R268 (R68/R68A Replacement) - Information & Discussion

[RailBus63]

3 hours ago, bobtehpanda said:

In addition to the other comments
 

• Siemens doesn't really make metro cars in the US. Their existing plants are pretty much at capacity because they handle nearly every light rail and Amtrak order in the US.
• CAF has had some reliability issues with their sets produced in the US
• Stadler in subway equipment is relatively new in the US, their first and only order so far has been MARTA in 2019, and those have not been delivered yet

Siemens built Boston's Blue Line fleet in 2007-09 - these cars have been very reliable.  Given the company's global footprint and capabilities, they absolutely should be qualified if they express interest in these orders.  They are also committed to the North American passenger rail and light rail markets in a big way.

[Comrade96]

Doing the math we would need at least 800 cars in this order to fully replace both 68/68a fleets(The real number is 781.25 but I inflated it because you cant exactly have a quarter of a car)

[Humidifier]

17 hours ago, RailBus63 said:

Siemens built Boston's Blue Line fleet in 2007-09 - these cars have been very reliable.  Given the company's global footprint and capabilities, they absolutely should be qualified if they express interest in these orders.  They are also committed to the North American passenger rail and light rail markets in a big way.

I would be surprised if Siemens got the order. For one, they've never manufactured entire cars for the MTA previously. Furthermore, their facility in California is practically at capacity with all the Charger and Venture orders. Also, they're likely about to be even busier with the imminent Velaro orders from Brightline. They're building a facility in North Carolina, but that won't be online for years and will likely be dedicated to fulfilling existing orders.

Of the manufacturers, I think the two most reasonable based on the way the MTA operates would be Alstom and Kawasaki. I would assume the R262 order will go to one manufacturer, and the R268 to another. My concern, however, is that Kawasaki has a significant backlog with the R211 orders, and tacking an additional order on top of that would mean we wouldn't see such an order delivered for many years down the line. If they do get an order, I'd expect it to be the R268, since the R68/A can likely hold on longer than the R62/A.

Alstom would make sense as a manufacturer because they don't have any massive orders in America besides the Acela, which is already underway on delivery. If given an order, they would likely be able to deliver faster than Kawasaki could. They also have experience (albeit from Bombardier) building quite reliable IRT stock; twice that of Kawasaki, leading me to believe they would get the order for the R262.

Of other (unused) manufacturers, the two that seem the most feasible to me would be Stadler and Hitachi. Stadler, despite being new to the MTA, has a very long history of building reliable rolling stock in the USA and Europe. Yes, they are new to the metro market in America, but they nonetheless have built successful metro rolling stock in Europe. Their order log in the USA consists of relatively small orders (except maybe MARTA and Caltrain), leaving them likely able to handle such a large order. Besides the obvious of them not being officially qualified, the biggest thing holding the MTA back from using Stadler as a manufacturer is, in my opinion, the MTA's hesitancy of using an "off-the-shelf" design. Stadler has a successful METRO platform which could probably be adapted pretty easily to MTA specifications. Nonetheless, the MTA is probably apprehensive about taking such an approach, since the last time they did that (R179/Movia) did not end up so well.

Hitachi also could be promising, as they're building a large manufacturing facility for the WMATA order, as well as probably the Ontario Line order. They could likely still deliver on an MTA order since the process for the 8000 series is already well underway. They also carry a relatively good reputation with them; I haven't seen any major reports of manufacturing defects or reliability problems, unlike some other manufacturers. Nonetheless, I would see the MTA using Stadler before they used Hitachi.  

Besides that, CRRC is out of the running, CAF doesn't appear to be well enough established in the American market for the MTA to take them seriously, and Hyundai has left the North American market. 

[Cait Sith]

On 6/16/2023 at 7:25 AM, AZthefoamer said:

Yep. Despite being "halfway to retirement age" their MDBF is still some of the best in the fleet. Who knows what may happen but the MTA is not going to retire R143s prematurely without good reason.

FYI, contradicting yourself is never a good idea. You can't say they are really bad and then say they are good.

[IAlam]

On 6/16/2023 at 5:00 AM, bobtehpanda said:

In addition to the other comments
 

• Siemens doesn't really make metro cars in the US. Their existing plants are pretty much at capacity because they handle nearly every light rail and Amtrak order in the US.
• CAF has had some reliability issues with their sets produced in the US
• Stadler in subway equipment is relatively new in the US, their first and only order so far has been MARTA in 2019, and those have not been delivered yet

Out of all those manufacturers if a new one were to enter the ring Stadler would make the most sense. Like Siemens, they're known to make decent rolling stock but as you mentioned they're still new on the subway side of things. Instead, I can see them trying for new commuter rail car orders for the MTA. 

