Are the R32s the most aesthetic subway car ever?
Here's a pic I took just a few hours ago
>rolling toasters
>aesthetic
never change, subway foamers
>>950134
what do you like, those trains that look like Optimus Prime's dick?
>>950145
Probably anything that doesn't literally look like the side of a cheap warehouse.
>>950121
>Are the R32s the least aesthetic subway car ever?
fixed it
C Trains that stop between 125 and 59street to shit themselves bless up
>>950157
That looks like like shit
Aesthetic.
>>950121
What is with you people? You sound like the 6 year olds who are fixated on construction equipment or monster trucks or somesuch shit. It's like going on and on about the 'aesthetics' of a trash dumpster, or a fire hydrant. Do you even know about girls yet?
>>950235
Op started an argument in a /ck/ thread about food that R32s were the bestest and every other country had shit quality rolling stock. Sadly I am not making this up
>>950242
It's not that NY thread up at the moment?
>>950235
It's an autistic board, what do you expect?
Check out this space shuttle and tell me your subway cars are aesthetic again
>>950121
They look like tin cans with no labels.
>>950121
>Have been around for 52 long years.
>Are probably the most structurally sound of the entire B Division fleet.
Eh.
>>950134
They looked better during the 60's desu.
>tfw R211 won't copy from R46's comfy interior
>>950421
I think the R32 and R42 have the most comfortable seats, followed by the r44-68, with all of the more recent ones coming in last
>>950369
Yeah, but I think they still look nice. And it is pretty impressive that they've lasted so long.
It would have been cool to ride the subway back in the 80s when rolling stock from the 40s and 50s was still in use.
>>950428
They should have kept the Silver & Blue scheme.
It looked nice.
However the most aesthetic subway car in my opinion has to be the R110A / R110B.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T5PgXjTB120
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zOmlI260MGI
>>950121
What is it about the New York Subway that makes it look so bleak and depressing? I just don't know, you see pictures of other systems around the world and they all look alive and welcoming but New York's for what ever reason just sucks the life out of you.
>>950448
Most subway systems are newer. Also, at the time the NYC subway was built, construction techniques were more primitive, they just dug a shallow trench and then built a roof, and that roof became the street. Hence why you don't see so many grandiose high arched ceilings like in some other systems.
>>950235
>Why do you like things instead of talking about other people's lives?
>If you think are intelligent you're a virgin
>>950451
There are some high arched ceilings in Washington Heights, IIRC
>tfw no big booty Dominican gf from Washington Heights
>>950448
I've only seen the london subway system and it didn't seem all that inviting
>>950493
What's wrong? Too clean and modern for you?
Major aesthetic.
>>950584
now fill it with muslims, grifters, and piss drunk foreigners singing obnoxious songs at 2am metric time
Hankyu is the definition of aesthetic.
>>950584
The tube looks sexy, especially with bent doors and the Victoria Line train style but it's a hellish nightmare due to lack of air conditioning in both station and train.
>>950484
>some
Most stations are shallow, flat ceiling affairs. And the 168 Street 1 station is falling apart, hardly a counterexample to the "looks depressing" question.
aesthetic
Budd made some nice trains
>>950121
No the 81-717 is.
R32s are GOAT
On a side note, I'm happy that the R160s are starting to look dirty and broken in, I felt like they looked too new when they first came in.
Casual Bump.
>>950121
I can never seem to find these. I thought it was only the C train that ran on these older wagons or is it common on the J? I take the R every day and have to deal with the awful aesthetics on those instead.
