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  
TheSubwayStation

How are the R142s holding up?

Recommended Posts

Here's a question that I've been wondering about for a while: how reliable have the R142s been lately? I know that their MDBF has been great, but I have heard from various people (on the internet) that the MDBF numbers don't tell the full picture. Additionally, I've been reading about problems such as the brake wear issue that I actually posted in the random thoughts thread (sorry, I know that posting the same thing in two threads isn't ideal). Some people insist that the R142s are simply bad cars, and I've heard some people say that there are always some R142s in for maintenance at 207 St yard, which would suggest that they have recurring problems. That could just be the usual NTT haters talking, though (specifically those who miss the redbirds). Specifically because the R142s are the first NTTs, and many people originally claimed that the NTTs would never be able to withstand the heavy-duty environment of the subway, I'm particularly curious about how they're doing after a good twelve years or so.

 

So, with that said, I was hoping that we could have some sort of discussion about this topic, and maybe some input specifically from people who are familiar with the fleet. I realize that this is the type of topic that could start an NTT vs. SMEE war, but I'm hoping that it won't happen. (If this becomes a bad thread and needs to be ended, that's fine with me and I apologize in advance if that becomes the case.)

 

-TSS

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hope there aren't anything wrong with the R62/62As, R142/142As, R143s, and R160s. Like the R32s, they were never lemons like the Subway's R44s (as well as the R46s and R68/68As once were despite their horrendous MDBF) were. R32s are only bad due to their aging bodies but are still workhorses regardless. As for the R46s and R68/68As, I've heared that management runs on the (A)(D)(G) is the problem (dunno about the (B) and (R) though).

 

Just hope the R142/142As are fine.

Edited by RollOverMyHead

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If this is going to be in general, I think the thread title needs to change.

 

For the R142s, as a local rider, I see nothing wrong with them. It maybe just me.. Of course, your gonna hear from some buffs all this bs about how the R142As are better then R142. Mainly the propulsion system, and design.. Plus how the R142s HVAC system is loud (which doesn't bother me. Use to it)... Thats how much some buffs can even think of.. But not related to any major issues......

  • Upvote 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have heard that the R142s are starting to fall apart. Instead of converting the R142s to R188s, they should have just converted the entire fleet, or give them an overhaul similar to the one that the R46 got, to refurbish them. Another option I thought that would have been pretty good is to send them to the (1)(3)(7)<7> and retire those R62s you got left, assuming that the R188 order can cover the (2) and (6)<6>.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the oldest of the 142s are from 1999; kinda hard to beleave, but a child born the day the 142s first came online is now looking at high schools...

 

they're no longer babies. to think of them as always being in perfect condition because of thier age is a little short sighted seeing as that age is 13 out of a 40-50 year design lifespan.

 

that being said, it doesn't mean they are the flawed equipment. they aren't falling apart.

  • Upvote 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

also, iirc, there was an set that was complelty sidelined at 207 with an electrical fault. the ones who keep saying about sets being there might have seen that set, which scewed the results.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For the R142s, as a local rider, I see nothing wrong with them. It maybe just me.. Of course, your gonna hear from some buffs all this bs about how the R142As are better then R142. Mainly the propulsion system, and design.. Plus how the R142s HVAC system is loud (which doesn't bother me. Use to it)... Thats how much some buffs can even think of.. But not related to any major issues......

 

I'm completely with you on this; I personally love the 142s. People can feel free to disagree with me, but I think that they along with the 142As manage to be rugged on the outside and comfortable on the inside; IMO they're perfectly suited to be the 21st century evolution of the legendary IRT car. I honestly like having a combination of 142s and 142As, but that's just my preference as a train buff. Like I said, with any train, I know that some people won't like them. I started this thread, though, because I wanted to hear about their reliability from some people who know more than I do about them.

 

 

If this is going to be in general, I think the thread title needs to change.

 

Who knows where this'll head, but I intended the thread to be specifically about the R142s. Edited by TheSubwayStation

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the R142A's on the (6) are not doing as good, due to the heavy runs but the R142's on the (2) and (5) seems to be improoving, in 2008 the R142's had major issues but that was fixed

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well looks like a good time for those R142As from the (6) to be taken and converted then. I'd like to think the R62A's that comes back to the ML IRT (when the swap happens, and please let's not go overboard with the R62As stuff like in the R188 thread) would be fully refurbished.

Edited by Grand Concourse

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They're always being maintained so you're always going to find trains in the barns for service, no matter the equipment. If they don't meet a functional anomaly in service they're all scheduled for regular maintenance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On the (2) cars you'll see strip maps faded to brown every now and then. How come this only happens in a few cars, and you don't really see anything like that on the Lex Av line strip maps?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On the (2) cars you'll see strip maps faded to brown every now and then. How come this only happens in a few cars, and you don't really see anything like that on the Lex Av line strip maps?