But for anyone that hopes Siemens makes a bid, it's probably unlikely due to the fact that they're focusing on selling their charger/venture combos to replace most of the regional rolling stock in the US and Canada. 

[AZthefoamer]

On 6/17/2023 at 4:31 PM, Cait Sith said:

FYI, contradicting yourself is never a good idea. You can't say they are really bad and then say they are good.

I never said they were really bad. I said they were good now but they might not be so good in the future, you never know.

[CyclonicTrainLookout]

Considering I don't go on to this site everyday, one can imagine how wide my eyes went out of surprise that this thread (and the first document of the new R268s) exists. Oh well, it seems NYC will say good-bye to the era of SMEEs in the next ten years or so.

On 6/9/2023 at 8:41 PM, ABCDEFGJLMNQRSSSWZ said:

This is good to see. Some things I think would be nice to see (starting with R211 as the baseline):

1. Higher Res LED front bullet. Ik this is a pretty minor thing and at least R211 has a color bullet now, but I think it would make for better clarity and consistency. Also making certain LEDs larger/higher Res so they can display full station names.

2. Regular sized doors (and in exchange more seatings); basically, a similar indoor layout to the current NTTs. I don't think the whole or even most of the B-Divison needs cars with super wide doors to handle normal loads. If the MTA is concerned about space/accessibility you could do more flip-up seating or lean seating on the ends of cars. If the MTA wanted to, they could have like 2 models of R268s which have different seating arrangements.

3. Larger windows. If they go back to normal sized doors that would obv help, but things discussed in the other thread such as moving displays above the windows and creating windows for the lower-half of the doors could also be interesting

All this stuff is more on the aesthetics side; I'm sure there's many technical ways the cars could be improved as well.

I'm pretty sure the whole reasoning of wider doors (in exchange of less seats) was not necessarily the amount of standing room inside the train but more so to allow passengers to enter and exit the train in a quick fashion, even during rush hours.

[jukeboxboy]

On 6/11/2023 at 7:02 AM, cony said:

Any reason why the rolling stock for the NTTs seem to always be manufactured by Bombardier/Alstom or Kawasaki? Why doesn't the MTA ever go with other manufacturers like CAF, Siemens, Stadler, etc?

Pretty sure that these companies have been very reliable with the NTT's. MTA could go with other manufacturers like you said, just not CRRC or some cheap junk.

[ABCDEFGJLMNQRSSSWZ]

9 hours ago, CyclonicTrainLookout said:

Considering I don't go on to this site everyday, one can imagine how wide my eyes went out of surprise that this thread (and the first document of the new R268s) exists. Oh well, it seems NYC will say good-bye to the era of SMEEs in the next ten years or so.

I'm pretty sure the whole reasoning of wider doors (in exchange of less seats) was not necessarily the amount of standing room inside the train but more so to allow passengers to enter and exit the train in a quick fashion, even during rush hours.

It was both to increase capacity and improve flow; they sort of interconnected concepts. However, in systems like DC, they do just fine with 75 footers with only 3 doors per side. Surely not every single B-Division line warrants 60ft cars with 4 ultra-wide doors on each side. For lines like the  I personally think the tradeoff of slightly wider doors and hence slightly better flow is not worth it for the reduction in seating, especially since the  pretty rarely come close to capacity outside of delays from my experience

[yoel kranczer]

was the mta train model R211A confirmed to go to the D line yet?

[yoel kranczer]

was the mta train model R211A confirmed to go to the D line yet?

[yoel kranczer]

On 6/11/2023 at 12:00 AM, Chris89292 said:

Dang, I guess a contract a award will most likely happen in 2028, with the pilot train arriving in 20

On 6/11/2023 at 12:00 AM, Chris89292 said:

Did Mta confirm that the R211A will also be on the D train?

 

 

[Chris89292]

9 hours ago, yoel kranczer said:

was the mta train model R211A confirmed to go to the D line yet?

No, at least for now it’s not confirmed at all

[Comrade96]

11 hours ago, yoel kranczer said:

 

nothing is confirmed past the A and C getting the initial batch as well as most of the option order

[AZthefoamer]

11 hours ago, yoel kranczer said:

was the mta train model R211A confirmed to go to the D line yet?

