R262 (R62/R62A Replacement) - Information & Discussion

[Union Tpke]

Just now, Lawrence St said:

?? Broken link.

It works for me.

[S78 via Hylan]

I don’t see any link.

[RR503]

1 hour ago, Union Tpke said:

It works for me.

Yeah, not working for me either.

To the general discussion: very few issues are, by themselves, conversation-ending propositions when it comes to reroute scenario, and the 's yard placement is especially tractable. Back in the '80s and '90s when these discussions were last had, there existed a much steeper drop off in PM demand to points north on IRT Broadway, which made running s back north from Flatbush expensive relative to loads and contributed to the business case for  access to Livonia, This is much less true today, which makes it easier (though of course still a cost) to run the line to Flatbush. 

Generally, though, there's a reason cost-benefit analyses exist, and it's to resolve question exactly like this one. Upwards of 30% of weekday daytime  trains are delayed for more than a minute northbound through Rogers (a stat that's considerably higher during the peaks); on excess runtime expenses alone, this would likely pencil out. 

Here's some data on hourly loads leaving the core:

[Deucey]

18 hours ago, Daniel The Cool said:

Except there's a certain reason why the  southern terminal is New Lots Avenue and not Flatbush Avenue which is due to no direct yard access. 

It could be done. Much like transit authorities do with buses - have a common terminal and change the route label - like how S42 becomes S52 at the ferry, and vice versa.

 could both terminate at Flatbush and switch to the other route when the next trip begins - like  do at Astoria.

Only real issue is, like with , you may need deadhead trips or reverses to meet peak service from both ends.

Probably wouldn’t be worth it since all  consists would have to be stored at 180th St or 239th St, and all  consists at New Lots due to space constraints, and the service reduction on either of the three lines because of  deadheads and reversals to serve Lenox Av stations. But it could be done.

Edited January 26, 2020 by Deucey

[Union Tpke]

Let's try again. https://fultonhistory.com/highlighter/highlight-for-xml?altUrl=https://fultonhistory.com/Newspaper%2024/New%20York%20NY%20Amsterdam%20News/New%20York%20NY%20Amsterdam%20News%201983/New%20York%20NY%20Amsterdam%20News%201983%2000253_1.pdf%23xml=https://fultonhistory.com/dtSearch/dtisapi6.dll?cmd=getpdfhits%26u=ffffffffa28002b6%26DocId=6932839%26Index=Z%3a%5cDISK%20X%26HitCount=11%26hits=5fa%2B5fb%2B5fc%2B5fd%2B5fe%2B5ff%2B600%2B601%2B602%2B603%2B604%2B%26SearchForm=%2fFulton%5fform%2ehtml%26.pdf&uri=https://fultonhistory.com/Newspaper%2024/New%20York%20NY%20Amsterdam%20News/New%20York%20NY%20Amsterdam%20News%201983/New%20York%20NY%20Amsterdam%20News%201983%2000253_1.pdf&xml=https://fultonhistory.com/dtSearch/dtisapi6.dll?cmd=getpdfhits%26u=ffffffffa28002b6%26DocId=6932839%26Index=Z%3a%5cDISK%20X%26HitCount=11%26hits=5fa%2B5fb%2B5fc%2B5fd%2B5fe%2B5ff%2B600%2B601%2B602%2B603%2B604%2B%26SearchForm=%2fFulton%5fform%2ehtml%26.pdf&openFirstHlPage=false

[Jchambers2120]

On 1/24/2020 at 6:47 PM, T to Dyre Avenue said:

True, but de-interlining Rogers isn’t quite off-topic. Up thread was a post about the R262s being assigned to the  and 42nd St . Since 1983, the  and  have shared Flatbush Avenue as a southern terminal. To this day, both lines have operated the same or compatible trains. If R142s stay on the  while the  gets R262s, then they will have completely incompatible equipment for the first time at least four decades. That’s going to make operations of both lines a bit more difficult than before, especially if one line needs to be rerouted or there’s a gap in service on either line and  crews haven’t been trained to operate the R262s. But if the  and  are going to operate the same or compatible trains going forward after the R262s go into service, then would it not be easier if the  and  - which already share the same tracks from 135th Street to Franklin Avenue - share the same southern terminal?

As these trains come in road crews will be qualified on them, alot of people who work on the  line have jobs on the  line aswell.  Hopefully the R142/262 fleet and the 7th Av/Lex CBTC systems are cross compatible and I'm sure the engineers behind those projects will look into this. It's almost expected for a  train to run via the west side because of an incident on Lex.  

