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.
Union Tpke

R262 (R62/R62A Replacement) - Information & Discussion

East New York

04289B70-0E3E-4F9D-B575-F4A226826C79.jpeg

Message added by East New York

Recommended Posts

On 7/10/2019 at 2:48 PM, R32 3838 said:

Because the (7) wasn't ready for tech trains when the redbirds were being replaced.

Corona barn was too old plus was sinking into the ground. 

Steinway tubes was causing clearance issues for the R142A's when they tested it on the (7) in 2003.

So a new barn was built (was already planned) and the tubes were modified. 

 

That's why the (7) didn't get tech trains until 2013.

This was pretty much what I assumed when I first read on the old SubTalk that the (7) was getting R62As in 2002-03 (plus the subsequent speculation about renaming the <7> the 11...obviously that didn’t happen). MTA budget issues being what they’ve always been, that’s probably why they didn’t modify the Steinway tubes and rebuild Corona barn in the late 90s in preparation for the R142As, like they should have.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, T to Dyre Avenue said:

This was pretty much what I assumed when I first read on the old SubTalk that the (7) was getting R62As in 2002-03 (plus the subsequent speculation about renaming the <7> the 11...obviously that didn’t happen). MTA budget issues being what they’ve always been, that’s probably why they didn’t modify the Steinway tubes and rebuild Corona barn in the late 90s in preparation for the R142As, like they should have.

Very limited funding, since most of it must have gone to rebuilding the Franklin Avenues shuttle. Another possible reason was that in 2000, they were busy with putting CBTC on the Canarsie Line, which is undergoing tunnel reconstruction as of this posting. They did not have any timetable set for CBTC on the Flushing Line yet. The CBTC installation on Flushing began to be installed in 2011.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, JeremiahC99 said:

Very limited funding, since most of it must have gone to rebuilding the Franklin Avenues shuttle. Another possible reason was that in 2000, they were busy with putting CBTC on the Canarsie Line, which is undergoing tunnel reconstruction as of this posting. They did not have any timetable set for CBTC on the Flushing Line yet. The CBTC installation on Flushing began to be installed in 2011.

When did the first R188 arrive on property, was it a converted or a factory set?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Lawrence St said:

When did the first R188 arrive on property, was it a converted or a factory set?

Around 2011-12. The converted cars arrived first, then the new units. At this time, the Canarsie installation was nearing completion, and the Flushing Line got a new repair facility and increased tunnel clearance for the NTT cars.

Share this post


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

When did the first R188 arrive on property, was it a converted or a factory set?

I remember the first one in service was a factory set (7811-7821) but I believe 7211-7220 (7899) came back first.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/28/2019 at 10:57 PM, T to Dyre Avenue said:

I suppose they are. But would Transit really want to take a chance on a car maker that’s never built a subway car for New York (other than Alstom)?

They took a chance with Kawasaki back in the '80s after St. Louis Car closed up shop. There's nothing preventing the MTA from expanding beyond the usual candidates if it becomes necessary.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, Lance said:

They took a chance with Kawasaki back in the '80s after St. Louis Car closed up shop. There's nothing preventing the MTA from expanding beyond the usual candidates if it becomes necessary.

True, although I do recall reading Budd protested and threatened legal action when the MTA chose Kawasaki as the winning bidder for the R62 contract. Budd’s choice of bogies didn’t help their case, given that they weren’t like the heavyweight bogies the MTA usually specifies.

Edited by T to Dyre Avenue

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The R62s had an incredibly high MDBF, around 273,000 this past year, and the 62As maintained a very good 114,000. These are actually even higher than the R142 and R142A, respectively, and beat most other NTTs. They are by far the most reliable old tech trains and are in the top three for most reliable period, together with the R188 and R160. Why on earth is the MTA planning to replace them? When replacements were planned for the Redbird and then B-division SMEE fleets, MDBF was tanking and the cars were falling apart. I’m not saying they should wait until things are that bad again, but these cars solid stainless steel (not falling apart at all) and are so reliable that they may actually beat the R262s when they come in. It feels like a bad move.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Amtrak706 said:

The R62s had an incredibly high MDBF, around 273,000 this past year, and the 62As maintained a very good 114,000. These are actually even higher than the R142 and R142A, respectively, and beat most other NTTs. They are by far the most reliable old tech trains and are in the top three for most reliable period, together with the R188 and R160. Why on earth is the MTA planning to replace them? When replacements were planned for the Redbird and then B-division SMEE fleets, MDBF was tanking and the cars were falling apart. I’m not saying they should wait until things are that bad again, but these cars solid stainless steel (not falling apart at all) and are so reliable that they may actually beat the R262s when they come in. It feels like a bad move.

