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  
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

1 hour ago, V886132 said:

Just hypothesizing. Probably because these trains are probably decade out and Lexington Ave CBTC may be online before then. But that's just me.

The R262s are for Lex CBTC, specifically the (6) so that shouldn't be an issue.

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Enjineer said:

Well remember, there are orders in between these contracts, so I think they generally just go up as they get more railcar-related contracts. Not all of them are even things like new work equipment, sometimes there are R contracts for stuff like HVAC systems. It would make sense though that the "generations" of cars would fall into different numbers (R1XX, etc.) 

No shit. But there ARE gaps. Large gaps in the sequence now that never used to exist.

These lists do exist you know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder if it's even really the same number series. The full number is actually R34xxx, and it didn't start out that way. It looks like this was a whole new series (including many other things besides rolling stock, which is what the original series was; hence so many consecutive numbers), and they just fixed it so that it appeared to pick up with the old R series, but it's really the "34000" series..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, LTA1992 said:

These lists do exist you know.

I know, that's what I've looked at to see where the passenger car contract orders fit in with the other contract orders. I still wonder why they've started having gaps in the contract orders...maybe things were drafted and then shelved so they just move on? Seems weird that they wouldn't just sequentially number contracts. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, V886132 said:

I wouldn't be surprised if they wind up on the (1) (2) (3), as the R142s from the (2) will likely have to go to the (6) for Lexington Ave CBTC before the R262s.

Knowing TA the (3) will get the R142 from the (2)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Union Tpke said:

Screen Shot 2019-01-18 at 4.42.33 PM

 

Already a thread on the R262s? Damn, that was quick!

19 hours ago, MysteriousBtrain said:

And this makes sense because????

Well, it depends. If the Lex CBTC is ready to go live before sufficient (if any) R262s get on the property, then they may have no other option. They have already ruled out equipping the R62/R62A cars with CBTC.

1 hour ago, Just New York said:

Knowing TA the (3) will get the R142 from the (2)

Not necessarily. The (3) ran solely with R62As while the (2) ran solely with Redbirds for roughly 15 years before the R142s came on the scene. Don’t forget, they had issues that sidelined them for the better part of 2001 and 2002.

Edited by T to Dyre Avenue

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, MHV9218 said:

Interesting to think whether the 62s or 62As will go first. The latter fleet are a few years newer, but they've been subject to way more abuse. The 62s consistently outperform on MDBF thanks to the diminished service requirements of the (3), sort of like how the 68As ought to long outlive the 68s given their M-F use only. I wouldn't be surprised if the 62s made it longer than the newer 62As. Their latest MDBF numbers were 2.5x that of the newer 62As. Also wonder if the MTA might spread the fleets more to decrease that kind of difference.

 

 

I would expect the 62As to go first given that they are on lines that would see CBTC installment quicker and are also more prone to failures; I would expect replacement to go something like this:

(6) fleet retired first

(S) 42nd fleet retired 2nd

(1) fleet retired 3rd

(3) fleet retired last

I think though that if FF comes into play, we could see the R62s go to the (1) while the (3) gets NTTs and is flat-out retired... I hope that this plan will also allow 7th and Lex to have two separate fleets.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, R68OnBroadway said:

I would expect the 62As to go first given that they are on lines that would see CBTC installment quicker and are also more prone to failures; I would expect replacement to go something like this:

(6) fleet retired first

(S) 42nd fleet retired 2nd

(1) fleet retired 3rd

(3) fleet retired last

I think though that if FF comes into play, we could see the R62s go to the (1) while the (3) gets NTTs and is flat-out retired... I hope that this plan will also allow 7th and Lex to have two separate fleets.

Nice! This is what I predict will happen:

Remaining R142A's are CBTC equipped (basically converted to R188's) and stay on the (4) or move to the (3) or (6) 

R142's are CBTC converted. 

