5000-series - Updates

[Busjack]

pun intended?

Somewhat. Also, the Cheddar Cheese reference

Roseanne Rosannadanna's comment also definitely applies to the CTA: "It's always something."

[See Tea Eh]

How many dead-spot stalls are we talking about? Two?

Having dead-spot stalls every month or so is normal for CTA. They just don't get reported. But because we live in an age of instant information (whether it's accurate or not), and this is the first new series of railcars delivered to CTA since the internet became more than a university/government curiosity, every little thing gets blown out of proportion as if it's the first time anything ever happened.

You saw the same stuff on the bus threads. "Oh, I just saw bus 1234 broken down at such and such location, these new buses must be junk because that thing is only two months old."

I'm curious, for those calling for "infrastructure" changes, exactly what infrastructure changes are you proposing CTA make to be "friendly" to AC power? In other words, how is the current infrastructure deficient to the point of causing problems for the 5000s that don't occur on other equipment types?

[Busjack]

"

I'm curious, for those calling for "infrastructure" changes, exactly what infrastructure changes are you proposing CTA make to be "friendly" to AC power? In other words, how is the current infrastructure deficient to the point of causing problems for the 5000s that don't occur on other equipment types?

Toppdawg is gonna get you, too.

I'll stand on my electrical engineer comment. However, I'll note that whatever Internet research I did on AC traction was on the basis that the third rail was going to stay DC, and they weren't going to use a 20-mile long three prong extension cord to power the trains. Come to think about it, that would become entangled going around the Loop on the Pink Line.

[ChicagoNova]

The 5000 Series cars are AC powered, whereas the other series cars are DC powered. Maybe that's the reason why the 5000 Series cannot be coupled with the other series cars.

[sw4400]

The 5000 Series cars are AC powered, whereas the other series cars are DC powered. Maybe that's the reason why the 5000 Series cannot be coupled with the other series cars.

That's already known. What is perplexing is the Tower 18 mystery. The Wheel Bearing issue aside... you can put a train of 4 DC-Powered Units, whether they're 2200's, 2400's, 2600's or 3200's through that problem zone, and they'll roll through fine. You try that with a train of 4 AC-Powered 5000-Series Units, and the trains seem to die and require a stinger to bring them back to life to move them, though it usually backs up traffic for 20+ minutes(not a good place to either, with the Brown, Green, Pink, Purple and Orange sharing that section to a extent). If it's the regenerative braking that's causing the problem, then they have to go back to the traditional braking on the DC-Powered units and forget about the regenerative braking system. If that's part of the AC System and can't be avoided, then the third rail infrastructure throughout the "L" System needs to be upgraded to work better with the AC system & regenerative braking system, as these cars will in about 10 years time occupy 75-85% of the system, grade crossings and other Junctions included, otherwise you need to make these cars DC-Powered. How many other problems will come up if a train dies and blocks a major intersection at grade level until the stingers give the train enough power to move out of the way, or other junctions in the system where there is no third rail for a short period? Yes, the stingers are there, but only have been used a handful of times in the "L" system's existence. With the 5000's in service, it seems like they are a daily requirement.

[toppdawg12]

What is so perplexing about the apparent fact that CTA and Bombardier engineers did not take into consideration some issues that are unique to CTA? AC propulsion ain't new. Don't CTA folks have peers at other transit agencies?

[BusHunter]

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?

There were more than two stalls. You have 3 documented stalls between my 2 and newsradio's 1. Also if you figure I'm not there 24/7, I'd say there could have been 5 or 6 if not more. The last stall was bad, 38 minutes in most instances is an end of the line stop to loop ride. All that was backed up. Also with it in the morning, we're talking thousands of riders late for work or school. Unfortunately, Tower 18 is a problem that's going to have to be worked out. Basically all the future #5000 assigned lines will go through it. I don't think there's a problem with the Orange line turn there, but I believe the purple can stall there too. There answer will probably be to run 6 car trains through there from now on no matter what time it is. Now as far as the defects, this is really throwing a monkey wrench into operations. Now this is twice trains have been parked. I'm starting to see CTA's point on keeping old cars even though they have new ones. What happens if this were to happen at the end of delivery. They would have to run limited service like in the case of a big snowstorm. But I still don't see 300 cars parked across the system. Where? Even now 54th is pretty much at capacity. Delivering to the Red line last shows the lack of confidence in these cars, but I think there going to have problems wherever they go. This could be another NABI. (NABI = Not Another Bad Investment.)

[Busjack]

What is so perplexing about the apparent fact that CTA and Bombardier engineers did not take into consideration some issues that are unique to CTA? AC propulsion ain't new. Don't CTA folks have peers at other transit agencies?

TTMG indicates that NYC has about 1600 or so cars acquired since about 2006 with what web sources indicate are AC motors. I suppose someone else here knows what a 1508C is.

Of course, the problem is that CTA has, in the past 15 or so years, been run by political hacks who don't recognize the existence of any other transit system, and, when in a pinch, calls in the old consultants.

There were more than two stalls. You have 3 documented stalls between my 2 and newsradio's ...

The question is what did you mean when you said here that the Newsradio one was the same?

What happens if this were to happen at the end of delivery. They would have to run limited service like in the case of a big snowstorm. This could be another NABI. (NABI = Not Another Bad Investment.)

This still makes one wonder about anything happening after making such a big deal about testing them on all the lines for over a year. Either the test was no good, or something should have needed a stinger before that.

I can see putting a stop to production while checking out the castings, but if one thinks a NABI scenario is occurring here, it is one thing to blow about $50 million on that fiasco, compared to the $1 billion cost of this contract.

[BusHunter]

"The question is what did you mean when you said here that the Newsradio one was the same?"

"This still makes one wonder about anything happening after making such a big deal about testing them on all the lines for over a year. Either the test was no good, or something should have needed a stinger before that.

I can see putting a stop to production while checking out the castings, but if one thinks a NABI scenario is occurring here, it is one thing to blow about $50 million on that fiasco, compared to the $1 billion cost of this contract."

(above quote by Busjack)

I mean't that the same exact thing happened as far as a sequence of events only twice as bad as the second documented dead train. As far as product reliability issues, they tested cars for two years. Isn't that long enough to find a problem and address it? The least they could have done is have a classroom instruction on how to free a stuck AC train. This way at least they could recover the service before 38 minutes. As far as a NABI scenario, the real question is whether more product recalls are going to happen again.

[Amtrak41]

Some of the first Loop-bound Brown line trains on Sunday mornings about 8 years ago (give or take) were 2 cars. No stalling.

[jajuan]

Interesting that those saying maybe the CTA should stick to DC power instead of going on with AC and a few others ignore the one quote in the News 780 story that Claypool made that actually makes some sense that you don't always expect of a CTA top official, and that being his mention that because the 5000s are of a totally different technology from the rest of the rail fleet when talking of their propulsion systems, rail maintenance crews are still on a learning curve when it comes to troubleshooting a problem and solving the problem quickly. I know and agree CTA management for the longest time have been political hacks with little to no transit experience, but given that CTA is using what is for them a new technology after decades of using one that is becoming more obsolote with each passing month for rail manufacturers it does stand to reason that the growing pains here aren't always the new equipment in and of itself but learning to quickly troubleshoot and resolve maintenance issues since they are in effect learning a totally new technology, again new for them at any rate.

[See Tea Eh]

That's already known. What is perplexing is the Tower 18 mystery. The Wheel Bearing issue aside... you can put a train of 4 DC-Powered Units, whether they're 2200's, 2400's, 2600's or 3200's through that problem zone, and they'll roll through fine. You try that with a train of 4 AC-Powered 5000-Series Units, and the trains seem to die and require a stinger to bring them back to life to move them

Again, trains get stalled on dead spots every month or two (and these were with the old DC cars, too). It's not a new occurrence. In the mean time, we're talking about two (maybe three? maybe not) occurrences where the 5000s get stalled. Bad luck, perhaps, but there were also hundreds of trips that the 5000s made through tower 18 just fine.

For all we know, it could be a matter of operators not being used to running the 5000s (not an inconceivable scenario, since they are...you know...new) and entering the turn too slow, and not having enough momentum to carry through. If those cars handle differently from the older fleet, then it's easy to see where an operator might get into trouble. Once they get used to the cars, then you'll go back to the train getting stuck on a dead spot every couple of months or so...like has happened since the beginning of time.

[sw4400]

This is a head-scratcher....

The new trains were operating solely on the Pink Line and were to be phased in on the Green Line in February. The CTA's strategy is to introduce the cars on the least-busy lines first in order to minimize service disruptions if problems arise, officials said. (Story)

Of course, being a Hilkevitch Article(Busjack's favorite Tribune Writer ), who knows if it's credible... If it is, then this should've been the assignment list for the 5000-Series when they come back to service...

Yellow(Least Busiest)

Pink(2nd Least Busiest)

Green(3rd Least Busiest)

Purple(Average Passenger Load)

Orange(Average Passenger Load)

Brown(3rd Most Busiest)

Red(2nd Most Busiest)

Blue(Most Busiest)

As it is right now, this is the proposed assignment list...

