They are the most at risk for breaking down and causing delays and a board member called them "dogs" (http://washingtonexaminer.com/local/dc/2011/05/metros-4000-series-rail-cars-cause-frequent-delays) (Examiner)
Two interesting nuggets come out in the article:
1: Metro may pass on rehabbing the 4000's and instead tack on an extra option to the 7000's (or even start the 8000's early) to fully replace the 4000's. This would use in part the money earmarked for the 4000's rehab.
2: Metro's MBDF figures are mentioned in the article and I don't know what happened but railcar middle age has NOT been happy to the 4000's. Their MBDF is just below 30,000 miles. The 6000's are way at the top at nearly 90,000 miles. The rest are clustered in the low 40's. Might running the 4000's solely in mixed trains be killing them?
I don't understand the article to say that they wouldn't rehab the 4000s, since the rehab would make the 4000s akin to the 7000s, in the same way the 2000/3000 rehab made the trains practically identical to the 5000s and 6000s from a technical standpoint. Rehabbing the cars is less expensive than buying new ones, so it doesn't make much sense in my mind to not rehab them.
The MDBF of the entire fleet suffers as a result of all the mixed consists. They ought to end the practice ASAP, I've never liked the 1000s to the middle idea and always thought it was a PR move more than anything else.
I've always disliked the practice of mixed cosnsists too. For many years (until the 1980s) mixed consists was widely practiced throughout NYCTA (especially the IRT).
It always seems odd to me to hear of the possibility of an agency passing on rehabbing a group of middle-aged railcars and/or retiring them early. I get the issue with PATH and their PA-4 cars as they don't have AC propulsion and no room for CBTC equipment. However, on Metro-North's New Haven line... I admit there could be a very good reason to not retain the M-4/M-6, but I can't help but to think that those cars could be rehabbed and serve as rush hour trains.
In my mind, WMATA seems to have a working formula with the CAF cars and 2/3K rehabs. Wouldn't it make sense to rehab the 4K cars to the same specs? This especially seems like a logical move to me since WMATA seems to not have as many railcars as they need.
Just my 2 cents...
Were the 2000/3000 series cars "this problematic"? I was kind of wondering why the 4000s weren't rehabbed with the rest of them. I guess they are young, but when the 2s and 3s were rehabbed, the 4000s became an "oddball fleet". It probably would've made things a lot easier if they were all rehabbed together, maybe even cheaper in the long run. Mixing them with other cars (especially with the new vs old techology) makes everything worse...any way to run them in their own trains?
I see your point, Wayne. How much younger are the 4000s compared to the 2000/3000s? Once the older cars are retired, how much longer would the 4000s be around? I ask this because they would be incompatible with the 7000s...and for such a small fleet, that could cause major headaches in terms of dispatching and setting up/breaking down the trains.
Quote from: WayneNYC on June 01, 2011, 09:56:34 AM
It always seems odd to me to hear of the possibility of an agency passing on rehabbing a group of middle-aged railcars and/or retiring them early. I get the issue with PATH and their PA-4 cars as they don't have AC propulsion and no room for CBTC equipment. However, on Metro-North's New Haven line... I admit there could be a very good reason to not retain the M-4/M-6, but I can't help but to think that those cars could be rehabbed and serve as rush hour trains.
Especially in this day and age since the build quality of products has markedly improved from anything from the 50's and 60's that often were operational nightmares (such as anything Pullman-Standard). When was the last time, outside of the 0600's in Boston which deal with constant salt air, a railcar model didn't make 35? I think you'd have to go back to the 2000's in Chicago or the 01400's in Boston which fall into the above cases.
I think the other issue is that the 4000's are going to test WMATA's limit for unrehabbed railcars. The rehab program for the 2000's began right after they turned 20, most of the 3000's were rehabbed by the time they reached 20, and I think the 1000's were in the middle of their rehab at 20. If the 4000's rehab is pushed back to 25 at the VERY earliest, the question becomes if rehabbing them is worth it to get another 10-15 years of life tops.
