Why Were The #2000's Retired So Soon?

[juelzkellz]

I noticed that the #2000's served the shortest amount of time for a CTA railcar series. I want to know why they were retired so quickly? It seems like CTA scrapped most of them as soon as they had the opportunity. The cars marked the beginning of the "High Performance Series" so they were compatible with everything that came after. Also, it seems strange that the CTA retired the #2000's as quick as possible but the #2200's which weren't that much newer served until just a few years ago. Heck even some of the PCC cars served a bit longer than the #2000's. What was wrong with the cars that necessitated their quick retirement and scrapping? 

[artthouwill]

They were junk.  They ran on the Lake Dan Ryan line until the Blizzard of 1979.   The roadway salt getting underneath those railcars rendered them useless.   Those cars were all transferred to the Englewood Jackson Park Howard where they ran until 1993 when the Howard line was linked to the Dan Ryan and the Lake St Louis linked with the SSM (current Green Line).  Then the Green Line was shut down in 1994 for two years.   Since those csrs couldn't be used on the Red and Blue Lines and the 320 were being delivered to the Orange and Brown Lines, there was no use for the 200 hence they were retired. 

[sw4400]

The 2000-Series was built by Pullman in 1964 and weren't retired until the opening of the Green Line after renovations in 1994, so they served CTA for pretty much 29-30 years, which is the FTA mandated lifespan of the railcar. The 2200's were an exception and would've been retired in 1999 except the CTA lacked capital funding for new railcars then, that's why they remained in service until 2011(42 years of service, 12 years beyond FTA mandated lifespan). The 2400's lifespan was until 2008, but they, too, stayed around a little longer than normal because of delay of funding for new railcars. The 2600's will also retire a little beyond the 30 year mark a bit, and the 3200's will be close to the 30 year mark when they are due for retirement.

[BusHunter]

The #2000 cars were known to have leaking/raining problems from the air conditioning. I'm told that a leaking/raining railcar is harder to fix than a leaking bus. As a comparison, #2503 was retired due to a leaky roof. It's really rare to see a leaking/raining railcar. I did see one though a few weeks ago on #2731 on the blue line. This leaking was a regular occurrence, the cars were the first AC cars so maybe something was wrong with the design of that. I remember they had AC units inside the cars versus outside and those would leak. 

Also, they didn't rehab those, all other cars in CTA history have had a heavy maintenance rehab up until the #4000's and I can't remember back further than that. This would mean they would only run as long as they were designed to run. 25 years. 1964 to 1993 is 29 years so they did make it 4 years longer than they should have.

[Busjack]

The #2000 cars were known to have leaking/raining problems from the air conditioning. I'm told that a leaking/raining railcar is harder to fix than a leaking bus. As a comparison, #2503 was retired due to a leaky roof. It's really rare to see a leaking/raining railcar. I did see one though a few weeks ago on #2731 on the blue line. This leaking was a regular occurrence, the cars were the first AC cars so maybe something was wrong with the design of that. I remember they had AC units inside the cars versus outside and those would leak. 

Also, they didn't rehab those, all other cars in CTA history have had a heavy maintenance rehab up until the #4000's and I can't remember back further than that. This would mean they would only run as long as they were designed to run. 25 years. 1964 to 1993 is 29 years so they did make it 4 years longer than they should have.

As art indicated, the real reason was that they wrecked the undercar equipment in the Blizzard (both Lake embankment and Dan Ryan sections) and thus they were restricted to the elevated.

While they were essentially the only cars with air conditioners on the ceiling, I'm sure they could have remedied the problem the same way they did for the GMC buses--disable the AC.

I think sw is correct about the 30 year FTA service life.

[BusHunter]

While they were essentially the only cars with air conditioners on the ceiling, I'm sure they could have remedied the problem the same way they did for the GMC buses--disable the AC.

 

But they didn't do that. With no hopper windows or any way to get any air that would made them rolling saunas. Better to have leaking ac than no ac at all.

[Busjack]

But they didn't do that. With no hopper windows or any way to get any air that would made them rolling saunas. Better to have leaking ac than no ac at all.

The last is true, but all I was pointing out was that that wasn't the cause of retiring them early. If that were the sole cause, they could have retired them in 1972.

[BusHunter]

How was the salt getting into the cars underbody any different than the #2200 series and the snow problem they faced? They seemed to always have the repeat problem of snow getting into the electronics under the car and shorting them out. The alstom #2600 rehab fixed this in the #2600 series. I don't know if it was done for the #2200 series, as the rehab was earlier starting in 1992. If you look back on "L" pictures before 1978-79, the rail cars ran without cow catchers. So snow must have been a factor too.

[Busjack]

How was the salt getting into the cars underbody any different than the #2200 series and the snow problem they faced? They seemed to always have the repeat problem of snow getting into the electronics under the car and shorting them out. The alstom #2600 rehab fixed this in the #2600 series. I don't know if it was done for the #2200 series, as the rehab was earlier starting in 1992. If you look back on "L" pictures before 1978-79, the rail cars ran without cow catchers. So snow must have been a factor too.

The answer seems to be that the 1992 rehab of the 2200s must have been worth doing, but by then fixing the 2000s wasn't.

