5000-series - Updates

[sw4400]

I think you could be on the right track. It means that the 5000s could be temporarily removed from service for adjustments and tweaks, and that the specific numbered 2600s that were transferred to the Blue Line in recent weeks could be transferred back to the Pink Line for the short term. Or the 5000s could be temporarily restricted to rush-hour-only service while the tweaks/upgrades are being done, with base service reverting to all 2600s.

Something doesn't sit right with the 5000-Series Cars. We've had the gaps at Tower 18 for many years and the 2200-Series, 2400-Series, 2600-Series and 3200-Series have gone through without as many die outs as these cars have been having(I don't see many reported incidents except one involving a 2400-Series set by artthouwill on the "unusual experiences" thread). This could be a potential major issue in the future. There are gaps at the Clark Jct., Kimball Terminal, Howard Yard and all the grade crossings on the Pink, Brown, Purple, & Yellow Lines(I know this because the humming noise you hear from the motors stops for a few seconds as the train rolls through, although the lights remain on).

[RJL6000]

Something doesn't sit right with the 5000-Series Cars. We've had the gaps at Tower 18 for many years and the 2200-Series, 2400-Series, 2600-Series and 3200-Series have gone through without as many die outs as these cars have been having(I don't see many reported incidents except one involving a 2400-Series set by artthouwill on the "unusual experiences" thread). This could be a potential major issue in the future. There are gaps at the Clark Jct., Kimball Terminal, Howard Yard and all the grade crossings on the Pink, Brown, Purple, & Yellow Lines(I know this because the humming noise you hear from the motors stops for a few seconds as the train rolls through, although the lights remain on).

In fact, something tells me that the CTA should have pursued the 3500-series of DC-propulsion cars instead of switching to AC-propulsion technology so prematurely (that way, the CTA would not have been stuck with as many old cars as it currently is). Unfortunately, the CTA is now in such a big mess that ordering new DC-propulsion cars would now cost a lot more money than the current 5000-series order - all while the CTA would be stuck with old cars that are past the end of their useful lives for years to come.

[Busjack]

I think you could be on the right track. It means that the 5000s could be temporarily removed from service for adjustments and tweaks, and that the specific numbered 2600s that were transferred to the Blue Line in recent weeks could be transferred back to the Pink Line for the short term. Or the 5000s could be temporarily restricted to rush-hour-only service while the tweaks/upgrades are being done, with base service reverting to all 2600s.

That might be the case in fact, but you know that the CTA would not make an announcement to that effect to the public. Only way would be if to explain why service has been degraded, but then they would be admitting an embarrassment, and, besides, they claim that enough cars are still around.

Also, restricting to rush hour would mean that if the fouling at Tower 18 isn't cured quickly, they are assuring more of what was reported on News Radio 780.

[Busjack]

In fact, something tells me that the CTA should have pursued the 3500-series of DC-propulsion cars instead of switching to AC-propulsion technology so prematurely...

If you look back at chicago-l.org, you'll find out that this order was delayed from 2002 to 2006, and CTA originally specified DC motors, and while he doesn't explicitly say so, it was because the car builders would not bid on essentially the 3200 specification. So, even if something tells you, that option was explored 9 years ago.

AC traction seems to work everywhere else, including on NICTD and the new ME cars. And, as people have pointed out, they had over a year to test this before giving the o.k., but, all the sudden, this problem appears after secretly giving the O.K. Also, I don't believe that Bombadier is another NABI, as it is one of the few world-wide carbuilders.

[artthouwill]

Something doesn't sit right with the 5000-Series Cars. We've had the gaps at Tower 18 for many years and the 2200-Series, 2400-Series, 2600-Series and 3200-Series have gone through without as many die outs as these cars have been having(I don't see many reported incidents except one involving a 2400-Series set by artthouwill on the "unusual experiences" thread). This could be a potential major issue in the future. There are gaps at the Clark Jct., Kimball Terminal, Howard Yard and all the grade crossings on the Pink, Brown, Purple, & Yellow Lines(I know this because the humming noise you hear from the motors stops for a few seconds as the train rolls through, although the lights remain on).