QuoteIn my mind, WMATA seems to have a working formula with the CAF cars and 2/3K rehabs. Wouldn't it make sense to rehab the 4K cars to the same specs? This especially seems like a logical move to me since WMATA seems to not have as many railcars as they need.
The plan was to rehab them to the specs of the 7000's and potentially run them in mixed trains so they could still run 6-car trains on some lines. I think the better thing may be to find some way to run them solely in 8-car sets in the interim to limit their exposure to the system.
To answer Tritransit Area, the 4000's date back to 1991, the 3000's to 1987-88, and the 2000's to 1983. The 2000/3000 rehab program began in 2004 and wrapped up in 2008. I think the mindset then was that the 4000's were a bit too young for a rehab.
Wayne,
I'd fear that the 2000/3000 rehab technology might be outdated by the time the 4000s are rehabbed. They might not be producing all the parts needed to make them identical to the older rehabs, I'd favor rehabbing them to the 7000 specs, even with the risks involved with that not withstanding.
Jason,
I'm pretty sure the last version of the plan for the 4000s rehab that I saw called for removing the cabs from the B cars. I haven't seen anything to suggest that has been changed, though I won't put it out of the realm of possibility.
Oren,
Does that mean WMATA was planning to rehab the 4000 series after the 7000 series cars began arriving and kinks worked out?
Does that mean WMATA was planning to rehab the 4000 series after the 7000 series cars began arriving and kinks worked out?[/i]
From what I have read and heard that schedule has been changed. The original schedule called for doing rehabilitation of 4k cars after the first 64 of the 7k cars were delivered. The rehabilitation of 4k cars would happen during the production of the 1k replacements. The revised schedule also has the 4k cars being rehabilitated at the same time the 1k replacement are in production.
Original schedule:
Base contract: 64 cars – Dulles Phase 1
Option 1: 64 cars – Dulles Phase 2
Option 2: 130 cars – Growth 75% Eight-Car Trains
Option 3: 100 cars – Mid-Life Rehabilitation (4000 Series)
Option 4: 300 cars – Fleet Renewal (1000 Series)
Option 5: 90 cars – Growth 100% Eight-Car Trains
Revised schedule:
Base contract: 64 cars – Dulles Phase 1
Option 4: 300 cars – Fleet Renewal (1000 Series)
Option 3: 100 cars – Mid-Life Rehabilitation (4000 Series)
Option 1: 64 cars – Dulles Phase 2
Option 2: 130 cars – Growth 75% Eight-Car Trains
Option 5: 90 cars – Growth 100% Eight-Car Trains
Quote from: WayneNYC on June 01, 2011, 03:19:52 PM
Oren,
Does that mean WMATA was planning to rehab the 4000 series after the 7000 series cars began arriving and kinks worked out?
Thanks John.
As I understand it, WMATA's rail fleet is essentially using 1970s technology in many ways, the 6000s included. The 7000s will use today's technology. Not sure it makes much sense for WMATA to rehab the 4000s using what will be nearly 50 year old technology by the time the rehab is complete and then have to use the cars for another 15-20 years.
WMATAGMOAGH
Thanks John.
Your welcome
As I understand it, WMATA's rail fleet is essentially using 1970s technology in many ways, the 6000s included. The 7000s will use today's technology. Not sure it makes much sense for WMATA to rehab the 4000s using what will be nearly 50 year old technology by the time the rehab is complete and then have to use the cars for another 15-20 years.
Virtually all of the 1970s technology that controls vital systems will be retained for redundant purposes and to allow non revenue movements of the 7k cars with the rest of the fleet, (trains of 7k cars rescuing trains of existing rolling stock and vice-versa).
The primary difference is the method and technology used to control the hardware of the various systems both new and existing in the cars. With the exception of the electro-pneumatic braking system virtually all of the hardware of the various systems will be controlled digitally using ethernet, the older technology used discrete digital or analog control line to control the hardware.