Jump to content
Attention: In order to reply to messages, create topics, have access to other features of the community you must sign up for an account.
Sign in to follow this  
East New York

M-9 Discussion

Recommended Posts

On November 1, 2017 at 12:19 PM, Truckie said:

The chance of MNR getting M9's this time around are slim to none.  The M3's may need to be replaced, but they are still running.  There is rolling stock that is not running with no replacement parts available.

The M3a’s interiors are more than fine, and they are just now being outfitted with security cameras, so I doubt that they are on the replacement docket. 

The M3a was introduced roughly around the same time that the R68 was introduced, and they haven’t been refurbished. I understand that commuter trains and subways are two different animals, but MNRR’s M3a’s do not need to be replaced, invest that money into the LIRR replacement. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, R42N said:

The M3a’s interiors are more than fine, and they are just now being outfitted with security cameras, so I doubt that they are on the replacement docket. 

The M3a was introduced roughly around the same time that the R68 was introduced, and they haven’t been refurbished. I understand that commuter trains and subways are two different animals, but MNRR’s M3a’s do not need to be replaced, invest that money into the LIRR replacement. 

Aren't the comets older than the M3A's if so wouldn't they need replacing anytime soon?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, R42N said:

...... but MNRR’s M3a’s do not need to be replaced, invest that money into the LIRR replacement. 

MNRR and LIRR are two separate operations.  There is no taking money from one and giving it to the other.  Just like MNRR can't take the money  they get from CDOT and use it for NY operations. 

Regardless, if M9's are tabled for the time being there is still other rolling stock in need of replacement.

Edited by Truckie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Truckie said:

MNRR and LIRR are two separate operations.  There is no taking money from one and giving it to the other.  Just like MNRR can't take the money  they get from CDOT and use it for NY operations. 

Regardless, if M9's are tabled for the time being there is still other rolling stock in need of replacement.

Ok, but you think that the M3’s are the biggest problem that Metro-North has? There are so many more pressing issues that would be better than replacing good railcars. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, IAlam said:

Aren't the comets older than the M3A's if so wouldn't they need replacing anytime soon?

Do you mean the Shoreliners?

They're dingy and uncomfortable, but I wouldn't count on it. Since they don't provide their own traction, they're much, much less likely to suffer a mechanical issue that prevents them from moving, so the need to replace them isn't as pressing as the need to replace old EMUs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, MNR Beacon Line said:

Do you mean the Shoreliners?

They're dingy and uncomfortable, but I wouldn't count on it. Since they don't provide their own traction, they're much, much less likely to suffer a mechanical issue that prevents them from moving, so the need to replace them isn't as pressing as the need to replace old EMUs.

Exactly.  The only complex mechanical components they have are the HVAC and the braking system.  Otherwise, as long as the carbody is in good shape (which they are) I wouldn't expect those to go anywhere for right now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Bosco said:

Exactly.  The only complex mechanical components they have are the HVAC and the braking system.  Otherwise, as long as the carbody is in good shape (which they are) I wouldn't expect those to go anywhere for right now.

As an upper Hudson Line rider, I really hope MNR will at least give them some extensive service if it plans on keeping them for decades from now.

The trucks are in pretty bad shape. There isn't as widespread of a squeaking issue as with the M-7s (where it can be almost intolerable at the car ends); but a lot of the cars have an extreme sag to one side, even if only slightly asymmetrically-loaded, and the some cars will rock quite violently into turns.

The seats absolutely need to be reupholstered. By my guess most of the M-7As have been, so they have no excuse. The Shoreliner seats are disgusting.

The current toilet & HVAC systems are woefully inadequate and very problematic. A peak GCT-Poughkeepsie train with only one working toilet is unacceptable, but common.

Unfortunately, Dutchess, Putnam, Orange, Rockland, and Suffolk Counties' tax dollars aren't as good as the others' in the MCTD, so I don't expect these fixes to come soon, or at all. What are we going to do, drive into the city? The MTA knows our bluff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, MNR Beacon Line said:

As an upper Hudson Line rider, I really hope MNR will at least give them some extensive service if it plans on keeping them for decades from now.