I talked to my regular motorman on the Green Line yesterday morning, and I lamented that I was not looking forward to the 5000s coming to the Green Line, and he agreed. He said that a lot of people on the Pink Line were getting in trouble because of those cars and they still had a lot of kinks that were not worked out. I responded that they've been working on the kinks for two years, and he said CTA has not thoroughly checked these cars out.

What I don't understand is how these cars get to consistently stop (and die out) on the dead spots. The one die out I experienced on the 2400s at Tower 18 was the only time I have ever been on a train that the lead car stopped in the dead zone. Based on my observation of the third rail in that area, it would have to be a near perfect stop for that kind of thing to happen, as there are very small sections of third rail except where the inner loop track meets with the Purple Line track turning into the inner loop track. Even if a train is sitting at Clark/Lake station, the cab signal lets a six car train clear the junction right up to the signal just short of the station. Most operators don't line up perfectly anywhere so consistently stop at a dead spot as small as this one is mindboggling.

[RJL6000]

I talked to my regular motorman on the Green Line yesterday morning, and I lamented that I was not looking forward to the 5000s coming to the Green Line, and he agreed. He said that a lot of people on the Pink Line were getting in trouble because of those cars and they still had a lot of kinks that were not worked out. I responded that they've been working on the kinks for two years, and he said CTA has not thoroughly checked these cars out.

In fact, the decision to assign the Green Line all 2400s was made back in the mid-1990s, when it was decided that every CTA line be equipped entirely with one series of equipment (during the final weeks of the pre-renovation Green Line, it was operated entirely with 2600s). Unfortunately, the 2400s were (and still are) the second-oldest series of cars still in regular service, and were at least 20 years old at the time. Plus, while the assignment of a line entirely with same-series cars (especially of the oldest ADA-compliant series) might have solved one maintenance headache, it creates another. A more prudent decision right now would be to temporarily assign some cars of a newer series (such as 2600s and/or 3200s) to the Green Line to relieve major servicing headaches (and redistribute many of the Green Line's existing 2400s to other lines and assign them to standby-only service, where they would be used only if the line goes short on operable newer cars). This is because parts for the older cars are becoming harder and harder to locate. Plus, if the Green Line continues to be officially equipped entirely with 2400s, the line might have to temporarily suspend all operations due to the impending car shortage.

[RJL6000]

If you look back at chicago-l.org, you'll find out that this order was delayed from 2002 to 2006, and CTA originally specified DC motors, and while he doesn't explicitly say so, it was because the car builders would not bid on essentially the 3200 specification. So, even if something tells you, that option was explored 9 years ago.

AC traction seems to work everywhere else, including on NICTD and the new ME cars. And, as people have pointed out, they had over a year to test this before giving the o.k., but, all the sudden, this problem appears after secretly giving the O.K. Also, I don't believe that Bombadier is another NABI, as it is one of the few world-wide carbuilders.

You may be right on the DC traction. Such motors in trains are on their way out of new builds. Though they were still theoretically available at the time of the original bid, they would have cost much more money per unit than what most transit agencies could afford to spend at the time. In other words, the CTA has a maximum bid ceiling on the cars, but none of the major builders could fit in a DC traction motor within that budget limit.

[artthouwill]

In fact, the decision to assign the Green Line all 2400s was made back in the mid-1990s, when it was decided that every CTA line be equipped entirely with one series of equipment (during the final weeks of the pre-renovation Green Line, it was operated entirely with 2600s). Unfortunately, the 2400s were (and still are) the second-oldest series of cars still in regular service, and were at least 20 years old at the time. Plus, while the assignment of a line entirely with same-series cars (especially of the oldest ADA-compliant series) might have solved one maintenance headache, it creates another. A more prudent decision right now would be to temporarily assign some cars of a newer series (such as 2600s and/or 3200s) to the Green Line to relieve major servicing headaches (and redistribute many of the Green Line's existing 2400s to other lines and assign them to standby-only service, where they would be used only if the line goes short on operable newer cars). This is because parts for the older cars are becoming harder and harder to locate. Plus, if the Green Line continues to be officially equipped entirely with 2400s, the line might have to temporarily suspend all operations due to the impending car shortage.

