Red Line 01744/01745

Discussion relating to commuter rail, light rail, and subway operations of the MBTA.

Moderators: CRail, sery2831

Red Line 01744/01745

Postby jwhite07 » Sat Jan 08, 2005 7:08 pm

Saw Red Line cars 01744/01745 earlier this evening. They have finally returned to revenue service after having been "hangar queens" at Cabot Carhouse since December 2002!
User avatar
jwhite07
 
Posts: 1409
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 7:39 pm

Postby lstrong » Sat Jan 08, 2005 8:02 pm

Why were they out of service for so long?
lstrong
 

Postby Robert Paniagua » Sat Jan 08, 2005 10:35 pm

Good, about time they are back on the road again. Now, what about 01520/21?
~Robert Paniagua
Moderator: WMATA :: General Railroad Operations
User avatar
Robert Paniagua
 
Posts: 4418
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2004 6:11 am
Location: Weymouth, MA 02188

Postby jwhite07 » Sun Jan 09, 2005 9:18 am

These cars needed replacement parts that are now apparently very difficult to obtain, so they were out for a long time. I believe Everett Shop ended up having to fabricate some of the parts.

01520/21 did finally return from the door sensitive edge program a few months ago. I saw it in service numerous times after that. But it's back at Cabot right now, for coupler replacement.
User avatar
jwhite07
 
Posts: 1409
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 7:39 pm

Postby efin98 » Sun Jan 09, 2005 5:40 pm

dare I say it: time is drawing to a close on the lifespan of the 1500s and 1600s?
efin98
 

Postby octr202 » Mon Jan 10, 2005 8:16 am

efin98 wrote:dare I say it: time is drawing to a close on the lifespan of the 1500s and 1600s?


It all depends on where you are on the scale of transit vehicle life span:

Most cities: At the end of their life span.

Boston: Probably another 5-10 years.

Philadelphia: Another 15-20 years. :wink:

(Don't worry...I'm poking fun at my own hometown with the last one.)
Wondering if I'll see the Haverhill double-tracking finished before I retire...
Photo: Melbourne W7 No. 1019 on Route 78, Bridge & Church Streets, Richmond, Victoria. 10/21/2010
User avatar
octr202
 
Posts: 4142
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2004 8:13 am
Location: In the land of the once and future 73 trackless trolley.

Postby jwhite07 » Mon Jan 10, 2005 9:55 am

As far as I've seen in the T's capital plans, there isn't even a thought to start replacing the #1 cars (01500/01600s) until sometime after 2010! The average "useful lifespan" for a subway car, as defined by the MBTA, is 35 years, but waiting until after 2010 to replace the #1 cars will mean that they will be at least 40 years old before they're retired.

The #1 cars aren't really causing any major problems -- for their age they're still pretty reliable, and they've always been light years beyond other (even newer) vehicles the T has purchased. They have been extensively rebuilt once before, and they're currently going through some other preventive maintenance programs like replacing the sensitive edges on doors, coupler replacements, and replacement of static converters and other propulsion components.

The biggest issue right now seems to be parts availability. Some critical parts have become very difficult to obtain, so #1 cars have been known to be out of service for excessively long periods waiting for them. Then again, as we know, the same holds true for the 01800s!
User avatar
jwhite07
 
Posts: 1409
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 7:39 pm

Postby efin98 » Mon Jan 10, 2005 1:35 pm

35 years means starting this year they are on their last legs! 1969-2004/5 is 35 years. 2010 seems to be z decent timeframe, if the contract(s) are put out to bid it and the current average for designing, building, testing and accepting is put to use they may be out on the rails in full service by them.

40 years is a great run for them, they have earned their retirment.
efin98
 

Postby jwhite07 » Mon Jan 10, 2005 2:21 pm

Yeah, but you know the MBTA, Ed... just so long as the #1 cars continue to run without breaking down and screwing up the rush hour multiple times every day, the T will hold off replacing them. And that's really not a bad thing... just because they've met some arbitrary age does not mean they cannot still provide adequate service for several more years (look at the remaining PCCs!!), and it may be necessary if there isn't the capital funding to replace them right away anyhow.
User avatar
jwhite07
 
Posts: 1409
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 7:39 pm

Postby efin98 » Mon Jan 10, 2005 4:29 pm

The fact that fabrication of spare parts is taking place is the big indicator, also that they are listed at getting replaced by 2010 is another. Things will start adding up, I would not be surprised if they have more problems or develope more problems over the upcoming year or two.
efin98
 

Postby jwhite07 » Mon Jan 10, 2005 6:49 pm

Ahhh, but that requires foresight and a willingness to be proactive rather than reactive, no? :wink:
User avatar
jwhite07
 
Posts: 1409
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 7:39 pm

Postby efin98 » Mon Jan 10, 2005 8:22 pm

jwhite07 wrote:Ahhh, but that requires foresight and a willingness to be proactive rather than reactive, no? :wink:


Foresight? No. It's common sense. Any idiot could see they are going to have to be retired sometime, best to have money and a plan to replace them rather than forcing yourself to replace them on the spur of the moment and risk having a large number of cars out of service for months because of that.

Probably the smartest move the T has made, why take a chance when you could possibly not afford to take the chance?
efin98
 

Postby 7 Train » Mon Jan 10, 2005 10:16 pm

They will definitely outlive the NYCT R40M/42, also from 1969-70. These cars are due to be replaced by the R160 by 2008-10.

One car that might outlive the 01500/600 is the R32, built 1964-65 by Budd. It is not due for replacement until the end of the R160 option orders and may survive until 2015 or beyond.
7 Train
 


Return to Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA)

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests