R211 Discussion Thread

[RES2773]

Why is the E being considered? They already have the R160s

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using NYC Transit Forums mobile app

[IAlam]

Why is the E being considered? They already have the R160s

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using NYC Transit Forums mobile app

That line is gonna have CBTC and is also one of the most crowded lines on QB

[Around the Horn]

I'm very interested to see what fleet numbers and numbering conventions they end up with, especially the Staten Island units.

 

I would assume the transit ones will be pretty simple: starting at 3310 or 3311 and following the 0,4,5,9 or 1,5,6,10 pattern for the A cars.

 

Staten Island is where it gets interesting:

 

You could follow the existing SIR convention where all A cars are even numbers and all B cars are odd, with all the A and B cars in the same number series (for example #500-571 continuous, then A cars #572, 574 and 576) or you could follow the PATH convention and have A cars in one number series and B cars in another. (#500-538 for the A cars and #600-635 for the B cars)

 

It will be interesting to see what they end up doing.

[agar io]

I'm very interested to see what fleet numbers and numbering conventions they end up with, especially the Staten Island units.

 

I would assume the transit ones will be pretty simple: starting at 3310 or 3311 and following the 0,4,5,9 or 1,5,6,10 pattern for the A cars.

 

Staten Island is where it gets interesting:

 

You could follow the existing SIR convention where all A cars are even numbers and all B cars are odd, with all the A and B cars in the same number series (for example #500-571 continuous, then A cars #572, 574 and 576) or you could follow the PATH convention and have A cars in one number series and B cars in another. (#500-538 for the A cars and #600-635 for the B cars)

 

It will be interesting to see what they end up doing.

 

The existing SIR convention is like the R46s. It works if you have four-car sets or if you have spare odd numbers for the 16 extra B cars. There are only 80 SIR cars though, so there should be plenty of spare numbers. We'll find out in a couple of years.

Edited January 27, 2017 by agar io

[Fan Railer]

*75

[2Line1291]

This is just me but I wouldn't be surprised at all if Jamaica Yard fleet is 100% R211 if all options are excercised while it's R160s aren't sent to Coney Island and perhaps 207th to make the 10 cars while all the R179s that's currently assigned to go to the all goes to the lines.

[agar io]

*75

My bad.

 

This is just me but I wouldn't be surprised at all if Jamaica Yard fleet is 100% R211 if all options are excercised while it's R160s aren't sent to Coney Island and perhaps 207th to make the 10 cars while all the R179s that's currently assigned to go to the all goes to the lines.

Then the will have a huge 260-car surplus that ENY can't use for the most part. None of these routes are planned to be extended in the near future, and any bumps in service frequencies could be handled by 6 or 8 four-car sets of R179s, not all 40 or so of the 's 4-car sets (including spares).

 

The rest of the B division could technically have enough R211 cars for a 10-car train if the MTA orders the expansion pack of 520 cars, but I doubt that the will get 10-car trains just because current ridership growth doesn't justify it. If the SAS Phase 3 gets built, which I doubt it will within the next century, there would be 330 R211s needed for the , and the 190 remaining cars would be just enough to cover the without any spares.

 

It would be much cheaper to convert the R160s to CBTC then to create all-new B-cars for the four-car R179 sets (to lengthen the R179 s to ten cars).

[RES2773]

That line is gonna have CBTC and is also one of the most crowded lines on QB

ah, that makes sense. Which lines do you think the R160s on the E would go to?

[Around the Horn]

ah, that makes sense. Which lines do you think the R160s on the E would go to?

 

I would assume most R160's would either stay at Jamaica for service on the      or get transferred to Coney Island for service on the      (which are expected to require additional trains due to increasing ridership)

 

I don't see any sort of conversion to ten cars for the  . What I could see happen, is the R143s all move to 207, with all R160s and R179s receiving CBTC and operating as one big pool of cars for the       and  .

[RES2773]

I would assume most R160's would either stay at Jamaica for service on the      or get transferred to Coney Island for service on the      (which are expected to require additional trains due to increasing ridership)

 

I don't see any sort of conversion to ten cars for the  . What I could see happen, is the R143s all move to 207, with all R160s and R179s receiving CBTC and operating as one big pool of cars for the       and  .

I don't really know if the mta will opt for CBTC conversion for the R160s. Unless they have already, I'm a little behind.

[HenryB]

It doesn't make sense to NOT give R160s and R179s CBTC.

[agar io]

I don't really know if the mta will opt for CBTC conversion for the R160s. Unless they have already, I'm a little behind.

The MTA probably will convert at least some of the R160s before they retire, mostly because the all need a 100% CBTC-equipped fleet by the time the Queens Blvd and 8th Av CBTC projects are completed. The R211s won't be enough to provide all the CBTC fleet. Also, operating non-CBTC cars on a line with CBTC enabled and in active operation would cause major headaches for these lines. It's the reason why the doesn't have any R32s or R42s even though it comes out of a yard that does have these stock.