The trucks are in pretty bad shape. There isn't as widespread of a squeaking issue as with the M-7s (where it can be almost intolerable at the car ends); but a lot of the cars have an extreme sag to one side, even if only slightly asymmetrically-loaded, and the some cars will rock quite violently into turns.

The seats absolutely need to be reupholstered. By my guess most of the M-7As have been, so they have no excuse. The Shoreliner seats are disgusting.

The current toilet & HVAC systems are woefully inadequate and very problematic. A peak GCT-Poughkeepsie train with only one working toilet is unacceptable, but common.

Unfortunately, Dutchess, Putnam, Orange, Rockland, and Suffolk Counties' tax dollars aren't as good as the others' in the MCTD, so I don't expect these fixes to come soon, or at all. What are we going to do, drive into the city? The MTA knows our bluff.

Do the Shoreliners need to be rehabbed?  Absolutely.  But they're not at the point where they need to be replaced.  Speaking of which, have any of the older ones been rehabbed yet?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, R42N said:

Ok, but you think that the M3’s are the biggest problem that Metro-North has? There are so many more pressing issues that would be better than replacing good railcars. 

First off, I would not say the M3's are "good" from an operational standpoint but that's a topic for another day.

I'm talking about equipment sitting in the yard in an unusable state because of the lack of available parts.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, MNR Beacon Line said:

As an upper Hudson Line rider, I really hope MNR will at least give them some extensive service if it plans on keeping them for decades from now.

The trucks are in pretty bad shape. There isn't as widespread of a squeaking issue as with the M-7s (where it can be almost intolerable at the car ends); but a lot of the cars have an extreme sag to one side, even if only slightly asymmetrically-loaded, and the some cars will rock quite violently into turns.

The seats absolutely need to be reupholstered. By my guess most of the M-7As have been, so they have no excuse. The Shoreliner seats are disgusting.

The current toilet & HVAC systems are woefully inadequate and very problematic. A peak GCT-Poughkeepsie train with only one working toilet is unacceptable, but common.

Unfortunately, Dutchess, Putnam, Orange, Rockland, and Suffolk Counties' tax dollars aren't as good as the others' in the MCTD, so I don't expect these fixes to come soon, or at all. What are we going to do, drive into the city? The MTA knows our bluff.

Lol just wondering why you included Suffolk County in there? Hudson Line doesn't even come close to Suffolk County, its way out east on Long Island, and the taxes are ridiculous in the first place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Truckie said:

First off, I would not say the M3's are "good" from an operational standpoint but that's a topic for another day.

I'm talking about equipment sitting in the yard in an unusable state because of the lack of available parts.  

So, why are they outfitting them with expensive security cameras, adding new and updated signage, re-paining the outside and keeping the interiors pristine, if the plan is to scrap them in 5 years?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, R42N said:

So, why are they outfitting them with expensive security cameras, adding new and updated signage, re-paining the outside and keeping the interiors pristine, if the plan is to scrap them in 5 years?

Who said they were going to scrap them (or plan to scrap) in 5 years?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, R42N said:

So, why are they outfitting them with expensive security cameras, adding new and updated signage, re-paining the outside and keeping the interiors pristine, if the plan is to scrap them in 5 years?

The same reason they redid the interior of the derailment R46 set 6150-6153.  Politics and instant satisfaction, as well as keeping them running for at least until the last of the cars they are to retire leave the system.  Plus, they're not necessarily going anywhere just yet, and even if MNR gets M9As, it would be a minimum of 5 years before the first M3 goes, and potentially near 10 before the last one is retired.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Bosco said:

The same reason they redid the interior of the derailment R46 set 6150-6153.  Politics and instant satisfaction, as well as keeping them running for at least until the last of the cars they are to retire leave the system.  Plus, they're not necessarily going anywhere just yet, and even if MNR gets M9As, it would be a minimum of 5 years before the first M3 goes, and potentially near 10 before the last one is retired.

Please stop saying MNRR is getting M9A's. M9A's do not refer to the variant that Metro North would get. M9A's are M9's that are federally funded, which are identical to the M9's. The LIRR has both M9's and M9A's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, jamesman8 said:

Lol just wondering why you included Suffolk County in there? Hudson Line doesn't even come close to Suffolk County, its way out east on Long Island, and the taxes are ridiculous in the first place.