 

 

Don't know.

 

I do feel that R142's are the first NTT's and are doing pretty good. The R142A's on the (6) are losing reliability, but I feel they are still very strong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the R142A's on the (6) are not doing as good, due to the heavy runs but the R142's on the (2) and (5) seems to be improoving, in 2008 the R142's had major issues but that was fixed

 

I think we all know that Westchester Yard treats their cars really badly. They almost always have dead motors, and the R142As on the (4) don't. BTW, what problems did the R142s have in 2008? Wasn't there a car shortage (I remember reading it in an old thread)?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On the (2) cars you'll see strip maps faded to brown every now and then. How come this only happens in a few cars, and you don't really see anything like that on the Lex Av line strip maps?

 

 

Maybe the color has something to do with it? Could the red paint of w/e they use to color in the red on the 2 line's strip maps.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the R142A's on the (6) are not doing as good, due to the heavy runs but the R142's on the (2) and (5) seems to be improoving, in 2008 the R142's had major issues but that was fixed

 

 

The brakes seem to screech more on the R142A's than the R142's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think we all know that Westchester Yard treats their cars really badly. They almost always have dead motors, and the R142As on the (4) don't. BTW, what problems did the R142s have in 2008? Wasn't there a car shortage (I remember reading it in an old thread)?

 

I don't remember the problems, but I only remember the (2)(5) had to borrow R142As from the (4)(6) lines. And the (4) had to borrow some R62As from the (1)(7).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't remember the problems, but I only remember the (2)(5) had to borrow R142As from the (4)(6) lines. And the (4) had to borrow some R62As from the (1)(7).

 

 

Why yes, I remember this. R142As on the 2/5.. 2005/06, I recall.

 

Btw, Im curious if these cars will get the cleaning treatment someday.. The 142A still look way cleaner.. 142s remain the same.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll never forget the time I rode on a R142A (on the (6))which i'm going to assume was lacking dynamic brakes...that poor thing was bucking and dragging the wheels to come to a complete stop at every station.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The R142/As arent falling apart, and given that the oldest of them are 13 years old, they're doing pretty good.

 

They're not flawed. But their HVACs sure do make a heck of a lot of noise.

 

 

Blame Bombardier for that.

 

I think we all know that Westchester Yard treats their cars really badly. They almost always have dead motors, and the R142As on the (4) don't. BTW, what problems did the R142s have in 2008? Wasn't there a car shortage (I remember reading it in an old thread)?

 

 

Something with either the brakes or one of the electrical components. It wasnt too significant, service wasnt affected and the majority of the fleet ran while the repairs were going on. Either way its history now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have heard that the R142s are starting to fall apart. Instead of converting the R142s to R188s, they should have just converted the entire fleet, or give them an overhaul similar to the one that the R46 got, to refurbish them. Another option I thought that would have been pretty good is to send them to the (1)(3)(7)<7> and retire those R62s you got left, assuming that the R188 order can cover the (2) and (6)<6>.

 

 

I don't see why they need to spend unnecessary money to convert the entire fleet/buy more trains when only the ones going to the (7) require CBTC kits.

 

Also, retiring the full R62/A fleet? DISLIKE.

  • Upvote 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think he's overblowing the situation. As others said, there's nothing wrong with the R142As, at worst maybe deferred maintenance, but not like 'falling apart'. The one's from the (6) are being converted into R188s and that should hopefully take care of that. Also even with the new R188s (additional cars, not just the refurbished ones), it would be used to allow for the (7) extension to the Javits Center and some additional service/spares for the system. No need to retire anything. At most, if there are more spares leftover, those R62As could be used as part of the work train fleet and retire the old redbirds.*

 

*all my speculation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think they could use an overhaul perhaps. Some of them I see the floor is starting to bubble for example... It's more cosmetic than anything... A good cleaning and new floor on some and they'd be fine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does anybody know if the car shortage in 2008 was because of a design flaw in the R142s, or a temporary problem? I've heard, as I said, that it was because the trains were designed with certain axles not having traction motors, and thus the friction brakes always get worn out too easily on those axles. If that's the case, then, I have no idea why the problem manifested back in 2008 when the shortage happened, and why it's not such a big deal now. That makes it seem like the shortage was caused by a specific temporary failure, not an axle design flaw.

 

*Like I said in the other thread, if the axle design was the problem, I don't understand why the MTA would be ordering the R179s with that configuration (at least I thought they were).

Edited by TheSubwayStation

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.