R262's first batch go on the (6) first. Retiring Westchester's R62A's

Second Batch goes to the (2) and (5) which opens a door for a number of possibilities: I'll just name one: 

E 180th/239 R142's get booted to the (4) which can boot its "R188's" to the (1) or (3)/(S) (< I say this since the (3) and 42nd Street (S) share Livonia)

Last batch will replace remaining R62A's and can either go to the (1), (3) or (4) 

For now, this is all just speculation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No article yet, just the committee meeting materials: http://web.mta.info/mta/news/books/pdf/190122_1400_CPOC.pdf (pgs 8. 9. 22 and 25)

Obligatory disclaimers that I can't see the future, I don't work at the MTA, I don't know what kinds of technologies could appear in the future and there's little point in speculating about a fleet that currently doesn't exist. But for the sake of discussion: 

As long as the (2) and (5) maintain their current routings, it's probably safe to say they will share a fleet to keep things as simple as possible. (And putting aside logistics, why would anybody want 7th and Lex to have their own uniform fleets? It'd be a bit dull seeing all the routes on a trunk line use the same fleet exclusively!) 

Once CBTC on the Lexington Av Line starts, I assume every car assigned to the (2) would have to be CBTC-compatible in case they show up on the (5). There aren't enough R142s and R142As to completely fill the (2)(4)(5)(6), so it seems we have little choice but to wait before a sufficient amount of R262s enter service before Lex CBTC can start. (If there's something I'm missing in this regard, please let me know!). 

If the R262s come with wider doors and open gangways like the R211s, I assume they would go to the lines with the biggest dwell time and crowding issues. That sounds like the (2)(4)(5) to me, with any leftover cars going to the (6). (Keeping in mind that the MTA put the R62As on the (6) to keep them off of the (4)). Which would mean that the R142s and R142As would go to the (1)(3)(6) - though which of the R142/R142As end up on which of those three lines specifically is irrelevant to me. 

Edited by Mysterious2train
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, Mysterious2train said:

No article yet, just the committee meeting materials: http://web.mta.info/mta/news/books/pdf/190122_1400_CPOC.pdf (pgs 8. 9. 22 and 25)

Obligatory disclaimers that I can't see the future, I don't work at the MTA, I don't know what kinds of technologies could appear in the future and there's little point in speculating about a fleet that currently doesn't exist. But for the sake of discussion: 

As long as the (2) and (5) maintain their current routings, it's probably safe to say they will share a fleet to keep things as simple as possible. (And putting aside logistics, why would anybody want 7th and Lex to have their own uniform fleets? It'd be a bit dull seeing all the routes on a trunk line use the same fleet exclusively!) 

Once CBTC on the Lexington Av Line starts, I assume every car assigned to the (2) would have to be CBTC-compatible in case they show up on the (5). There aren't enough R142s and R142As to completely fill the (2)(4)(5)(6), so it seems we have little choice but to wait before a sufficient amount of R262s enter service before Lex CBTC can start. (If there's something I'm missing in this regard, please let me know!). 

If the R262s come with wider doors and open gangways like the R211s, I assume they would go to the lines with the biggest dwell time and crowding issues. That sounds like the (2)(4)(5) to me, with any leftover cars going to the (6). (Keeping in mind that the MTA put the R62As on the (6) to keep them off of the (4)). Which would mean that the R142s and R142As would go to the (1)(3)(6) - though which of the R142/R142As end up on which of those three lines specifically is irrelevant to me. 

Keep in mind that the R142/As' doors are wider than those on the R62As. The R62As on the (6) are awful, and it takes longer for people to exit the train. Dwell times should go down across the IRT. This is great news. I hope they send both R62s and R62As to the museum, instead of doing what they did with the R27/R30.

 

2 hours ago, T to Dyre Avenue said:

Already a thread on the R262s? Damn, that was quick!

I had little time to spare. Shabbat was about to come in. I thought there would be a few more pages of discussion by now.

23 hours ago, Coney Island Av said:

Lol R262. It's just like R62 2.0 in a way! 

My thought as well.

 

On 1/18/2019 at 6:55 PM, Elmhurst said:

You must've been grinning from ear to ear while creating this thread.

Yes. But not for that long since I had to walk to the subway station to help my dad carry some things.

On 1/18/2019 at 6:36 PM, XcelsiorBoii4888 said:

It says including open gangway. 

I'm looking forward to THIS order. The (4)(5)(6) will be the best trunk in the entire system.  

I didn't realize that. I just quickly took screenshots and posted this!

On 1/18/2019 at 5:33 PM, Lawrence St said:

DARN IT I was going to do this thread! :P

 

Heh heh heh.

Edited by Union Tpke
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Mysterious2train said:

As long as the (2) and (5) maintain their current routings, it's probably safe to say they will share a fleet to keep things as simple as possible. (And putting aside logistics, why would anybody want 7th and Lex to have their own uniform fleets? It'd be a bit dull seeing all the routes on a trunk line use the same fleet exclusively!) 