Looking at the train itself I'm not really a big fan of the mockup it'll probably look better in person, however I'm still ecstatic for these trains and wonder when can we realistically see them built/placed into service. I'm tired of the hot car situation every year on the  along with how uncomfortable those cabs are on the way 62/a fleet. They've had their time...

[FLX9304]

On 1/27/2020 at 8:57 AM, Jchambers2120 said:

As these trains come in road crews will be qualified on them, alot of people who work on the  line have jobs on the  line aswell.  Hopefully the R142/262 fleet and the 7th Av/Lex CBTC systems are cross compatible and I'm sure the engineers behind those projects will look into this. It's almost expected for a  train to run via the west side because of an incident on Lex.  

Looking at the train itself I'm not really a big fan of the mockup it'll probably look better in person, however I'm still ecstatic for these trains and wonder when can we realistically see them built/placed into service. I'm tired of the hot car situation every year on the  along with how uncomfortable those cabs are on the way 62/a fleet. They've had their time...

Having the R262s on the  would benefit those on the Dyre Ave line especially during the overnight periods where there is OPTÓ on the shuttle. 
The  and the  in my opinion I would like to see the R262s their first if the TA would make both Broadway and Pelham lines CBTC first since they are shorter lines. The  and the  can follow the  line’s short Dyre Ave CBTC. Unless they’re gonna make the Lexington Ave line full CBTC. 

[bwwnyc123]

The  and especially should get R262. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited February 20, 2020 by bwwnyc123

[Lex]

Anything that fails to serve both Brooklyn and the Bronx should be knocked out of consideration.

[Around the Horn]

From Railway Age: https://www.railwayage.com/passenger/commuterregional/mta-plans-to-develop-purchase-up-to-949-next-gen-cars/

Quote

MTA Plans to Develop, Purchase up to 949 Next-Gen Cars

MTA New York City Transit announced plans to develop and purchase up to 949 new subway cars with an open-gangway configuration, designed for the numbered lines, that would increase passenger flow to allow customers to move freely between cars, and have the potential to improve dwell times at stations and increase capacity.

The move comes as the MTA prepares for a major re-signaling project on the Lexington Avenue 4, 5, 6 lines and the planned retirement of its R62 and R62A fleets that have been in service for more than 30 years.

NYC Transit is planning a base order of 504 new cars, which will be identified as the R262 class, with the option of 445 additional cars, and a second option to buy an additional 415 cars through the 2025-2029 Capital Plan. NYC Transit is seeking competitive proposals, which allow the agency to consider technical approaches, overall technical qualifications including proposer’s experience, product quality and delivery schedule, overall project cost and financial benefits.

Once again sounds like is the plan (with some appearances on the due to the lines sharing a pool of cars)

All cars will have CBTC, open gangways and hearing loops

[Union Tpke]

17 minutes ago, Around the Horn said:

From Railway Age: https://www.railwayage.com/passenger/commuterregional/mta-plans-to-develop-purchase-up-to-949-next-gen-cars/

Once again sounds like is the plan (with some appearances on the due to the lines sharing a pool of cars)

All cars will have CBTC, open gangways and hearing loops

I wouldn't trust Railway Age for things NYCT.

[LTA1992]

1 hour ago, Union Tpke said:

I wouldn't trust Railway Age for things NYCT.

This comes via the horses mouth. I just read the board materials an hour ago.

The 949 is both base and option 1.

[Yankees4life]

If the gameplan is to get the Lexington line CBTC-ed, then I can easily see these guys on the . Also, I imagine the 42nd will get the R142/As from them making that CBTC-ed

[T to Dyre Avenue]

12 hours ago, Yankees4life said:

If the gameplan is to get the Lexington line CBTC-ed, then I can easily see these guys on the . Also, I imagine the 42nd will get the R142/As from them making that CBTC-ed

The MTA are planning to run the  with 6-car trains once they complete the reconstruction. If that’s still the plan, then they should continue to use the single R62A cars currently being used, then replace them with R262s once those cars come on line. Cascading R142/As from the  would require them to acquire additional trailer cars to make 6-car trains. The cost wouldn’t be worth doing for so few cars. 

[Union Tpke]

The shuttle is set to receive "modern signaling." It is unclear if this is new fixed block or CBTC.

[T to Dyre Avenue]

I would think fixed block, especially since the shuttle reconstruction is currently ongoing. So far, I haven’t seen any materials the MTA with the shuttle on the short list for CBTC. 

[R62A-6-Train]

I think the R32 will be retired the same year as the R62/A.

[Maxwell179]

6 hours ago, R62A-6-Train said:

I think the R32 will be retired the same year as the R62/A.

