R262 (R62/R62A Replacement) - Information & Discussion

[XcelsiorBoii4888]

Open gangways will be perfectly fine here, especially for the IRT which is why this ENTIRE order better have it as the standard. 

If the cars were 75' it would be a problem for certain lines, but cars that are 60ft or shorter can maintain a full walkway when going through tight curves and switches. 

 

[T to Dyre Avenue]

20 hours ago, Around the Horn said:

Hidden in an article about CRRC getting banned from receiving federal funds:

I guess there's your way way too early short list for the R262s 🤣

Guess they never heard of the R160s, many of which were built by Alstom. Or that a substantial portion of them had propulsion made by Siemens. But then, I think it’s the 11th Commandment among news writers not to do research when writing articles about railcar builders.

5 hours ago, B35 via Church said:

As opposed to keeping those same smells confined in an individual, closed off subway car? You've gotta be bullshitting me with this....

....not to mention being a catalyst for passenger safety.

Besides, they can locate additional vents near the gangway areas to help exhaust out the odors. (I would think...)

1 hour ago, XcelsiorBoii4888 said:

Open gangways will be perfectly fine here, especially for the IRT which is why this ENTIRE order better have it as the standard. 

If the cars were 75' it would be a problem for certain lines, but cars that are 60ft or shorter can maintain a full walkway when going through tight curves and switches. 

 

Agreed, especially since by the time they award the R262 contract, (presumably) we’ll have some experience with open gangway cars on the letter lines. But then, we all know how resistant to change the MTA are...

Edited December 11, 2019 by T to Dyre Avenue

[LTA1992]

30 minutes ago, T to Dyre Avenue said:

Guess they never heard of the R160s, many of which were built by Alstom.

The merger (PLEASE, someone correct me if I'm wrong) with Siemens made them unqualified as Siemens has never built rolling stock for us. I specifically mention Siemens because that's the name that will stick around 

The merger has been delayed by the EU anyway due to it creating a lack of competition according to their regulations. However, Siemens has been fighting that due to the fact that China's rolling stock companies are rapidly expanding. Siemens rightfully mentions that there are enough railcar companies across the world (more than many of us realize) to quell the worries about competition.

Let's see how 2020 goes lol

Edited December 12, 2019 by LTA1992

[AlgorithmOfTruth]

On 7/28/2019 at 12:38 PM, Late Clear said:

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.  

I'm completely with you on that. The 62s and 68A's are very likely the best braking trains in their respective divisions. A bit of tweaking and they'll perform even better. However, they are aging, and ultimately, are not compatible with the modern hardware needed for ATO. I believe that's the reason why the  isn't jumping on the idea of refurbishing them—CBTC.

[T to Dyre Avenue]

8 hours ago, AlgorithmOfTruth said:

I'm completely with you on that. The 62s and 68A's are very likely the best braking trains in their respective divisions. A bit of tweaking and they'll perform even better. However, they are aging, and ultimately, are not compatible with the modern hardware needed for ATO. I believe that's the reason why the  isn't jumping on the idea of refurbishing them—CBTC.

They determined it would be too expensive to retrofit the old tech R62As on the  at the time with the CBTC equipment, so they swapped them with the ’s R142As (now R188s) and retrofitted those cars.

On 12/11/2019 at 7:06 PM, LTA1992 said:

The merger (PLEASE, someone correct me if I'm wrong) with Siemens made them unqualified as Siemens has never built rolling stock for us. I specifically mention Siemens because that's the name that will stick around 

The merger has been delayed by the EU anyway due to it creating a lack of competition according to their regulations. However, Siemens has been fighting that due to the fact that China's rolling stock companies are rapidly expanding. Siemens rightfully mentions that there are enough railcar companies across the world (more than many of us realize) to quell the worries about competition.

Let's see how 2020 goes lol

Right. There are rail car builders all over the globe I didn’t know about. Because they may  have never bid on an MTA or other US transit agencies’ contracts, it’s entirely possible to have never heard of them. 

[Late Clear]

On 12/12/2019 at 11:00 PM, AlgorithmOfTruth said:

I'm completely with you on that. The 62s and 68A's are very likely the best braking trains in their respective divisions. A bit of tweaking and they'll perform even better. However, they are aging, and ultimately, are not compatible with the modern hardware needed for ATO. I believe that's the reason why the  isn't jumping on the idea of refurbishing them—CBTC.

Of course.  But look at this save seconds initiative they have.  All this effort and extra supervision to speed up service and test signals that they've determined are outdated, not working as designed and can't handle the type of service they desire to run. 

They're investing into a handicapped signal system I figured they'd invest in these trains a little bit too.  