Pink(2nd Least Busiest)

Green(3rd Least Busiest)

Purple(Average Passenger Load)

Orange(Average Passenger Load)

Yellow(Least Busiest)

Red(2nd Busiest)

Blue(Most Busiest)

Brown(3rd Busiest)

[Scionic]

Again, trains get stalled on dead spots every month or two (and these were with the old DC cars, too). It's not a new occurrence. In the mean time, we're talking about two (maybe three? maybe not) occurrences where the 5000s get stalled. Bad luck, perhaps, but there were also hundreds of trips that the 5000s made through tower 18 just fine.

For all we know, it could be a matter of operators not being used to running the 5000s (not an inconceivable scenario, since they are...you know...new) and entering the turn too slow, and not having enough momentum to carry through. If those cars handle differently from the older fleet, then it's easy to see where an operator might get into trouble. Once they get used to the cars, then you'll go back to the train getting stuck on a dead spot every couple of months or so...like has happened since the beginning of time.

Agreed.

It's been a while since I was on a 5000, but it was well into the prototype period, I think during second go-around on the Red Line last spring/summer. It's pretty clear the acceleration/braking dynamics are different from what operators are used to, as this particular operator kept braking far short of the platform and then creeping in. While I agree that it's very likely that AC motors bleed off speed way faster than DC motors, it seems to be a matter of learning to carry more momentum through the curves. Either by streamlining the signal system, or simply starting their approach from further away from the curve, it doesn't seem to me like a scenario that requires reinventing the entire system.

[Busjack]

Either by streamlining the signal system, or simply starting their approach from further away from the curve, it doesn't seem to me like a scenario that requires reinventing the entire system.

Depending on the direction of travel, I suppose that the signals could be set to stay red until Clark/Lake station is clear. I've heard many messages on the Purple Line crossing Lake about "we are waiting for signals to clear and will be on our way shortly."

After all, aren't these cars getting over the grade crossing at Cicero Ave? Especially since wb has to slow to approach the station?

[BusHunter]

This is a head-scratcher....

The new trains were operating solely on the Pink Line and were to be phased in on the Green Line in February. The CTA's strategy is to introduce the cars on the least-busy lines first in order to minimize service disruptions if problems arise, officials said. (Story)

Of course, being a Hilkevitch Article(Busjack's favorite Tribune Writer ), who knows if it's credible...

Since we're head scratching, the question that comes to mind reading that article is if the wheel problem only causes cosmetic problems, why are the problems so serious to pull them from service? Is CTA being a difficult customer? I understand they don't want future cars to have the same problem, but if the existing cars already have a cosmetic defect why not just continue to run them. So is Bombardier "dropping the ball" not informing CTA of a problem? Or is this being made a bigger issue than it is? I just hope this doesn't end up with a lawsuit or they may never get this order. We all know how long it's taking in the case of NABI vs the CTA. :rolleyes:

[Amtrak41]

Since we're head scratching, the question that comes to mind reading that article is if the wheel problem only causes cosmetic problems, why are the problems so serious to pull them from service? Is CTA being a difficult customer? I understand they don't want future cars to have the same problem, but if the existing cars already have a cosmetic defect why not just continue to run them. So is Bombardier "dropping the ball" not informing CTA of a problem? Or is this being made a bigger issue than it is? I just hope this doesn't end up with a lawsuit or they may never get this order. We all know how long it's taking in the case of NABI vs the CTA.

My take on the CTA press release is that this is a truck frame cracking issue, not a cosmetic issue.

IOW, the NYCTA R46 dilemma 30 years later, 750 miles west.

[jtrosario]

My take on the CTA press release is that this is a truck frame cracking issue, not a cosmetic issue.

IOW, the NYCTA R46 dilemma 30 years later, 750 miles west.

Not quite understanding what a truck frame cracking issue is, nor what model the NYCT 46(corrected) is, found this enlightening link:

http://en.wikipedia....ity_Subway_car)

Oh my gosh! Cracks found in 1977 during the delivery of their 754 car order, that went to become multiple cracks per car and getting pulled off the system when "more than one crack" was found. By 1979, brake flaws were found as well. Then overhauled 1989-1992. The end of the entry notes that by 2011 this model is no longer considered to be the "lemon" that it once was.

I really, really hope this isn't the same circumstances being played out with the current delivery of the 5000's. I can see why the CTA decided to pull these out of service and correct this now before even more are delivered.