The only other clue is in Krambles's book (caption page 64) that the 2000s "challenged engineering and maintenance forces over the years." Maybe like the 5800 series buses, those departments said that's enough. That book also talked about, after the procurement of the 3200s, that further stock would have to be procured to replace the nonairconditioned units on the Skokie Swift and the "aging 2000s, now approaching the end of their life cycle," but obviously the 3200s led to the retirement of both.

[sw4400]

2200's were rebuilt in 1990; 2600's were rebuilt in 2000-2001

2200's builder's plate from N.Y Rail Car

[chicagopcclcar]

 If you look back on "L" pictures before 1978-79, the rail cars ran without cow catchers. 

"Cow catchers".....How many chitransit readers know what a cow catcher is? LOL!  Operators in the vicinity....there's a cow on the track....sound your horn, make sure the cow sees you before you pass. Make announcements to your passengers.....this is one thing they won't want to miss.

CTA rail car pilot. 

    

Edited August 19, 2015 by chicagopcclcar

[4CottageGrove95th]

"Cow catchers".....How many chitransit readers know what a cow catcher is? LOL!  Operators in the vicinity....there's a cow on the track....sound your horn, make sure the cow sees you before you pass. Make announcements to your passengers.....this is one thing they won't want to miss. 

    

If I remember correctly, the term "cow catcher" or "pilot" as it was supposedly referred to in the rail industry was the device mounted on the front of steam locomotives years ago to deflect debris and obstacles off the track. To my understanding, the device mounted on CTA trains since the late 70s must serve the same purpose. But what is the "technical" name for it according to CTA jargon????? 

[BusHunter]

"Cow catchers".....How many chitransit readers know what a cow catcher is? LOL!  Operators in the vicinity....there's a cow on the track....sound your horn, make sure the cow sees you before you pass. Make announcements to your passengers.....this is one thing they won't want to miss.

CTA rail car pilot. 

    

That's what they were called years ago like in the 1800's, hence the cow catchers name. Streetcars even had a device that would catch a pedestrian and throw it in a basket like device above the cow catcher. I guess people were getting hit by streetcars as both would be in the street and more pedestrians would be in the street than there would be now. Streetcars don't pull over to the curb!! Pilot is a funny name, it's not driving anything. Pilot is also the name of the person who takes over driving responsibilities in a single track or wherever. The single track pilot.

[chicagopcclcar]

If I remember correctly, the term "cow catcher" or "pilot" as it was supposedly referred to in the rail industry was the device mounted on the front of steam locomotives years ago to deflect debris and obstacles off the track. To my understanding, the device mounted on CTA trains since the late 70s must serve the same purpose. But what is the "technical" name for it according to CTA jargon????? 

PILOT!  Same with railroads, diesel locomotives, high speed train sets, Acela., etc, etc.

[4CottageGrove95th]

"Cow catchers".....How many chitransit readers know what a cow catcher is? LOL!  Operators in the vicinity....there's a cow on the track....sound your horn, make sure the cow sees you before you pass. Make announcements to your passengers.....this is one thing they won't want to miss.

CTA rail car pilot. 

    

Lord Help me.....Please!! The term was right there in your comments!!! Man, I need to have my eye glass prescription changed in a big hurry !!!

[chicagopcclcar]

ROTFAMAO!

[andrethebusman]

The leaking AC's in the 2000's had nothing to do with the roof. The AC condensers were inside the car, hung from the ceiling. An AC is also a dehumidifier, and the water has to go somewhere. On a 2000 it was supposed to drain down the four stanchion poles that were under the AC unit, and go out under the floor. However, the problem is that the bottoms of those four drains would bet plugged up with dirt, they would fill up, eventually all the way to the top, and then the AC itself would flood, and the blower fans would start blowing the water out the air vents. Basically a design that didn't work too god. On all later cars condensers are below floor level, so if they flood, it does not affect the inside.

Also, the 2000's as early as 1977 were badly deteriorating. Sticking brakes were a common problem. The big blizzard didn't so much short out control equipment as snow kept getting into the motors and shorting them out. Using long trains of 2000's (up to 16 together) in a "ram until you stall, back up, and ram again" effort to plow the Lake St embankment for several days afterwards didn't help either, and didn't help the rail either. A few years later west of Laramie had to be realid because in the week after the blizzard the rail was so badly gouged and pitted. The Blizzard was really the beginning of the end for the 2000's. The ones that landed in Evanston did better than the North-South cars as they ran much less mileage per week, and the Evanston crews made more of a fuss to get Wilson to fix what ailed their cars, while the NS crews didn't seem to care much. By the time they were on Lake-Englewood-Jackson Park, they were in sad shape, and while LJP was not a very demanding assignment, they were goners by then.

 

[Juniorz]

FYI: Roof AC's are proposed to return on the new 7000-series railcars.

[Busjack]

FYI: Roof AC's are proposed to return on the new 7000-series railcars.

True, but here the ACs were inside the passenger compartment, essentially hung from the ceiling.

Personally, I don't see how ACs can be mounted on the roof and still maintain necessary clearances.

BTW (since you made me look) the bidding process must finally be closed, as the 7000s solicitation is off the Contract Opportunities page.

[Juniorz]

July 28th was the cut off date