Age and the need to have CBTC-compatible cars on the Lexington Avenue Line, since that line is planning to get CBTC. The option to not retire them and move the (6) R62As to the (2) is NOT an option, given the high frequency of the (2) and (5), not to mention that they often switch signs are Flatbush every single rush hour. If we put even a few R62/As on the (2) and (5), then you can expect delays from Flatbush Avenue all the way to Franklin Avenue, compounding already existent delays on the line south of Church Avenue. Therefore, there is no other choice but to retire them.

In addition, the R62As have a very high reliability because somehow, they’re assigned to a part time line (the (3)) that doesn’t run its entire route all the time. It runs from 148 to New Lots at all times except late night, when it is a shuttle between 148 and Times Sq, where a pocket track exists to turn trains. For the (3), the shorter route, aside from providing service to Central Harlem, allows for the other R62s to go into the shop for inspection and repairs. The R62A, R142 and R142As are all assigned to mainline trains that constantly run its entire route all the time, though the (5) runs shorter routes outside the work hours. Hopefully when the new cars come in, the R142 and R142As get reassigned to the (3) to have cars with lower Mean Fail rates on part time lines while factory fresh cars get assigned to full time lines.

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Amtrak706 said:

The R62s had an incredibly high MDBF, around 273,000 this past year, and the 62As maintained a very good 114,000. These are actually even higher than the R142 and R142A, respectively, and beat most other NTTs. They are by far the most reliable old tech trains and are in the top three for most reliable period, together with the R188 and R160. Why on earth is the MTA planning to replace them? When replacements were planned for the Redbird and then B-division SMEE fleets, MDBF was tanking and the cars were falling apart. I’m not saying they should wait until things are that bad again, but these cars solid stainless steel (not falling apart at all) and are so reliable that they may actually beat the R262s when they come in. It feels like a bad move.

The one problem with them is the air conditioning units on the R62As. They constantly break down, seemingly more than in other cars. At least the trains run well, but the hot cars are a big problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, Amtrak706 said:

The R62s had an incredibly high MDBF, around 273,000 this past year, and the 62As maintained a very good 114,000. These are actually even higher than the R142 and R142A, respectively, and beat most other NTTs. They are by far the most reliable old tech trains and are in the top three for most reliable period, together with the R188 and R160. Why on earth is the MTA planning to replace them? When replacements were planned for the Redbird and then B-division SMEE fleets, MDBF was tanking and the cars were falling apart. I’m not saying they should wait until things are that bad again, but these cars solid stainless steel (not falling apart at all) and are so reliable that they may actually beat the R262s when they come in. It feels like a bad move.

The only flaw the R62/62A cars have is their A/C units break down a lot, otherwise, there's nothing wrong with those cars. I think both the 62s and 62A's can easily do 50 years of service without breaking a sweat, if only they found a way to make their A/C units more reliable...

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

R62 & R68A braking package needs an update otherwise this is probably the best equipment transit has ever had it's a shame they are not investing into it.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/20/2019 at 7:35 PM, W4ST said:

The one problem with them is the air conditioning units on the R62As. They constantly break down, seemingly more than in other cars. At least the trains run well, but the hot cars are a big problem.

This was never an issue on the (7). They're on mostly underground local routes now. So there's gonna be issues.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

They certainly were an improvement over the R33/36 trains. Ridership on the (7) eventually got to the point where they had to run the single R33s in the consists during the summer. And, oh how hot those cars got in the summer, even with the windows open. Having fully air-conditioned 11-car R62As were definitely a welcome change in 2002-03. The R62As’ tiny little orange seats were a different story, however...

Edited by T to Dyre Avenue

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.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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