I just threw into the "counties that the MTA doesn't care about serving" pile. North fork service on LIRR is beyond pathetic.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, jamesman8 said:

Please stop saying MNRR is getting M9A's. M9A's do not refer to the variant that Metro North would get. M9A's are M9's that are federally funded, which are identical to the M9's. The LIRR has both M9's and M9A's.

Standard MTA convention dictates that regardless of funding source, LIRR cares are always the base version, and MNR ones always have the /A attached. 

While you’re right that at times ppl have said that the A distinction has to do with funding (though I heard the as were ESA cars), for the sake of simplicity and brevity, I think it’s better if we continue with the old system. 

Edited by RR503
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, RR503 said:

Standard MTA convention dictates that regardless of funding source, LIRR cares are always the base version, and MNR ones always have the /A attached. 

While you’re right that at times ppl have said that the A distinction has to do with funding (though I heard the as were ESA cars), for the sake of simplicity and brevity, I think it’s better if we continue with the old system. 

That was the convention in the past. It's not the convention anymore. It's not simpler or clearer to continue with the old system because the old system is not accurate. M9A cars and M9 cars will both run on both systems (assuming they do run on the MNRR). Any other claim is not clearer or simpler, just plain wrong.

Edited by quadcorder
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, quadcorder said:

That was the convention in the past. It's not the convention anymore. It's not simpler or clearer to continue with the old system because the old system is not accurate. M9A cars and M9 cars will both run on both systems (assuming they do run on the MNRR). Any other claim is not clearer or simpler, just plain wrong.

Unless there has been some change order for dual shoes, and cab signal interoperability (one which I would be delighted to hear about), they physically can not. The LIRR has different 3rd rail design, and a different cab signal system. 

As I said above, the designation in the order has changed. What I am saying now is that for the sake of clarity and brevity, until otherwise proven, it is easier to continue to refer to the different subtypes as _ and /A

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, RR503 said:

Unless there has been some change order for dual shoes, and cab signal interoperability (one which I would be delighted to hear about), they physically can not. The LIRR has different 3rd rail design, and a different cab signal system. 

As I said above, the designation in the order has changed. What I am saying now is that for the sake of clarity and brevity, until otherwise proven, it is easier to continue to refer to the different subtypes as _ and /A

Thats the only thing I'm saying. The M9 was designed with a shoe specifically for the LIRR, it doesnt have the dual shoe like the M8. Unless the MTA is proposing another design for the M9 for MNRR I don't believe that MNRR is going to get M9's at all The ridership difference is almost 20 million more passengers per year difference between MNRR and LIRR. LIRR needs new units more desperately.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, jamesman8 said:

Thats the only thing I'm saying. The M9 was designed with a shoe specifically for the LIRR, it doesnt have the dual shoe like the M8. Unless the MTA is proposing another design for the M9 for MNRR I don't believe that MNRR is going to get M9's at all The ridership difference is almost 20 million more passengers per year difference between MNRR and LIRR. LIRR needs new units more desperately.

The difference is more like 2 million, which, broken down over the course of a year, is negligable.

I can all but guarantee you MNR will get M9s -- they too have M3s to replace. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, MNR Beacon Line said:

I just threw into the "counties that the MTA doesn't care about serving" pile. North fork service on LIRR is beyond pathetic.

If you don't exist in electrified territory you may as well not matter. Ask Oyster Bay or Port Jeff branch riders how that feels.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, RR503 said:

I can all but guarantee you MNR will get M9s -- they too have M3s to replace. 

Everything will need to be replaced in time.  M3's are not the priority at the moment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Truckie said:

Everything will need to be replaced in time.  M3's are not the priority at the moment.

If replacing M3s isn’t a priority, then why is that the stated goal of the M9 base order for LIRR?  

https://www.newsday.com/long-island/lirr-previews-new-train-cars-due-in-2017-1.6085375

Edited by RR503

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, RR503 said:

If replacing M3s isn’t a priority, then why is that the stated goal of the M9 base order for LIRR?  

https://www.newsday.com/long-island/lirr-previews-new-train-cars-due-in-2017-1.6085375

You are taking my quote out of context. 

You were talking about Metro North, as was I.  Now you are applying what I say about LIRR. 

I have no idea what LIRR needs or plans are so there is no basis for me to comment on them.

Edited by Truckie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.