A real win-win would be isolating the Lex in Brooklyn -- (4)(5) to BG, Utica and New Lots, (3) to New Lots, more (2) to Flatbush. Gets your fleets in order,  fixes Rogers w/o having to install new switches and lets everyone keep yard access...but I digress. 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All of this of course begs the most important question - are there any R62A singles left that they will be able to save for the museum collection when their time comes? If they kept a 5 car set I imagine they'd run out of storage space real quick.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Union Tpke said:

Keep in mind that the R142/As' doors are wider than those on the R62As. The R62As on the (6) are awful, and it takes longer for people to exit the train. Dwell times should go down across the IRT. This is great news. I hope they send both R62s and R62As to the museum, instead of doing what they did with the R27/R30.

 

I had little time to spare. Shabbat was about to come in. I thought there would be a few more pages of discussion by now.

My thought as well.

 

Yes. But not for that long since I had to walk to the subway station to help my dad carry some things.

I didn't realize that. I just quickly took screenshots and posted this!

 

Heh heh heh.

I went to go create the R262 page on the wiki only to find that one already was created by rejected, why?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Lawrence St said:

I went to go create the R262 page on the wiki only to find that one already was created by rejected, why?

There is only one source and there is absolutely no press coverage yet. Wait until after the MTA Board Meeting. It is premature.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, ttcsubwayfan said:

All of this of course begs the most important question - are there any R62A singles left that they will be able to save for the museum collection when their time comes? If they kept a 5 car set I imagine they'd run out of storage space real quick.

Yes, the Times Square shuttle cars or those 4 singles leftover at Corona Yard. I'd imagine it's possible for shop forces to rebuild a Kawaski 62 to be operational as an single car again.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Mysterious2train said:

No article yet, just the committee meeting materials: http://web.mta.info/mta/news/books/pdf/190122_1400_CPOC.pdf (pgs 8. 9. 22 and 25)

Obligatory disclaimers that I can't see the future, I don't work at the MTA, I don't know what kinds of technologies could appear in the future and there's little point in speculating about a fleet that currently doesn't exist. But for the sake of discussion: 

As long as the (2) and (5) maintain their current routings, it's probably safe to say they will share a fleet to keep things as simple as possible. (And putting aside logistics, why would anybody want 7th and Lex to have their own uniform fleets? It'd be a bit dull seeing all the routes on a trunk line use the same fleet exclusively!) 

Once CBTC on the Lexington Av Line starts, I assume every car assigned to the (2) would have to be CBTC-compatible in case they show up on the (5). There aren't enough R142s and R142As to completely fill the (2)(4)(5)(6), so it seems we have little choice but to wait before a sufficient amount of R262s enter service before Lex CBTC can start. (If there's something I'm missing in this regard, please let me know!). 

If the R262s come with wider doors and open gangways like the R211s, I assume they would go to the lines with the biggest dwell time and crowding issues. That sounds like the (2)(4)(5) to me, with any leftover cars going to the (6). (Keeping in mind that the MTA put the R62As on the (6) to keep them off of the (4)). Which would mean that the R142s and R142As would go to the (1)(3)(6) - though which of the R142/R142As end up on which of those three lines specifically is irrelevant to me. 

Since the R142/R142A are being upgraded to CBTC wouldn’t it make since just to keep the 

(2)(5)(4) - R142

(4) - R142A

(1)(3)(6) - R262

its save a lot of time and work from transferring train fleet between yards and all IRT lines would have fleet with CBTC

Edited by R179 8258

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Someone made a mockup of the R262 and it looks like something out of a star wars movie 🤣

  • LMAO! 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Lawrence St said:

Someone made a mockup of the R262 and it looks like something out of a star wars movie 🤣

I'm going to assume the actual R262 will look something like a hybrid of the design features of the R142/As and the R211s. It seems the MTA has pretty much solidified NTT car design, even with cars like the R211 taking on at least a bit of a changed design from the R142/As and R188s, and R143s, R160s, and R179s. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Someone" involved with the actual design of cars, or just some fan imagining what it might be like?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Eric B said:

"Someone" involved with the actual design of cars, or just some fan imagining what it might be like?

Some foamer. Pay it no mind lmao.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, ABOGbrooklyn said:

Nice, now we just need a replacement for the fat ass R68/As

Yea, the R297......

  • LMAO! 1

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.