Edited January 29, 2017 by agar io

[danielhg121]

I'm pretty sure I've seen some R160s doing testing for CBTC on the nassau line.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using NYC Transit Forums mobile app

[Fresh Pond]

I don't really know if the mta will opt for CBTC conversion for the R160s. Unless they have already, I'm a little behind.

The 160s came with CBTC provisions. All you have to do is install the necessary hardware.

[Art Vandelay]

We don't need to wonder about what will be used for the CBTC conversion of Queens Boulevard. 

There is a reason that the already signed contracts with Thales and Siemens as part of the Queens Boulevard CBTC project includes the CBTC conversion of 309 sets of R160s.

[R10 2952]

Lot of rumors I've been hearing about the R211s-The TA isn't seriously considering China Rail Corp as a potential bidder, are they?

It's bad enough the Chicago and Boston systems got duped into awarding contracts to these shysters; given CRC's history of shoddy build quality.  Won't be surprised if their contracts turn out like the Flxible-Grumman 870s...

[Around the Horn]

Lot of rumors I've been hearing about the R211s-The TA isn't seriously considering China Rail Corp as a potential bidder, are they?

It's bad enough the Chicago and Boston systems got duped into awarding contracts to these shysters; given CRC's history of shoddy build quality. Won't be surprised if their contracts turn out like the Flxible-Grumman 870s...

My initial response to CRRC getting the Boston contracts was the same as yours but they delivered the hard mock up a few weeks ago (on time I might add) and boy if it's built as good as it looks, they are in good shape up there in Boston...

 

I still doubt they would be MTA qualified in time for this order.

[R10 2952]

But that's the thing; the R44/46s also looked 'good' according to contemporary standards of the day, yet turned out to be mechanical shitshows.  And given CRC's history of poor quality, I genuinely doubt they can be trusted.

http://www.masslive.com/business-news/index.ssf/2016/07/crrc_which_is_building_a_springfield_pla.html
https://www.hongkongfp.com/2015/08/07/70-of-chinese-train-components-fail-safety-standards-chinas-railway-operator-reveals/]https://www.hongkongfp.com/2015/08/07/70-of-chinese-train-components-fail-safety-standards-chinas-railway-operator-reveals/

And normally I can't be bothered to pay attention to the fools in Congress and other legislative bodies in this country, but once in a blue moon they seem to have a moment of clarity and do something sensible for a change:

https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2016/07/19/urged-probe-chinese-company-building-mbta-subway-cars/wRTd80HIyx3oDxT1o2KheK/story.html
http://www.masslive.com/news/index.ssf/2016/07/55_members_of_congress_urge_tr.html

For once I agree with the legislators- CRC needs to be investigated and awarding contracts to a foreign state-owned enterprise is most certainly a national security issue.

[Around the Horn]

But that's the thing; the R44/46s also looked 'good' according to contemporary standards of the day, yet turned out to be mechanical shitshows.  And given CRC's history of poor quality, I genuinely doubt they can be trusted.

 

http://www.masslive.com/business-news/index.ssf/2016/07/crrc_which_is_building_a_springfield_pla.html

https://www.hongkongfp.com/2015/08/07/70-of-chinese-train-components-fail-safety-standards-chinas-railway-operator-reveals/]https://www.hongkongfp.com/2015/08/07/70-of-chinese-train-components-fail-safety-standards-chinas-railway-operator-reveals/

 

And normally I can't be bothered to pay attention to the fools in Congress and other legislative bodies in this country, but once in a blue moon they seem to have a moment of clarity and do something sensible for a change:

 

https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2016/07/19/urged-probe-chinese-company-building-mbta-subway-cars/wRTd80HIyx3oDxT1o2KheK/story.html

http://www.masslive.com/news/index.ssf/2016/07/55_members_of_congress_urge_tr.html

 

For once I agree with the legislators- CRC needs to be investigated and awarding contracts to a foreign state-owned enterprise is most certainly a national security issue.

 

Oh, no doubt you are most certainly correct on that front. The one good thing they've got going is that it seems they aren't making the same mistakes as Rotem.

 

From a very enlightening discussion on another forum:

CRRC has a very solid rep for metro subway cars. That's where their pre-merger predecessors got their start. While this is their first North American order, they have a huge installed base in Asia and the Middle East. Check out their HRT customer list (all 6 pages of 'em): http://www.crrcgc.cc/g6633.aspx. They do pretty much all other types of passenger rolling stock as well: LRV's, push-pull locos, coaches, and HSR trainsets...but heavy rail subways are far and away their bread-and-butter. There shouldn't be any fear about their component manufacturing acumen. Only the usual concerns about the systems integration (and even that isn't nearly as scary for T heavy rail as it is for for T LRV's & commuter rail orders, because our HRT cars are so world-generic mechanically).