>>950588
>imperial colours
Absolutely YAMATO
>>950428
the new shipment of cars is gonna replace the r46 trains first, they are rusting away from the inside out which is why the outside walls look rippled and dimpled, r32 is a fuckin warrior
>>950451
>>950448
you are both wrong. it looks bleak and depressing because it's a clusterfuck of too many design schemes and there is no integrity. helvetica signs taht replaced original designs pretty much ruined everything
observe, a design typeface integrated with wall, column/ibeam enamel signs, and hanging signs
>>955756
after mta takeover and vignelli unimark wreck of design and years of neglect, it's kinda like a frankenstein all mixed up
>>955759
these photos are from the IND system (roughly from A to G) and you can see in island platform stations where there are no big wall murals, the hanging sign typeface matches the one used on walls of wall platform tiles
>>955762
other cities have one small org running one small system. new york mass transit system is 3 entire systems (hence more stations and shit), since the 40s/takeover ran by one org. too much for one org to run, so everything they do is shit
-installation of fluorescent to replace incandescent means bolting aluminum can looking rows of fluorescents indiscriminately to ceiling
-never painting ceilings, peeling paint
-when painting i beams in stations, one solid block color over layer, policy to never use painter's tape (look at the bottom of an i-beam and you will see splatter of 50 years of different paint colors of previous color schemes)
-same goes for hand railings, etc, no craftsmanship
-along with ill-fitting signage
-tiles of walls never cleaned
-water damage and leaks never inspected and have continued for 60+ years causing tiles to fall out and get stained with microbe/rust/tar/street oil filled water buildup
>>950451
also the statement of 'cut and cover' being primitive is completely false and based in nothing but fiction
-using DC metro and waiting 3/5 minutes to enter station because of deep escalators
-no cities built as many miles as quickly because cut and cover is very cheap
-one staircase away from ground, very fast in and out no long climbs
-easier to map routes that follow streets
london and paris metros built before new york's first subway (IRT, made entirely of carnegie steel frame) were studied extensively by Augustus Belmont, it's worth reading his book to learn more on the reasons why cut and cover is the most convenient and economical method, especially in NYC where the ground is fucking rock, super hard rock
(for alt, 2nd ave subway is being built with deep bore tunneling with a custom and specialized drill, it will be like DC metro deep underground. it, along with east side access is one of the 2 most expensive transit projects in history)
>>950451
london and paris are mud, very easy to tunnel. nyc insanely expensive and foolish to tunnel
>>955756
It looks bleak because it reminds me of a bathroom wall from a few decades ago.
Even then, NYC, out of all cities I've been to, is the worst city I've visited.
>>950448
A number of factors. In addition to the fact that it's huge, old as fuck and being built initially by 2 and then 3 independent and competing companies before being consolidated by the City in the 1950s as others have mentioned, the city of New York also suffered a major financial crisis through a substantial portion of the 1970s. This meant the city simply had almost no money to put into the system which forced decreased service leading to all-time-low ridership, and a huge increase in crime. So the MTA is now dealing with keeping up with maintaining the relatively ancient system along with catching up on all the stuff that got deferred in the 70s and 80s as well as dealing with issues brought on by the huge surge in ridership in the last 10 years. Along with the enormous amount of money going to the Second Avenue line and state funding cutbacks, that leaves the MTA with not a whole lot of money for things like aesthetics.
Personally, I'm okay with it. The MTA is a heavily criticized agency-and perhaps rightly so- but when you consider the age and scope of the system along with the fact that it's the only major system in the world that operates service to every station in the system 24 hours a day 365 days a year, it's pretty unreasonable not to at least appreciate it. Plus I'm from a small town and I think the big-city grit is kinda cool anyway.
>>955764
>new york mass transit system is 3 entire systems (hence more stations and shit), since the 40s/takeover ran by one org. too much for one org to run, so everything they do is shit
Transport For London manage okay.
>>955968
yes but they were tiny. 250 miles for the total london overground
nyc subway has 661 mainline track miles, not including yards.
the size of the london underground is about the size of just one of the nyc systems, even though yes, the underground was consolidated too.
divide 660 by 3 and you get 220, which about the size of the london underground, which one org can handle. then triple the amount they're handing and you've got too much system for one org.
>>955386
From what I have seen, they are common on the C as you stated, and are seen occasionally on the A.