I've kind of had enough of the band aid remedies RTO is trying lately.  Supplements are maximized and any incident that happens (which is almost daily) brings everything to a complete standstill.  The IRT is a prime example of that daily, especially on the Lexington Line, Eastern Parkway, and Nostrand Junction. 

Edited December 14, 2019 by Late Clear

[StevenFrancis]

I wouldn't be surprised if the R262s go to the  and  those are the heaviest used IRT lines, their current higher capacity NTTs are bursting at the seams and those lines need cars with higher capacity than these, and if the R262s have open gangways, then I see them going there. I also see the R142s going to the  and   since it is such a large fleet that can easily be split between the two and really all those lines need are trains with higher capacity and better flow but nothing requiring open gangways, therefore, I see the  and 42nd Street  getting R142As, even when they get CBTC retrofits.

[StevenFrancis]

On 7/20/2019 at 7:33 PM, JeremiahC99 said:

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  R62As to the  is NOT an option, given the high frequency of the  and , not to mention that they often switch signs are Flatbush every single rush hour. If we put even a few R62/As on the  and , 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 ) 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 , 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  runs shorter routes outside the work hours. Hopefully when the new cars come in, the R142 and R142As get reassigned to the  to have cars with lower Mean Fail rates on part time lines while factory fresh cars get assigned to full time lines.

R62As operate on the  and . The  uses R62s.

[StevenFrancis]

On 7/20/2019 at 7:18 PM, 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.

Trains do not last forever, the plans on converting the subway to CBTC and the SMEEs are not able to be retrofitted, it's cheaper for the MTA to just buy new CBTC-ready cars. You have to realize that, things are progressing, we can't just keep old things because people like them, if it's time for an old train to go, they have to go. You also have to realize that not every newer train that arrives on  property will work perfectly, they go through teething problems when they begin burn in testing that has to be fixed, so of course their MDBF will be initially low, but as things work out, it'll increase. No excuse is good enough to just keep old cars that will wear out. Look at the (SIR) R44s, I'm surprised they're still roadworthy, the R211Ss should've been awarded first and they should've been given those cars the boot, it's by God's grace they're still operating.

[Emil]

When I first found out about the new cars my first thought was that the  and  would get them bc they utilize R62/A... BUT seeing everyones comments about the busiest lines getting them FIRST makes much more sense. As I would love to see my home line (the ) getting the R262s, I would rather see the  saved first considering CBTC is also planned for the Lex. Avenue line. I just want the design process to be done to basically see an A division style R211 lol. 

[Union Tpke]

Major update:

Screen Shot 2020-01-17 at 1.49.42 PM by Union Turnpike, on Flickr

Screen Shot 2020-01-17 at 1.55.08 PM by Union Turnpike, on Flickr

Screen Shot 2020-01-17 at 1.55.16 PM by Union Turnpike, on Flickr

Screen Shot 2020-01-17 at 1.55.35 PM by Union Turnpike, on Flickr

Screen Shot 2020-01-17 at 1.55.52 PM by Union Turnpike, on Flickr

Screen Shot 2020-01-17 at 1.56.05 PM by Union Turnpike, on Flickr

Screen Shot 2020-01-17 at 1.56.10 PM by Union Turnpike, on Flickr

 

[Around the Horn]

Do I get any credit for getting the design on the nose months ago? LMAO

Edited January 17, 2020 by Around the Horn
better photo

[Union Tpke]

Screen Shot 2020-01-17 at 2.14.43 PM by Union Turnpike, on Flickr

Screen Shot 2020-01-17 at 2.14.49 PM by Union Turnpike, on Flickr

 

[Union Tpke]

Highlights of the above:

- Base Order 504 (even number, not in fives) Open Gangway Cars

 Likely 24 cars in 4 6-car sets for the ; 480 cars in 96 5-car sets for the Mainline IRT

- First Option 445 Open Gangway Cars

- Second Option 415 Open Gangway Cars (2025-2029 Capital Program)

Total: 1364 cars, fewer than the initial approximation of 1500 cars

24 cars in 6-car sets, 1340 in 5-car sets

Replaces 1,139 R62s and R62As

225 cars for service growth (45 trains), 1139 cars to replace existing cars (Actually 4 are in work service)

Increase of 3 cars for the shuttle 21 vs. 24

New features from R211: A Division Open Gangway and hearing loops for hearing-impaired riders

Edited January 17, 2020 by Union Tpke

[trainfan22]

Cool, their going back to the mid 1960s line of thinking where both B div and IRT cars had the same design.

 

[T to Dyre Avenue]

Even earlier than that. The R12 and R14 cars, built in 1948-49, were narrow-body versions of the R10s, also built at the same time and which were the mainstay of the  line for decades.