So it seems we should be in line for a dual retirement with the 2200s and the 2400s provided we don't have major problems with the 5000s. I've noticed six car consists on the Pink Line 5000s, even at 4 a.m. in the morning. I've also noticed more Red Line 2600s popping up on the Purple Line express, so maybe the failure rate of the 2200s and 2400s are such that accepting delivery of these 5000s are now a matter of necessity. During the height of a,m, rush, when a train leaves Harlem/Lake, the next train is usually the one that pulls into Harlem about 3-5 minutes later. There might be a couple of cars in the yard at most. I'm surprised that this line has NO borrowed cars from other lines considering it lost some cars to the Purple Line. At least that line can draw from the Red Line fleet. It would seem more prudent to send the remaining 2600s on Pink to the Green Line on an interim basis.

[Busjack]

Automation posted on the home page the CTA release that the cars were being taken out of service, but because of a wheel bearing casting problem and apparently discovered in Plattsburg. So, despite what I said about not being a public announcement, there was one that service would not be impacted. However, nothing about the third rail gap issue.

[RJL6000]

Automation posted on the home page the CTA release that the cars were being taken out of service, but because of a wheel bearing casting problem and apparently discovered in Plattsburg. So, despite what I said about not being a public announcement, there was one that service would not be impacted. However, nothing about the third rail gap issue.

Thanks for the new info. It turned out that the "interesting announcement" has nothing to do whatsoever to what the public has already known.

[ryanbytes]

I'm starting to wonder if the stalls are because the 5000 series trains just don't coast as well as other cars. With the regenerative breaking I assume there's a little drag introduced into the drive train even if the train itself isn't braking. A little extra drag adds up when were talking eight wheels per car on a six or four car train. Living next to the Kedzie Brown line station I can see southbound trains lose a lot of momentum as they pull out of the station and cross Kedzie and these are regular old 3200 series cars.

Just a thought from a laid up guy on some strong pain meds. :)

[Busjack]

I'm starting to wonder if the stalls are because the 5000 series trains just don't coast as well as other cars. With the regenerative breaking I assume there's a little drag introduced into the drive train even if the train itself isn't braking. A little extra drag adds up when were talking eight wheels per car on a six or four car train. Living next to the Kedzie Brown line station I can see southbound trains lose a lot of momentum as they pull out of the station and cross Kedzie and these are regular old 3200 series cars.

Just a thought from a laid up guy on some strong pain meds.

It probably is regeneratively braking only when it is braking. The regeneration substitutes for dumping electricity generated by the DC motors into the resistances while slowing down.* Also, the impression I get from Bus Humter is this occurs when the train is stopped in the junction, but he could clarify.

The more interesting thing from the release is that Bombardier is casting its own trucks in the U.S., rather than, as Krambles indicated, the various assemblers using German trucks from 2400 up.

_________

*Most sources indicate that rapid transit and streetcars rely on three types of braking: turning the motors to generators needing somewhere to dissipate the electricity, conventional brakes, and track brakes on the trucks. Regenerative braking was used on streetcars since the 1920s, according to Lind, but the problem on the L that prevented it until now was that there was not the control to deal with it if it couldn't dump it into the third rail at a gap. Now, maybe that's connected with the current problem.

[BusHunter]

CTA Tattler had a link to a News Radio 780 story about a breakdown of 5000s at Tower 18. BusHunter, is this the same as you described, or are they continuing?

There is also some stuff in the article about what Claypool said (probably through a spokesperson) about the retirement schedule. While what I said above was facetious, I believe Claypool about as much.