R32 are already retired but I don’t think this is for the right thread

[R62A-6-Train]

On 5/3/2020 at 12:22 AM, Maxwell179 said:

R32 are already retired but I don’t think this is for the right thread

I mean that the R32 (In my opinion) will be retired on the same year as the R62/A. The R32's were taken out of service in 2020 (This Year) because of COVID-19.

[Theli11]

2 hours ago, R62A-6-Train said:

I mean that the R32 (In my opinion) will be retired on the same year as the R62/A. The R32's were taken out of service in 2020 (This Year) because of COVID-19.

Unless the R62/As retire this year, it's probably not gonna happen.

[darkstar8983]

If you move all the R142s to the  and 42 St , you would use

415 cars for the  including spares (33 trains + 8.5 spare trains) (i.e. car numbers 6301-6345; 6351-6720)

480 cars for the  including spares (39 trains + 9 spare trains) (i.e. car numbers 6721-7180; 1201-1220)

30 cars for the 42nd St   (2 6-car trains + 3 6-car spare trains) 

(i.e. car numbers 1221-1250 split up as follows: 1221-1222-1223-1228-1229-1230 ; 1231-1232-1233-1238-1239-1240 ; 1241-1242-1243-1248-1249-1250 ; 1225-1224-1234-1244-1227-1226 ; 1235-1237-1236-1245-1247-1246

Total: 920 cars

Total R142s available: 1025 cars

Left-over cars: 100 cars

*This increases the spare factor for the three lines and replaces the R62As

 

The 220 R142A cars can run with the 100 R142s and be assigned to the  train (32 train sets total: 24 needed for service + 8 spares) [ Replaces R62s ] (i.e. 7591-7810 ; 1101-1200)

 

The R262s can be assigned to the  to ensure that the  have an interchangeable rolling stock. And yes, Lexington Av would have to be CBTC compatible for R142 cars, unless you want to cause massive delays at Rogers Av Junction or Flatbush because the  have differing rolling stock. To maintain flexibility, either R262s would have to be on both routes and permit R142s/R142As to be retrofitted for Lexington CBTC.

Edited May 21, 2020 by darkstar8983

[Lex]

3 hours ago, darkstar8983 said:

If you move all the R142s to the  and 42 St , you would use

415 cars for the  including spares (33 trains + 8.5 spare trains) (i.e. car numbers 6301-6345; 6351-6720)

480 cars for the  including spares (39 trains + 9 spare trains) (i.e. car numbers 6721-7180; 1201-1220)

30 cars for the 42nd St   (2 6-car trains + 3 6-car spare trains) 

(i.e. car numbers 1221-1250 split up as follows: 1221-1222-1223-1228-1229-1230 ; 1231-1232-1233-1238-1239-1240 ; 1241-1242-1243-1248-1249-1250 ; 1225-1224-1234-1244-1227-1226 ; 1235-1237-1236-1245-1247-1246

Total: 920 cars

Total R142s available: 1025 cars

Left-over cars: 100 cars

*This increases the spare factor for the three lines and replaces the R62As

 

The 220 R142A cars can run with the 100 R142s and be assigned to the  train (32 train sets total: 24 needed for service + 8 spares) [ Replaces R62s ] (i.e. 7591-7810 ; 1101-1200)

 

The R262s can be assigned to the  to ensure that the  have an interchangeable rolling stock. And yes, Lexington Av would have to be CBTC compatible for R142 cars, unless you want to cause massive delays at Rogers Av Junction or Flatbush because the  have differing rolling stock. To maintain flexibility, either R262s would have to be on both routes and permit R142s/R142As to be retrofitted for Lexington CBTC.

There are a few 6-car sets in the R262 order. Those will be used for the shuttle.

[Kris Brain]

On 5/21/2020 at 12:32 AM, Lex said:

There are a few 6-car sets in the R262 order. Those will be used for the shuttle.

It seems that this has been put on the back burner for now due the the ongoing coronavirus crisis.

[MTATechOperation]

On 5/20/2021 at 11:30 AM, Jarobortiz said:

1:R142 2:R262 3:R142/A 4:R262 5:R262 6:R262 7:R188 42S:R262

Source? Proof? No? The R262s aren't even here. Stop saying BS.

[IRT Bronx Express]

3 hours ago, MTATechOperation said:

Source? Proof? No? The R262s aren't even here. Stop saying BS.

Sadly, he's spreading unnecessary spam in different threads.

In regards to the eventual replacement fleet, I'm more interested in the interior and exterior LED signs hehe.

Edited May 21, 2021 by IRT Bronx Express