M9 Cars Design Delivery and Acceptance

Discussion relating to the operations of MTA MetroNorth Railroad including west of Hudson operations and discussion of CtDOT sponsored rail operations such as Shore Line East and the Springfield to New Haven Hartford Line

Moderators: GirlOnTheTrain, nomis, Jeff Smith, FL9AC

Thomas
Posts: 829
Joined: Mon May 06, 2013 10:04 am

Re: M-9 Cars

Post by Thomas » Thu May 23, 2013 9:30 pm

How much longer until the MTA awards an M9 contract?

DutchRailnut
Posts: 22247
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 8:02 pm
Location: released from Stalag 13

Re: M-9 Cars

Post by DutchRailnut » Thu May 23, 2013 9:35 pm

Who cares about MTA, this is about LIRR or MNCR, and MNCR may not award M-9 contract.
If Conductors are in charge, why are they promoted to be Engineer???

Retired Triebfahrzeugführer. I am not a moderator.

Amtrak7
Posts: 2190
Joined: Thu May 01, 2008 4:39 pm
Location: Long Island / Pittsburgh

Re: M-9 Cars

Post by Amtrak7 » Fri Sep 13, 2013 11:19 pm

The procurement comes before the MTA Board this week. Kawasaki for a 92 car base order with options for up to 584 more. (note: combined LIRR and MNR numbers)

Like M8's there will be married pairs and unpowered singles. The base order will be used for one for one M3 replacement.

Price is listed as $1.834 billion, I *think* that includes the options.

Adirondacker
Posts: 601
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2009 9:00 pm

Re: M-9 Cars

Post by Adirondacker » Fri Sep 13, 2013 11:33 pm

Amtrak7 wrote:Price is listed as $1.834 billion, I *think* that includes the options.
If it's only the base order, that would be almost 20 million dollars a car. Kinda pricey. 2.7 million a car if they exercise all the options and get all 676 of them. Still kinda pricey but not out of line with other orders by non-US railroads. That probably also included training etc. and a start up inventory of parts.

lirr42
Posts: 2726
Joined: Thu Dec 29, 2011 6:16 pm
Location: Montauk, NY (MP 115.8)

Re: M-9 Cars

Post by lirr42 » Fri Sep 13, 2013 11:38 pm

Amtrak7 wrote:Price is listed as $1.834 billion, I *think* that includes the options.
That number better include the options!! If that would be the pricetag for just the 92 cars that would be almost $20 million for each car!

NH2060
Posts: 1518
Joined: Thu Feb 25, 2010 4:44 pm

Re: M-9 Cars

Post by NH2060 » Sat Sep 14, 2013 8:03 am

Amtrak7 wrote:The procurement comes before the MTA Board this week. Kawasaki for a 92 car base order with options for up to 584 more. (note: combined LIRR and MNR numbers)

Like M8's there will be married pairs and unpowered singles. The base order will be used for one for one M3 replacement.

Price is listed as $1.834 billion, I *think* that includes the options.
Wow. Bombardier to be outbid AGAIN for a MNR order?
lirr42 wrote:
Amtrak7 wrote:Price is listed as $1.834 billion, I *think* that includes the options.
That number better include the options!! If that would be the pricetag for just the 92 cars that would be almost $20 million for each car!
For that money they better come furnished with red carpet, upholstery, chandeliers AND butlers serving free complimentary tea and crumpets ;-)

All kidding aside though if the $1.834B figure includes (I assume non-powered) singlets- judging from the rough estimate of $2.7M per car- it sounds like it would be around $2.8-2.9M+ per powered car and perhaps $2.3-2.5M per singlet? Even $2.7M still sounds rather high for a 3rd rail-only EMU, but -in the words of Pope Francis- who am I to judge :-P

Fan Railer
Posts: 2197
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2008 9:32 pm

Re: M-9 Cars

Post by Fan Railer » Sat Sep 14, 2013 9:59 am

lirr42 wrote:
Amtrak7 wrote:Price is listed as $1.834 billion, I *think* that includes the options.
That number better include the options!! If that would be the pricetag for just the 92 cars that would be almost $20 million for each car!
It most definitely includes options. A quick look at the LIRR capital program page shows $355,451,200 allocated for a base order of 76 cars, which works out to about $4,677,000 per car.

khansingh
Posts: 82
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2012 6:40 pm

Re: M-9 Cars

Post by khansingh » Sat Sep 14, 2013 9:32 pm

Does this mean they've ruled out bi-levels?