No, we do not know. My theory is that at first the D will get R160 from Queens Boulevard but nothing is confirmed for now.

[RandomRider0101]

On 6/19/2023 at 11:58 PM, ABCDEFGJLMNQRSSSWZ said:

It was both to increase capacity and improve flow; they sort of interconnected concepts. However, in systems like DC, they do just fine with 75 footers with only 3 doors per side. Surely not every single B-Division line warrants 60ft cars with 4 ultra-wide doors on each side. For lines like the  I personally think the tradeoff of slightly wider doors and hence slightly better flow is not worth it for the reduction in seating, especially since the  pretty rarely come close to capacity outside of delays from my experience

D.C. Metro has neither the tight curves nor the ridership levels that we have here at MTA NYCT. That is why 75 footers with less doors works for them. 

If you have noticed, all end doors on all the 75 footers are locked at all times due to how dangerous it is to cross between them. Even during an emergency, passengers are still unable to use them. Case in point, the shooting last year in which a man opened fire on an r46 N train. People were trying to escape and couldn't since the doors were locked. Luckily no one was killed in that incident.

The seating arrangement on all the 75 footers is also very bad for crowd control. When you're on a 75 footer that is packed to the brim, you don't wanna be standing by those transverse seats as it is very uncomfortable.

Last but not least, MTA likes fleet uniformity. Ordering trains with different doors and seats does not conform to that. These things would require different parts to be used for maintenance, which in turn leads to higher maintenance costs.

Edited June 21, 2023 by RandomRider0101

[texassubwayfan555]

7 hours ago, RandomRider0101 said:

Last but not least, MTA likes fleet uniformity. Ordering trains with different doors and seats does not conform to that. These things would require different parts to be used for maintenance, which in turn leads to higher maintenance costs.

And don't forget about future compatibility with platform doors.

[jukeboxboy]

On 6/19/2023 at 11:16 PM, yoel kranczer said:

was the mta train model R211A confirmed to go to the D line yet?

It is a possibility because the MTA was talking about Sixth Avenue CBTC, so the B and D lines would have had CBTC. Chances are however, the existing R179's on the A and C lines could take over the B and D. The F amd M lines are already NTT's since QBL has had CBTC.

[Vulturious]

13 minutes ago, jukeboxboy said:

It is a possibility because the MTA was talking about Sixth Avenue CBTC, so the B and D lines would have had CBTC. Chances are however, the existing R179's on the A and C lines could take over the B and D. The F amd M lines are already NTT's since QBL has had CBTC.

It would only be either the  or  that gets the R179's and more specifically from the . The  has 8 car R179's which cannot go to the  or  because they need the capacity which 8 car R179's take away. It's doubtful that they will even move the 10 car R179's from the .

[Comrade96]

3 hours ago, jukeboxboy said:

It is a possibility because the MTA was talking about Sixth Avenue CBTC, so the B and D lines would have had CBTC. Chances are however, the existing R179's on the A and C lines could take over the B and D. The F amd M lines are already NTT's since QBL has had CBTC.

theres not enough 10 car 179s to send to the B and D they wont bother

[AZthefoamer]

As I said, R179 5 car sets will stay either on the A or at best be moved to the C. I think R160 on B and D from QBL makes the most sense. Obviously the decision is the MTA's but we will likely see a bit of fleet swapping.

[FLX9304]

3 hours ago, AZthefoamer said:

As I said, R179 5 car sets will stay either on the A or at best be moved to the C. I think R160 on B and D from QBL makes the most sense. Obviously the decision is the MTA's but we will likely see a bit of fleet swapping.

That’s not happening on the MTA’s watch. 

[AZthefoamer]

1 hour ago, FLX9304 said:

That’s not happening on the MTA’s watch. 

Why not?

[RandomRider0101]

1 hour ago, FLX9304 said:

That’s not happening on the MTA’s watch. 

What do you mean? Anytime a new car order comes about, cars swap around all the time. Why would it be any different now?

[R32 3838]

honestly the should get the R211s brand new. Jamaica Could still get the option II cars anyway. If this order is open gangway 100% then I could see this being a Jamaica/ Coney Island order with Jamaica loosing it's remaining R160s and CI getting the rest for the . If it's standard cars then I could see this as a coney Island order since the entire R68 fleet would be at Coney by the time these retire.