New Red and Orange Line Cars

[Zash]

Not relevant really to this thread, but yes it was. Between Ruggles and Jackson. AFAIK it's still closed.

I heard that part of the Orange Line was closed because of flooding & heavy rain. Can anyone confirm that?

 

[DrFreewind]

Just some new trains not doing anything

 

[Jahvon09]

Looks like there's enough of the new trains now, to start sending some of those old rust buckets out to pasture!! The sooner they are gone, the sooner that we won't have to even look at them, much less having to ride on them!! Hah!!

 

[Jahvon09]

Chinese train maker CRRC may have to replace all of the new Red & Orange Line vehicles! Wonder how long THAT'LL take!! It may also throw things back even further if it happens. We'd have to deal with those old rust buckets even longer!

https://commonwealthmagazine.org/transportation/new-orange-line-cars-being-tested/

 

[Brattle Loop]

Chinese train maker CRRC may have to replace all of the new Red & Orange Line vehicles! Wonder how long THAT'LL take!! It may also throw things back even further if it happens. We'd have to deal with those old rust buckets even longer!

https://commonwealthmagazine.org/transportation/new-orange-line-cars-being-tested/

That article is a.) from August and b.) solely concerns the fact that the new cars were at that time being tested ahead of their return to service. Some of the CRRC Orange Line cars have since returned to service and the remaining cars accepted on property will be returned to service soon (I assume once necessary fixes have been completed) with the Red Line cars (I assume similarly fixed) to follow later down the line.

The article's reference to CRRC "replacing" the Red and Orange Line vehicles was saying that CRRC is replacing the current vehicles; i.e. the new CRRC #14 Orange Line* and #4 Red Line cars are replacing the #12 Main Line (01200 series Hawker Siddeley Orange Line cars) and the #1, #2, and #3 Red Line (01500, 01600, 01700, and 01800 series Red Line cars of various manufacture). It says nothing about CRRC needing to somehow 'replace' its own products (the new cars), just that the delays to EIS of the new cars are problematic precisely because they are replacing both lines' entire fleets (both OL and RL will be all-CRRC once the order is complete).

 

[Jahvon09]

That article is a.) from August and b.) solely concerns the fact that the new cars were at that time being tested ahead of their return to service. Some of the CRRC Orange Line cars have since returned to service and the remaining cars accepted on property will be returned to service soon (I assume once necessary fixes have been completed) with the Red Line cars (I assume similarly fixed) to follow later down the line.

The article's reference to CRRC "replacing" the Red and Orange Line vehicles was saying that CRRC is replacing the current vehicles; i.e. the new CRRC #14 Orange Line* and #4 Red Line cars are replacing the #12 Main Line (01200 series Hawker Siddeley Orange Line cars) and the #1, #2, and #3 Red Line (01500, 01600, 01700, and 01800 series Red Line cars of various manufacture). It says nothing about CRRC needing to somehow 'replace' its own products (the new cars), just that the delays to EIS of the new cars are problematic precisely because they are replacing both lines' entire fleets (both OL and RL will be all-CRRC once the order is complete).

I don't think that there was anything wrong with the first new Red Line train. They supposedly took it out of srvice as a precautionary measure. Didn't even give it a chance to prove itself. But the question is, how much longer will they just keep on doing this? I think that they might have made a mistake in choosing this company to make the new cars for them. That is probably what happens when you make the lowest bid for stuff. The T has always done that. Look at the Boeing units & the Breda units. I just hope that doesn't happen with the Type 10 units.

 

[Brattle Loop]

I don't think that there was anything wrong with th first new Red Line train. They supposedly took it out of srvice as a precautionary measure. Didn't even give it a chance to prove itself. But the question is, how much longer will they just keep on doing this? I think that they might have made a mistake in choosing this company to make the new cars for them. That is probably what happens when you make the lowest bid for stuff. The T has always done that. Look at the Boeing units & the Breda units. I just hope that doesn't happen with the Type 10 units.

