. Berlin noticing issues with the capacity of that design. So NYCT is going to make a whole car. RedProofHill123 (talk) 02:29, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

In case you didn't know this, TWU Local 100, the union representing MTA workers, has a rule that train conductors cannot be more than 300 feet from the motorman, , which would be the equivalent of five 60-foot cars. Therefore, the open gangway R211s cannot be in 10-car sets because conductors would be too far away from the motorman, violating TWU rules, so the cars must be in five-car sets. It doesn't matter how "ugly" it would look. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.118.33.181 (talk) 02:56, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

> They're five-car sets. Nothing more to explain. Mtattrain (talk) 17:50, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

Thank you
Thank you to everyone who works on these articles. I am glad that although I am hundreds of miles away, I can visualize the seats on a certain kind of subway car and with a few clicks find out the exact model number. Ab e g92 contribs 01:47, 9 April 2018 (UTC)

Option 2 Layout
I just found the RFP for the CBTC contract, and it specifies that the 333 car option would have had 71 sets, meaning 88 cars in 4-car sets, or 22 sets, and 245 cars in 5-car sets, or 49 sets. This contract, S-48013, is specified in the October 2018 board materials. This begs the question whether they made a mistake, leaving out their indecision on the contract option, or that they have changed their mind and aren't set on the 437 car option. Help would be appreciated. Thanks.--Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 15:27, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

> Maybe they changed the contract details? They sometimes say one thing in the board materials and reveal a new detail in the meeting itself. Mtattrain (talk) 16:08, 20 January 2019 (UTC)


 * Yeah, I think they changed the stipulation of the contract. For now, I think we should mention both figures. Neither option has been exercised yet so it's hard to tell which of the two layouts for Option 2 will be chosen. epicgenius (talk) 16:26, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

CBTC is independent of Queens Boulevard.
I removed a mention of Queens Boulevard CBTC from this page as it is not connected to this order. It was later re-added in good faith. The CBTC on these cars is needed for Eighth avenue, not Queens Boulevard CBTC.

The Queens CBTC contract specifies only R160s to be converted, the conversion of which is well underway. Enough R160s are to be converted for the entirety of Queens Boulevard service to operate. CPOC agenda, See Page 62

The R211 CBTC is listed as part of the Eighth Avenue CBTC project (along with the conversion of R179s). RFP for R179 and R211 CBTC Conversion

The current wording appears to be derived from the CPOC agenda here: http://web.mta.info/mta/news/books/pdf/190122_1400_CPOC.pdf Which on page 62 states: "Close coordination with the CBTC – QBL project, which must provide the on-board equipment, mock-ups, drawings and other technical information for Kawasaki’s use, is required in order to insure on time delivery of the Initial Train in July 2020."

I understand how this statement can cause confusion but as the 8th avenue CBTC contract has not been awarded, the winning vendor cannot provide their specifications to the builder of the cars for the project. Since 8th avenue CBTC and Queens CBTC must be fully compatible in every way, the QB vendors are the only CBTC vendors Kawasaki has to work with. (and the two QB vendors are also the only ones qualified at this point to bid on 8th avenue...)

That all said, it is entirely possible that they will end up on Queens Boulevard, but they are neither necessary for, nor specifically intended for, QB CBTC MrLincoln (talk) 04:44, 14 April 2019 (UTC)
 * , Thanks for the detailed response. I am aware that QB will most likely receive R160s. However, the CBTC for 8th Avenue is still important to mention in this article, since the R211 must also be CBTC compatible to provide enough cars for 8th Avenue CBTC. It's just that the CBTC projects and the R211 order are closely related, which is probably why the CBTC installation was mentioned at all. epicgenius (talk) 13:49, 14 April 2019 (UTC)
 * I am not against mentioning CBTC in the article, but would certainly avoid making it sound as if Queens CBTC is reliant on the order being completed on time. It would not surprise me if Queens CBTC ends up being one of the only CBTC projects not delayed by rolling stock acquisition :) Perhaps it would make sense to mention the need for more CBTC equipped cars in the existing CBTC point at the end of the Features section? MrLincoln (talk) 15:41, 14 April 2019 (UTC)
 * , I think that could work well, if we put CBTC in the features section. epicgenius (talk) 21:47, 14 April 2019 (UTC)


 * and epicgenius, The big idea floating around is the QBL will received all R160s to Jamaica Yard. However, my opinion is the R46s currently in Jamaica yard will stay there till the base order of R211s shows up, so nothing needs to be shuffled around. Why send R46s to CI to fill Jamaica with 160s, then move some 160s back after the base order arrives? That seems a bit excessive. That COPC about QBL Likely getting R160s was from last year, now recently January 2019 as it said, "Close coordination with the CBTC – QBL project, which must provide the on-board equipment, mock-ups, drawings and other technical information for Kawasaki’s use, is required in order to insure on time delivery of the Initial Train in July 2020." In time between now and a little more than a year when the production R211s start showing up, we will all figure out the answer for this. Till then, its still a guessing game.

Semi-protected edit request on 18 June 2019
By January 2019, the first R211A test train was scheduled to be delivered in July 2020, in conjunction with the installation of CBTC on the IND Queens Boulevard Line, serving the. Thereafter, new R211 cars would be produced and delivered at a rate of 30 to 40 cars per month. The first two test trains of ten R211T open-gangway cars would be delivered in May 2021, followed by the first 5-car set of R211S cars for the Staten Island Railway in December 2021. Under the schedule outlined in January 2019, the base order of R211 cars would continue to be delivered through mid-2023. If the two option orders of 1,077 cars were exercised, deliveries would continue through late 2025. A decision on whether to make the first option order as open-gangway or standard trainsets would need to be decided by late 2022. It was also announced in January 2019 that Kawasaki had made a full-car mock-up of the R211 fleet. 2604:2000:DD50:8C00:E14B:F7C:E5F:37D9 (talk) 00:26, 18 June 2019 (UTC)


 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Saucy[talk – contribs] 05:45, 19 June 2019 (UTC)

In Service Infobox
Delivery schedule is indeed 2020-2025. However, the Jan. 2019 Committee suggest that production sets won’t be delivered until Oct. 2021. This suggest that the R211’s won’t go into passenger service until at least 2021, hence why I changed the date. TheThingISee28 (talk) 16:00, 28 November 2019 (UTC)

R211 already on the tracks for non revenue testing
Since the R211 began non revenue testing recently, can you all update on that please. PS: Trains that are already testing without passengers will do so for the next year or so and won't be in passenger service until at least 2022. Williamwang363 (talk) 23:48, 7 August 2021 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 5 February 2022
115.97.76.92 (talk) 08:14, 5 February 2022 (UTC) I Want To Edit
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: this is not the right page to request additional user rights. You may reopen this request with the specific changes to be made and someone may add them for you. Cannolis (talk) 08:18, 5 February 2022 (UTC)

R211 Update (June 2022)
Here is important information regarding the R211s stated in this MTA document between pages 28-44. Information about the R211s are barely being updated and needs an update. Someone please put in information about the additional delivery delays and when the R211A pilot train is suppose to enter service. Also menschen when it was suppose to originally enter service. About the Option I order I know it menschen's R211A's but do not menschen that the Option I order will consist of standard cars because the MTA did not talk about the Option I order a lot. Also about the R211T car numbers I think the cars will be numbered 4040-4059 not the R211Ss as it would not make sense as there will be 75 of those cars and not 20. There will be 20 of the R211Ts so under car numbers change it from where it say car numbers 4040-4059 from R211S to R211T. This article is something I can't edit.

R211S car numbers are confirmed
Someone removed my addition of the R211S car numbers (despite keeping the reference). The R211S car numbers are confirmed to be 100-174 as the first car is 100 and there is a total of 75 cars in the R211S order. My friend verified this a while back, but there was no source for it as it was private information. Considering we now see car 100, it's confirmed now. Plus, it wouldn't make sense for the numbers to go below 100 (as the MTA wouldn't do that) and it wouldn't make sense for there to be any gaps in the car number range. I'll repost the references I used here:

https://tfloffroad.com/2022/09/kawasaki-factory-tour-video/ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-gNqz4h63lk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rYTgu1AGYSQ&

Forgot to mention the second video.

The first link shows an image with R211S car 100 next to R211A car 4088. However, this is hard to see. This was a shot taken from the video in the third link which clearly shows the poster on the window, stating R211S 100. BenTheMiner (talk) 17:05, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 30 January 2024
Please change number under construction in the infobox from 970 to 1175. The base order of 535 cars and Option 1 of 640 additional cars have already been purchased. 535 plus 640 is 1175. 50.110.255.236 (talk) 03:12, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Shadow311 (talk) 16:56, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
 * It’s already in the article. The infobox should be changed to reflect what the article says. See section “Contract” for the source of the 535 base order and section “Option orders” for the source of the 640 Option 1 cars. 50.110.255.236 (talk) 00:54, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done . oknazevad (talk) 18:17, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Thank you. 50.110.255.236 (talk) 20:40, 31 January 2024 (UTC)