Probably another BusHunter topic is the statement there that there are still 130 cars, which basically means that only 10 cars have been retired this year, and maybe as a result of being replaced.

Yes, this is the same. This appears to be the straw that broke the camels back. 38 minutes stranded is a long time. That must be why they went to 6 cars. But what happens when they go to 4 on a weekend service? I find it more interesting news radio 780 still reports that they are keeping 300 cars as spares when all deliveries are complete. Is that the official CTA position or are they quoting from the past? As far as #2200's being retired 130 is just two cars shy of what they had before the #5000 delivery, so they are not retiring anything much yet. This shows me they are still not confident enough in these cars to retire any older ones.

[toppdawg12]

What are they putting in Lake Michigan water these days?

[Sam92]

I'm starting to wonder if the stalls are because the 5000 series trains just don't coast as well as other cars. With the regenerative breaking I assume there's a little drag introduced into the drive train even if the train itself isn't braking. A little extra drag adds up when were talking eight wheels per car on a six or four car train. Living next to the Kedzie Brown line station I can see southbound trains lose a lot of momentum as they pull out of the station and cross Kedzie and these are regular old 3200 series cars.

Just a thought from a laid up guy on some strong pain meds.

This may cause some trouble with the new Oakton station when 5000's are assigned to the Yellow Line. Only two cars and not really enough time to build up speed. And maybe another potential problem with the turnaround track at Skokie?

[sw4400]

Is it possible to do a switchover to DC Power? The CTA is clearly not ready for AC Powered Trains. The whole infrastructure needs to be upgraded before a switchover can occur. With only about 50-100 of the 5000's built, I think the CTA can find someone who can do a DC Truck for them, or maybe do an in-house job at Skokie Shops. This whole AC Power mess probably will take several years more to iron out, and I don't know if the 2400's can hold out that long... I know the 2200's definitely can't.

[artthouwill]

According to the News Radio 780 story, the Red Line would be the last line to receive the 5000s. So following the teething logic, I would guess Brown would be next to last.

With regard to the regenerative braking and the stop gap, it is still a mystery that a train could precisely stop perfectly in a very small section where there is no third rail. If the lead car stops there, then does it really matter if it is a four car or six car consist? I say that because even the third and fourth cars would be touching third rail. But if the lead has no power, then it doesn't matter the length of the train. That takes me back to signalling, perhaps in the new cars, perhaps at Tower 18.

[Busjack]

Is it possible to do a switchover to DC Power? The CTA is clearly not ready for AC Powered Trains.

Like I said before, the 2002 spec was for DC. Whether it was as I understood it, that the carbuilders wouldn't bid on the spec, or as RJL understood it that they would bid only exorbitant prices, that ship has sailed.

It looks like people are advocating that even though DC propulsion is obsolete, because CTA is unable to deal with it, it should buy more obsolete equipment and assure the same maintenance problem for another 40 years, because, by then, they sure won't get replacement parts. Maybe CTA can bring back the 4000s, too.

While the 38 minute stall got press, if, as BusHunter indicates, there were only two stalls, maybe we are overblowing it.

Has any other rapid transit system been brought to its knees because of AC traction?

[Guest]

Like I said before, the 2002 spec was for DC. Whether it was as I understood it, that the carbuilders wouldn't bid on the spec, or as RJL understood it that they would bid only exorbitant prices, that ship has sailed.

It looks like people are advocating that even though DC propulsion is obsolete, because CTA is unable to deal with it, it should buy more obsolete equipment and assure the same maintenance problem for another 40 years, because, by then, they sure won't get replacement parts. Maybe CTA can bring back the 4000s, too.

While the 38 minute stall got press, if, as BusHunter indicates, there were only two stalls, maybe we are overblowing it.

Has any other rapid transit system been brought to its knees because of AC traction?

Its sad to see the 5000s are already recieveing bad press. Theyre very nice cars, I like them! Hopefully the problems can be resolved quickly. The 3200s are my absolute favorite once the 2200s are gone. I love the 3200s and 5000s because of the cross of a 2600 car and steel fluted sides like the 2200 series.