ACeInTheHole
Posts: 2786
Joined: Fri May 07, 2010 10:31 pm

Re: M-9 Cars

Post by ACeInTheHole » Sat Sep 14, 2013 9:44 pm

Single level is better. The shocks on some of the NJT MLs have started to go, you sit on the top level as the car youre on is going through an interlocking you just get rocked hard one way and back the other as it rolls from side to side, its uncomfortable and it feels like the car is going to tip over, not even the Arrows rock that bad. Single level is better, the Center of Gravity of the car is much lower, and as a result you get hardly any of that "ship caught in a gale" sensation.

ajp
Posts: 281
Joined: Thu Mar 22, 2007 8:37 pm

Re: M-9 Cars

Post by ajp » Sun Sep 22, 2013 8:36 pm

in the white plains citizens news reporter http://WWW.wpcnr.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; has an article dated 9/19 stating
NY State has signed contracts for m-9 cars first for the LIRR then Metro North

lirr42
Posts: 2726
Joined: Thu Dec 29, 2011 6:16 pm
Location: Montauk, NY (MP 115.8)

Re: M-9 Cars

Post by lirr42 » Sun Sep 22, 2013 10:05 pm

F-line to Dudley via Park wrote:...but it depends a ton on what LIRR needs for running dual modes from diesel territory into GCT. If they decide to junk the DM30AC's it could end up being a very large combo order split between both MTA carriers. Or might not.
There will be no dual modes from diesel territory into GCT, they won't fit into the 63rd Street Tunnels.

MattW
Posts: 570
Joined: Thu May 13, 2010 8:00 pm
Location: Atlanta, GA (ATL)

Re: M-9 Cars

Post by MattW » Mon Sep 23, 2013 12:13 am

Existing dual modes won't fit, but I can't believe it is impossible to design a dual mode to fit within the clearances of ESA. Perhaps LIRR could request someone design one (issue RFI? is that how it would work?) and I'm sure someone could come up with one. Whether it's economically feasible is another question (repeat of the ALP45DP?), but that decision would be made later anyways depending on what LIRR can get. Then there's also the possibility of a DEMU. Again, whether it's realistic or not is not an issue for just now necessarily.

F-line to Dudley via Park
Posts: 7355
Joined: Fri Mar 11, 2005 7:26 pm
Location: North Cambridge

Re: M-9 Cars

Post by F-line to Dudley via Park » Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:41 am

Getting a little off-topic. But...at any rate...2020 is roughly when the next procurement decision figures to hit (give or take 1-2 years) for those vehicles. DM30's will be over 20 years old and relatively unsuccessful one-and-done's that won't merit a rebuild, P32's will be near the end of their post-rebuild service lives. A lot is going to change about service configurations in the 2020's that they'll have to plan for with the # of units they stock on the roster, but can't accurately pin today. Therefore that's really really not a procurement taking up anyone's mindshare today.


Addressing seating capacity on the Hudson/Harlem...yeah, big mindshare taken up by that dilemma. And interesting to see how it'll play out.

F-line to Dudley via Park
Posts: 7355
Joined: Fri Mar 11, 2005 7:26 pm
Location: North Cambridge

Re: M-9 Cars

Post by F-line to Dudley via Park » Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:58 am

Thomas wrote:What is the height of the 63rd street tunnels (and shortest tunnels) between Harold Interlocking and Grand Central Terminal as part of the East Side Access Project?
That's a question for the LIRR forum, not Metro North. I am sure the ESA thread has the exact dimensions if you search for it.


The M7 is designed for the max dimensions of ESA. That was a purposeful design spec considered decades in advance since the shortest tunnel segment is the one pre-existing from the 1970's. The M9's will match that dimension. Metro North isn't quite as constrained into GCT, which is why they are considering going taller for their 3rd rail-only vehicles. Otherwise, they keep to the LIRR specs (as they have done on all previous orders) for all single-level 3rd rail EMU's because it helps the manufacturing and maintenance economy of scale immensely to have a completely common carbody design for both MTA railroads.

Jeff Smith
Site Admin
Posts: 8494
Joined: Tue Nov 07, 2006 9:28 am
Location: MP 67.2 Georgia Southern Railway

Re: M-9 Cars

Post by Jeff Smith » Fri Oct 04, 2013 11:55 am

ADMIN NOTE:

This is the M-9 thread. We will be making all stops along the M-9 procurement and delivery process. We will not be making any stops at dual mode, diesel replacement, ESA, LIRR, etc. That can be discussed here: MNRR Joint EMU Procurement with LIRR - Alt/Successor to EMU ;)

I tried to split and merge some of the posts here the best I could and deleted some of the others. That's a shame, because some of the info was great, and I sincerely apologize for the collateral damage.

One warning was issued to a habitual offender who I've spoken to about thread hijacks. If you see an obviously off-topic post, please use the report function. Such a post would be "when is MNRR replacing it's diesel fleet", "what is the height of the ESA tunnel" or "what is the capacity of a bi-level" in the M-9 thread. I'm not trying to be mean here, I'm trying to keep things on course. I know many are eager to learn. The search function is a wonderful thing.

If you see a way off-post topic, report and don't respond. If we start getting off track, I would recommend a response and steering it back on track. I hate losing good material. For those who have unrelated queries come to them, please use the search function or start a new thread.

My apologies again for intruding on a good discussion.
Next stop, Willoughby
~Jeff Smith (fka "Sarge") :: RAILROAD.NET Site Administrator/Co-Owner

Return to “MTA Metro-North Railroad and CtDOT Passenger Rail”