>New Dork
*yawn*
>>955998
>250 miles
>tiny
Okay.
It's 76 miles for the Overground network and 249 miles for the underground, so 325 miles in total. Plus the buses.
More to the point you were talking about "3 entire systems which is too much for one org to run", but London Underground is made up from a whole bunch (Metropolitan Railway, District Railway, City and South London Railway, Central London Railway, Great Northern and City Railway, Baker Street and Waterloo Railway), plus the Overground which is a collection of various ex-BR lines.
On top of that it's also the oldest underground railway in the world.
I mean shit if we're playing "Whose railway is the biggest" the entire UK rail network is 9790 route miles and that's been managed by a single entity since the 1940's.
The problem with the NYC system isn't that it's too big; it's that the NYC Transit Authority is shit.
>>956817
>The problem with the NYC system isn't that it's too big; it's that the NYC Transit Authority is shit.
>>950421
I've always liked these cars. Feels very warm and comfy, unlike the 5 and 6 trains which make me feel like I'm sitting in a hospital bedroom.
>>959217
I still wonder why Bombardier/Kawasaki decided to go with periwinkle bench color seatings for the R142/R142As anyway.
>>959245
Former plane foamer here (until /n/ turned me anti-plane due to all the faggotry). Also anti train but I'm making an exception for NYC
The reason is that blue is a stress reducing color, and commuting on the 6 train is even worse than being in the cockpit of a Russian jet when you realize the wheels fell off during takeoff.
>>950121
Who supplied he older tokyu trains?
I loved the seats in them, they had this and a purple, red, blue camo type effect
But the blue ones had the LCD screens that played TV shows and told you what stop was next in 5 different languages
>>959252
>The reason is that blue is a stress reducing color, and commuting on the 6 train is even worse than being in the cockpit of a Russian jet when you realize the wheels fell off during takeoff.
Kek.
The same could be said for the entire Lexington Ave line as well, at least from what I have experienced.
r32 + rundown j train line = goat
>>950451
Cut and cover doesn't have to be bleak and depressing. Subterranean stations can look acceptable provided the facade is updated to match the times.
Take for example the 7 line extension or the new (T) system coming to Second Avenue. The problem is a design (shitty looking shower style tiles which become grimy after years of neglect and decay), as opposed to the vaulted concrete of the DC metro or the late 70's bunker deco style used by the Washington metro.
>>955765
The most important aspect is station accessibility. No other system in the U.S. (except for some the very limited red/purple line of the CTA offer local/express service on a dedicated right of way, or the level of branching within the boroughs outside manhattan where many of the commuters originate.
Line complexity on Manhattan and thus access is supercharged because most of the branch lines create four track local/express tunnels on the main avenues.
There are cities like of San Francisco and Seattle; Washington DC - (and virtually every east coast megacity for that matter) that could benefit from a similar model.
Even a place like Phoenix, Denver, or Las Vegas could benefit form an adaptation along its major urban avenues.
In New York, the design allows transit folk as well as tourist to reach virtually every part of the city and transfer to other reliable forms of public transit, or navigate on foot.
>>955756
The gum spots on the station platforms and metrocard litter are probably also responsible. MTA should have its feeders eat used metrocards and have special bins at the end of the mezzanine level for dumping empty cards.
>>963179
>implying the local/express model should be copied
It just makes everything massively more complicated for a minimal gain in performance. Cities that are far bigger and denser than most cities in the US get by just fine without express service on their subway networks.
Also,
>implying anyone should model their plans on those of a company that can't even clean and maintain its stations properly despite having a massive budget
The MTA is a joke.
>been on b for years
>finally my mom gives me an ultimatum
>decide to apply for job at metro transit authority
>just got hired at MTA
>im now an expert on trains even tho im entry level
>hey /n/ LOL arent these trains gr8?
>guys?
>plz
>trains plz
>aesthetic
this is how you sound
>>963179
SEPTA Broad Street line has local-express tracks.