[sw4400]

The entire CTA infrastructure is probably set for DC-Powered Equipment. That might be a probability of the failing 5000-Series Railcars with the "dead spots" where the DC-Powered Equipment has little or no problems. If the infrastructure is more AC-Power friendly, then the 5000's might work more better. The Pink Line has used 4-car consists of 2600-Series Railcars through that same Tower 18 Junction without any problems. You put a 4-car consist of 5000-Series Railcars through there and you have to break out the stingers??? Something doesn't add up with the AC-Powered Railcars on the existing CTA infrastructure, which is more DC-Power friendly, I bet.

The 4000's thrived on the older infrastructure. But today's would probably cripple it, as would the 5000's(old models). The 6000's were the only known series to run on this current infrastructure in 1992. They went through the most upgrades to allow them to run on the infrastructure the CTA was using. The 5000's(new models) are probably having problems with the infrastructure the CTA has in place, and will continue to until one of the following occurs...

-CTA overhauls the infrastructure to be more AC-Power friendly

-5000-Series Railcars are retrofitted with DC-Power motors, then the CTA starts a funded program to get their infrastructure ready for AC-Powered technology, so future Railcars can have AC-Powered motors and no problems will occur

-Remaining equipment(2600's, 3200's) are retrofitted with AC-Powered motors similar to the 5000-Series motors, and overhaul the infrastructure.

[Busjack]

The entire CTA infrastructure is probably set for DC-Powered Equipment. .... You put a 4-car consist of 5000-Series Railcars through there and you have to break out the stingers???

1. They did redo the signal systems. In any event, the infrastructure, if needing upgrading, should be upgraded to current standards.

2. Stingers have been on the CTA for probably 100 years. I remember others mentioning when they had to be hauled out at Tower 12 for DC cars.

3. In the first example cited by BusHunter, the issue probably isn't the infrastructure, but how the cars are electrically connected. In the second case, since there apparently was a defect, I would tend to go along with whoever said there might be a software problem, as another distinction between these cars and all prior ones was that the prior ones had mechanical propulsion controls. For that reason, you just can't replace AC motors with DC ones; you would have to strip most of the undercar equipment, including the inverter, which changes third rail DC to AC.

Maybe we should leave these surmises for the electrical engineers. However, unfortunately, Krambles is still dead.

[toppdawg12]

It probably is regeneratively braking only when it is braking. The regeneration substitutes for dumping electricity generated by the DC motors into the resistances while slowing down.* Also, the impression I get from Bus Humter is this occurs when the train is stopped in the junction, but he could clarify.

The more interesting thing from the release is that Bombardier is casting its own trucks in the U.S., rather than, as Krambles indicated, the various assemblers using German trucks from 2400 up.

_________

*Most sources indicate that rapid transit and streetcars rely on three types of braking: turning the motors to generators needing somewhere to dissipate the electricity, conventional brakes, and track brakes on the trucks. Regenerative braking was used on streetcars since the 1920s, according to Lind, but the problem on the L that prevented it until now was that there was not the control to deal with it if it couldn't dump it into the third rail at a gap. Now, maybe that's connected with the current problem.

[toppdawg12]

pun intended?:lol:

[Sam92]

According to the News Radio 780 story, the Red Line would be the last line to receive the 5000s. So following the teething logic, I would guess Brown would be next to last.

With regard to the regenerative braking and the stop gap, it is still a mystery that a train could precisely stop perfectly in a very small section where there is no third rail. If the lead car stops there, then does it really matter if it is a four car or six car consist? I say that because even the third and fourth cars would be touching third rail. But if the lead has no power, then it doesn't matter the length of the train. That takes me back to signalling, perhaps in the new cars, perhaps at Tower 18.

Brown won't be recieving any 5000's

[toppdawg12]

Remember, the rest of the world has had AC traction for at least a decade; CTA has fallen far behind.