The Boeings were basically foisted on the T (and MUNI) by the feds, so we can't solely blame the agency for that craptastic procurement. The Bredas, yeah, that's on the T for giving a builder with a very scant history of making LRVs the task of building the first low-floor cars for our notoriously quirky subway. It does seem like the T tends to fixate on the "lowest" portion of "lowest qualified" bidder, which doesn't help, especially not with their historical fondness for over-customization.

That said, there's very little in the way of actual evidence of systemic quality or quality control problems with the CRRC cars at present. They're still very young in fleet-introduction terms, and while they have had teething problems more noticeable than some equipment, the most notable and severe was the problem with a single component, the side bearer pads in the wheel trucks, (made by an Australian company as I understand it) that wore down faster than expected, which could be a design issue, could be an unexpected interaction with other components, or some such thing. These things happen with new equipment, and I think we all agree that we don't like it, but I think it's far too soon to write the CRRC cars off as Boeing or Breda level crap. (We don't see them cannibalizing new cars for parts like the Boeings or getting so many problems that they [temporarily] cancel the contract as with Breda.)

 

[Jahvon09]

Yeah, the new Red & Orange Line trains are still under warranty anyway & CRRC has to fix them for however long so that they run smoothly. They look so shiny & new, but they need to be doing what they are supposed to do. Provide quick & reliable service to be used in getting passengers from Point A to Point B.

 

[Jahvon09]

Could THIS mean that some of those Relics from the Dinosaur Age will start being put out to pasture? I hope so!! Hah!!

 

[Balerion]

There is a brutal slow order northbound between Stony Brook that is creating ~2.5 minute travel times where prior to August 2020 there were 50 second travel times between these stations.

I played around with the TransitMatters dashboard and you can find a ton of segments where the trains used to run faster as recently as sometime in the last 2-3 years than they do now.

 

[Jahvon09]

That has to be the old trains doing that. They've become the least reliable over the years, falling apart & breaking down to the point of causing massive delays. I rember the similar looking old Blue Line cars being the same way. Always made me late for work at the airport!!

 

[Brattle Loop]

There is a brutal slow order northbound between Stony Brook that is creating ~2.5 minute travel times where prior to August 2020 there were 50 second travel times between these stations.

I played around with the TransitMatters dashboard and you can find a ton of segments where the trains used to run faster as recently as sometime in the last 2-3 years than they do now.

That has to be the old trains doing that. They've become the least reliable over the years, falling apart & breaking down to the point of causing massive delays. I rember the similar looking old Blue Line cars being the same way. Always made me late for work at the airport!!

Any idea if there's been track work in the vicinity (or if it needs track work)? We got stuck with a bunch of annoying slow orders up on the northern end of the OL a couple of years back when they did the massive track work project (so...many...shuttle...buses) that it was very slow going until the new ballast settled down.

I think it unlikely that the old cars themselves are responsible (unless this is a Tufts Medical-style situation where they keep losing the ATO speed codes) given that while their reliability is problematic, they're not running at a snail's pace along the whole line. Maybe they limited their top speed for all I know to save some wear and tear, but there've been a lot of track work projects (didn't some get accelerated due to pandemic-depressed ridership) that might explain some of the slowdowns.

 

[Jahvon09]

That may have been the case. But it IS clear that the unreliable track record of the old cars has really taken its toll on long-time riders of the line. Thease cars were supposed to be replaced once they were in service for at least three decades. The exasperating problems of getting the new cars to work properly might have added to the increased "hanging around" of the old cars.

As I said after some of the new cars came back, I hope that they finally got them to work properly. As it turns out, these cars are heavier than the old ones, & the old tacke switches just didn't work well with them. Seem that the MBTA was trying to use decades-old track switches & tracks with new equipment.

 

[Zash]

That has to be the old trains doing that. They've become the least reliable over the years, falling apart & breaking down to the point of causing massive delays. I rember the similar looking old Blue Line cars being the same way. Always made me late for work at the airport!!

I know you vehemently hate the old trains, but I'd like it if you could at least cite something directly pinpointing the blame on the older trains.

 

[Brattle Loop]

I know you vehemently hate the old trains, but I'd like it if you could at least cite something directly pinpointing the blame on the older trains.