 

As for "Rotem potential" with Springfield, they've been hiring and training employees for a full year now with recurring job fairs...since well before they broke ground on the new plant. New recruits are spending their first year on the job doing intensive classroom training that includes a trip to China to get some hands-on experience with the components they'll be assembling. That's way, way above-and-beyond the level (and cost) of training that typical manufacturers will engage in. And that's mainly because...1) they don't want to @#$% this one up like Rotem did (and Nippon-Sharyo is doing with Amtrak) and drive themselves clear out of the domestic market before they ever get established, and 2) they want Springfield to be a main base of domestic operations and not just some fly-by-night "Buy Local" pop-up factory that idles as soon as the job is done. Heavy recruitment from local colleges and whatnot because they aim to attract a younger and local set of workers who'll want to make a full career out of working for them, rather than hiring term-of-project workers (also can do lower starting salaries that way while still getting a workforce inclined to stay awhile). Hence, the extreme up-front investment in apprenticeship a full year-plus out.

 

Rotem's main problem--especially with that troubled Philly assembly plant that bungled the T and SEPTA orders--was that they did negligent vetting of their recruits. The operation was written off as a term-of-project afterthought, and they took anybody who had tangential experience on their resume without enough double-checking and without paying enough attention to whether that experience translated to railcar assembly. They got what they paid for: crap-awful integration, spaghetti electrical from incompetent electrician recruits, poor documentation of the work because the project managers weren't up-to-snuff, and too many untraceable faults for warranty service to sort out. The fact that the component fabrication in Korea and second-source component vendor vetting wasn't real high-quality either just worsened all the issues with incompetent assembly. Rotem has pretty much made themselves a case study in how NOT to introduce themselves to the domestic market, so everything CRRC are doing with Springfield (ditto many other foreign builders sizing up first-time pushes into North America) is a direct response to that Rotem debacle case study.

 

 

 

The only thing I'd be a little leery of trusting CRRC with at this early stage is a bid for the next commuter rail coach order. They one thing they haven't done before is FRA-compliant rolling stock. The mainly Asian countries they've done push-pull sets for to-date are countries that have nowhere near the weight class of the North American mainline network. They haven't even cracked the Euro market yet, and mainland Europe is the closest match in heft to North America where designs are somewhat easily adaptable. Asian stock is more or less two orders of magnitude away from FRA-compliants, so they need to get their rep established at least with Euroland-class push-pulls and MU's before it's safe to exhale on a low bid @ Springfield for the next K-car clones or an xMU order. Which sucks for the T when the most experienced domestic-market builders like Kawasaki, etc. are too swamped with ongoing orders to carve out the extra factory bandwidth at any attractive bid price.

 

http://www.railroad.net/forums/viewtopic.php?f=65&t=58865&start=525#p1420051

I still would not give them an MTA order until I see what the Boston and Chicago cars look like.

 

Edited February 23, 2017 by Around the Horn

[agar io]

It does seem like some companies make good-quality items in one place and then the same company has poorer-quality product if it's made in another (e.g. Bombardier with the 2009 stock in London vs. the R179s here). However, I do agree that the MTA should see what China Rail Corp's products in Boston and Chicago are like first before picking them for the R211s, or not.

[East New York]

The Train Of the Future. Countdown to R211. Ladies and gentleman, without further adoo, the R211 Program Update for April 2017.

 

1.) Preliminary Assignments and Official Designations.

• R211A 60-foot cars with end doors and and a few to test on the bumping some R160's.
• R211S 60-foot FRA cars with end doors for SIR.
• R211T 60-foot Open-gangway prototype cars exclusively for test and evaluation on the .

If all trains have a smooth entry into service, MTA will move to immediately award all options, which will also introduce more open gang-way trains. If this proves to be successful, this will be the wave of the future. 

 

2.) Note the EIS of the R179 and time frame of the actual delivery for R211 will lay a major part in future assignments. The R211's are expected to replace ALL R32, and R46 models. The remaining balance of the R179 fleet is planned to replace the R42's.

 

3.) The remaining balance of R211A's options would end up on the train if so happens to exist at that time. 

 

It is unclear at this time MTA would move to convert any A options to T model trains models depending on evaluation.

 

Sources: RTO, ENY, DCE

Edited March 29, 2017 by East New York

[BreeddekalbL]

What will make the gangway go just on the ?

[Far Rock Depot]

What will make the gangway go just on the ?

What new pilot doesn't start on the A? Its the longest and one of the most used lines in the B division.

 

Sent from my LGLS755 using Tapatalk

[BreeddekalbL]

What new pilot doesn't start on the A? Its the longest and one of the most used lines in the B division.

 

Sent from my LGLS755 using Tapatalk

 

i guess that's where the crowds are? 

 

also while i am here ENY, who has qualified to bid on the r211's, have the chinese?

[Around the Horn]

The Chinese qualified thanks to that modified R68 on the IIRC