But I definitely like the looks of these cars, though I do like the design better on the R211s.

Edited January 18, 2020 by T to Dyre Avenue

[beelinefan]

To make things go quicker the 262 order should be award to Kawasaki and have them build an a division version of the 211s

[Lex]

Just now, beelinefan said:

To make things go quicker the 262 order should be award to Kawasaki and have them build an a division version of the 211s

That depends on whether or not Kawasaki is even willing to take on more orders.

[Yankees4life]

On 1/17/2020 at 2:10 PM, Around the Horn said:

Do I get any credit for getting the design on the nose months ago? LMAO

Ooohhhh...its gonna look GOOD. Can't wait to see this on the or the

[rbrome]

On 12/11/2019 at 1:39 PM, RedLine said:

The same amount of stink will diffuse through a bigger surface area so it can stink less for an open gangway train.

And it's easier to get away from the source of the stink. 

Most major cities have open gangways already. People love them. No one ever talks about going back to separated cars. Not ever. New York doesn't have a monopoly on stinky people, either. (Have you been to France?) I truly don't understand the smell argument. It's ignoring the lived experience of millions of people throughout the rest of the world. 

[Around the Horn]

According to the live video of the Board Meetings that I'm watching, the gentleman running though the rolling stock program said the R262s are for the and , with the fleet expanded by 225 cars once CBTC on Lex is complete.

[LGA Link N Train]

4 minutes ago, Around the Horn said:

According to the live video of the Board Meetings that I'm watching, the gentleman running though the rolling stock program said the R262s are for the and , with the fleet expanded by 225 cars once CBTC on Lex is complete.

I can see that happening. I assume that the R262's would replace Westchester's R62A's first before replacing some R62A's in Livonia. If this happens, I wonder if they'll do put-in's with the  

[T to Dyre Avenue]

5 hours ago, Around the Horn said:

According to the live video of the Board Meetings that I'm watching, the gentleman running though the rolling stock program said the R262s are for the and , with the fleet expanded by 225 cars once CBTC on Lex is complete.

In the end, they may change which cars get the R262s first, though it would certainly make sense to put them on the Lex once CBTC work is finished. But if they do actually assign them to the  and split the then-older R142/142A cars between the , I would hope that they are still going to retrofit those cars with CBTC technology, so that the  can still operate via Lex and the  via 7th if either trunk line experiences delays or rehabilitation work. Presumably he said nothing about changing the  and  sharing Flatbush Avenue as their southern terminal, so the best things to do are either retrofit the R142/R142As or deinterline Rogers Junction. 

5 hours ago, LaGuardia Link N Tra said:

I can see that happening. I assume that the R262's would replace Westchester's R62A's first before replacing some R62A's in Livonia. If this happens, I wonder if they'll do put-in's with the  

Perhaps the  can move to Jerome or Westchester Yards. Prior to the R142As being assigned to the  and their R62As cascading over to the , the  was based there. If I’m not mistaken, Jerome Yard was also the home base for the  in the early 2000s.

Edited January 22, 2020 by T to Dyre Avenue

[Around the Horn]

11 minutes ago, T to Dyre Avenue said:

But if they do actually assign them to the  and split the then-older R142/142A cars between the , I would hope that they are still going to retrofit those cars with CBTC technology, so that the  can still operate via Lex and the  via 7th if either trunk line experiences delays or rehabilitation work.

That's exactly the plan... The existing R142/As will receive a mid-life rehabilitation along with CBTC installation for 7th Avenue which will also get it.

[JeremiahC99]

9 hours ago, T to Dyre Avenue said:

Presumably he said nothing about changing the  and  sharing Flatbush Avenue as their southern terminal, so the best things to do are either retrofit the R142/R142As or deinterline Rogers Junction.

If I were them, I’d rather deinterline Rogers Junction. The three way merge between the , , and  is a pain. Deinterlining, combined with CBTC, plus any possible fix to Flatbush Avenue would boost system reliability.

9 hours ago, T to Dyre Avenue said:

Perhaps the  can move to Jerome or Westchester Yards. Prior to the R142As being assigned to the  and their R62As cascading over to the , the  was based there. If I’m not mistaken, Jerome Yard was also the home base for the  in the early 2000s.

We tried having Westchester Yard as a home base for the shuttle, but it was a pain to deal with, due to having to go all the way around just to get to the Pelham Line (track 4 does not connect to the Lexington Line).

With the reconfiguration of the shuttle to two tracks and 6-car trains, the best place for the  would be at East 180th/239th Street Yards.

Edited January 22, 2020 by JeremiahC99