Not addressed to me, I know, and I tend to share the sentiment, but I will note that the #12 Main Line fleet has definitely seen declining reliability. A decade ago the OL was running 17 trains at peak (equivalent to 3 'spare' sets to account for maintenance and OOS cars). Around 2012 that was cut down to 16 trains because reliability was not sufficient to run with only eighteen cars unavailable for service. They're currently running with 15 trains at peak, though that could also be a pandemic measure. (That said, there are 10 #12 cars out of service, as opposed to "in service" but temporarily unavailable for service due to maintenance and/or minor work.) The cars are all over 40 and never had a proper midlife overhaul, so while they've held up well in the circumstances they aren't bulletproof by any means. That's not cause for reflexively blaming them (let alone in hyperbolic terms) for problems without evidence, but their declining reliability is very real, though utterly unsurprising given their age and hard lives.

 

[Jahvon09]

I know you vehemently hate the old trains, but I'd like it if you could at least cite something directly pinpointing the blame on the older trains.

1. A piece of flat metal fell off a train after it came into the State Street Station. It fell onto the 3rd rail, creating a small fire, sparks, flames & had smoked up the station. The mishap had caused passengers to flee the train for safety while running for their lives. Remember that one?

2. During heavy rainstorms, the roofs on some of the cars had leaked, causing the water to have leaked inside wetting up some of the seats. Remember that one?

3. A small fire had gotten started on the tracks of the Orange Line, cause a shutdown & delays. The smoke had seaped up into some of the cars. Remember that one?

4. During the winter of 2015, there were mounds of snow. It had snowed so badly that some of it had gotten clogged into the traction motors under the cars, creating a shutdown & delays. Remember that one?

5. And because a rehab program was thought about, but was never done on the trains, they had rusted & deteriorated even more, causing delays, problems & more troubles across the board.
Remember that one?

Nah. You didn't know about those things.

 

[Zash]

1. A piece of flat metal fell off a train after it came into the State Street Station. It fell onto the 3rd rail, creating a small fire, sparks, flames & had smoked up the station. The mishap had caused passengers to flee the train for safety while running for their lives. Remember that one?

2. During heavy rainstorms, the roofs on some of the cars had leaked, causing the water to have leaked inside wetting up some of the seats. Remember that one?

3. A small fire had gotten started on the tracks of the Orange Line, cause a shutdown & delays. The smoke had seaped up into some of the cars. Remember that one?

4. During the winter of 2015, there were mounds of snow. It had snowed so badly that some of it had gotten clogged into the traction motors under the cars, creating a shutdown & delays. Remember that one?

5. And because a rehab program was thought about, but was never done on the trains, they had rusted & deteriorated even more, causing delays, problems & more troubles across the board.
Remember that one?

Nah. You didn't know about those things.

I didn't ask for you to cite past experiences, I meant this particular ones.

I'm not too sure what point you're trying to make by using repetition like that, all I was asking for was some clarity on where this issue came from, not past issues. We get it, the old trains stink. But when something does go wrong, I'd like to know what went wrong now and not months ago.

 

[Brattle Loop]

1. A piece of flat metal fell off a train after it came into the State Street Station. It fell onto the 3rd rail, creating a small fire, sparks, flames & had smoked up the station. The mishap had caused passengers to flee the train for safety while running for their lives. Remember that one?

Was this the result of the age of the trains, or are trains of any age susceptible to components falling off (and, if they fall on the wrong places, triggering electrical fires) if they're, for instance, improperly fastened?

2. During heavy rainstorms, the roofs on some of the cars had leaked, causing the water to have leaked inside wetting up some of the seats. Remember that one?

This one is at least directly connectable to the age of (and wear on) the cars, as well as the difficulty of maintaining aging equipment. Wet seats are unpleasant, but not a safety issue. (Now back in the day of the black fake leather seats, the moisture didn't sink into the seats so was less problematic.)

3. A small fire had gotten started on the tracks of the Orange Line, cause a shutdown & delays. The smoke had seaped up into some of the cars. Remember that one?

Track fires are not related to the age of the cars. Smoke ingress would only be prevented if the cars were pressurized and/or hermetically sealed (both of which are ludicrous in a vehicle that needs to open doors that big that frequently).

4. During the winter of 2015, there were mounds of snow. It had snowed so badly that some of it had gotten clogged into the traction motors under the cars, creating a shutdown & delays. Remember that one?

These cars have had problems with fine particle snow for pretty much their entire lives. As I recall at one point it was found that hairnets over the intakes helped ameliorate the problem. That said, in a winter as historically bad as that, it's not the cars fault if the conditions are extreme beyond reasonableness. (The intake susceptibility is a design issue, and a little bit of an odd one for a Canadian company, but it's nothing to do with the age of the cars, and it's also unclear from this whether past practice for dealing with it was followed and ineffective due to extreme conditions or not followed, which would be an agency screw up not on the cars.)

5. And because a rehab program was thought about, but was never done on the trains, they had rusted & deteriorated even more, causing delays, problems & more troubles across the board.
Remember that one?

That's not an incident or a specific. Everyone on this board knows that equipment reliability worsens as the cars age, and that rebuilds like the ones these cars never had is how you turn back that clock.

I didn't ask for you to cite past experiences, I meant this particular ones.

I'm not too sure what point you're trying to make by using repetition like that, all I was asking for was some clarity on where this issue came from, not past issues. We get it, the old trains stink. But when something does go wrong, I'd like to know what went wrong now and not months ago.

Zash is entirely right here. Blame was placed on the cars, and specifically their age and deteriorated condition. No evidence was proffered for the initial assertion, and the response was a list of grievances at the cars in which only one of the specific complaints (the wasted roofs leaking water) was directly tied to the cars' ages and deteriorating conditions, and none of which constituted arguments let alone evidence of why the cars should be blamed for the specific incident which they were being blamed for.

No one here will seriously contest that the #12 cars are in significant decline despite the best efforts of the maintenance workers to keep them rolling. The fleet is 40+ without a rebuild, struggling through the bumpy EIS of its replacement. It's understandable to be upset at their end-of-life pains, but it's of no meaningful value to this discussion to just gripe about them, especially when those gripes turn into inaccurate allegations about their responsibility for incidents in which there is no evidence to suggest their responsibility. Difference of opinion is fine, it's the lifeblood of a board like this, but can we please try at least to agree on what are actual facts and what are not? Disliking the cars does not mean they are responsible for all of the bad things that happen on the Orange Line. (The same goes for the #14 cars, which have faced their own version of this argument in earlier pages of this thread, similarly unhelpfully.)

 

[themissinglink]

It's understandable to be upset at their end-of-life pains, but it's of no meaningful value to this discussion to just gripe about them, especially when those gripes turn into inaccurate allegations about their responsibility for incidents in which there is no evidence to suggest their responsibility.

I could not agree more. As frustrating as it is having such old equipment running on the Orange Line, complaining about the old cars gets really out of hand in this thread far too often.

 

[Brattle Loop]

I could not agree more. As frustrating as it is having such old equipment running on the Orange Line, complaining about the old cars gets really out of hand in this thread far too often.

Sometimes it's posts complaining that the old cars are crap following posts complaining that the new ones are crap. (Usually not both in the same post, though. Usually.)

Extending what I said earlier, complaints about specific problems are much less objectionable, especially because they can often obliquely raise questions prompting useful responses (such as the details in earlier posts about the specific component in the CRRC cars that was implicated in the derailment, its origin from an Australian manufacturer, and example-filled discussion of the difficulties of component integration on new-design cars that lead to teething problems). It's the complaining for the sake of complaining that serves no purpose beyond derailing the thread (pun intended).

Not fitting in with the immediate above discussion, but given the actual titled topic of this thread, and speaking of gripes, am I the only one who finds the #14 Orange Line designation for the CRRC cars annoying? (It came to mind when I referenced the new cars, having been referring to the old ones by their #12 designation). Per past practice the CRRC cars should either be the #13 Main Line cars or the #1 Orange Line cars; it's not even consistent with the Red Line cars from the same order (correctly designated #4 Red Line). It's a complaint, and a trivial one, but I do wonder if anyone has any idea how the new cars got that number?