[jajuan]

My take on the CTA press release is that this is a truck frame cracking issue, not a cosmetic issue.

IOW, the NYCTA R46 dilemma 30 years later, 750 miles west.

And what I read in the RedEye did cite extra precautions on the part of the CTA as reason that they took this step. I also thought of the NABI situation, but I thought of that scenario along the lines of at least now unlike with NABI they are having the manufacturer work out the issues now while it's still early in the order with relatively few units out of the full order deliverd as opposed to giving the go ahead to take everything as stipulated in the contract and have it be an even bigger issue years down the road as happened with NABI. Now they have 226 buses collecting rust when they knew just about from the outset that the buses had a myriad of problems but still approved full delivery. One other thing I read in the RedEye is that the wheel casting issue is being worked on at Bombardier's expense as stipulated in their contract with CTA. But again the bigger point is this is being worked on now while there are still less than 100 cars in CTA's possession as opposed to having to deal with it after a few hundred made their way here.

[BusHunter]

Not quite understanding what a truck frame cracking issue is, nor what model the NYCT 46(corrected) is, found this enlightening link:

http://en.wikipedia....ity_Subway_car)

Oh my gosh! Cracks found in 1977 during the delivery of their 754 car order, that went to become multiple cracks per car and getting pulled off the system when "more than one crack" was found. By 1979, brake flaws were found as well. Then overhauled 1989-1992. The end of the entry notes that by 2011 this model is no longer considered to be the "lemon" that it once was.

I really, really hope this isn't the same circumstances being played out with the current delivery of the 5000's. I can see why the CTA decided to pull these out of service and correct this now before even more are delivered.

If this is the same problem then it's alot more major than the press indicates. If I read your link correctly, it took 3 years to iron out the R46's problems. I'm surprised one of the premier transit manufacturers may have put out a "lemon". Also somewhat surprising is the fact that the cars were tested over two years without finding this defect in them. This could take a while to iron out. An engineer is going to have to figure out what's causing this and how to prevent it. Or at least reassure CTA that the problem is not going to get worse. I think it's a big gamble now to put these on any busy lines. With 706 cars total coming this could turn out to be a real nightmare. Too bad they couldn't just go back to receiving 406 cars. These cars sound like there going to be a real headache.

[Busjack]

If this is the same problem then it's alot more major than the press indicates.

I would guess that it is somewhere in the middle of your two postions--certainly not aesthetic, but while affecting the integrity of the castings, being more of a Quality Control thing. Matt, who commented on the CTA Tattler, may have a better grasp of what it is, given that all CTA has given the rest of us to go on is what was in its press release. Apparently, according to CTA, it has something to do with the mold used to cast a wheel bearing housing.

At least, if QC is catching these, I hope what I said in the first sentence there is the case, i.e. that the bugs are worked out before any more are accepted. If that happens, there is no reason to go into shock.

[jtrosario]

If this is the same problem then it's alot more major than the press indicates. If I read your link correctly, it took 3 years to iron out the R46's problems. I'm surprised one of the premier transit manufacturers may have put out a "lemon". Also somewhat surprising is the fact that the cars were tested over two years without finding this defect in them. This could take a while to iron out. An engineer is going to have to figure out what's causing this and how to prevent it. Or at least reassure CTA that the problem is not going to get worse. I think it's a big gamble now to put these on any busy lines. With 706 cars total coming this could turn out to be a real nightmare. Too bad they couldn't just go back to receiving 406 cars. These cars sound like there going to be a real headache.

I originally thought that the symptoms mentioned before(edited) and noted by Amtrak41 were the only thing the NYCT's R46s and the CTA's 5000s had in common. Take a look at this(under "The end of Pullman"):

http://en.wikipedia....Pullman_Company

To recap, NYCT receives their R46's from Pullman-Standard(edited) from 1975-1978. Then, by 1982, the passenger car designs of Pullman-Standard are spun off into a separate company called Pullman Technology, Inc. In 1987, Bombardier purchases Pullman Technology to gain control of its designs and patents. It also notes that Pullman Technology, Inc, was/is a subsidiary of Bombardier. Also noted here:

http://us.bombardier...in_country.html

Funny, the above only mentions 406 cars going to the CTA. I guess their web page hasn't been updated for a while now.

[Busjack]

I originally thought that the symptoms mentioned before(edited) and noted by Amtrak41 were the only thing the NYCT's R46s and the CTA's 5000s had in common. Take a look at this(under "The end of Pullman"):

http://en.wikipedia....Pullman_Company

You are really going out on a limb here, assuming (1) they are the same problem, and (2) Bombardier is using a 35 year old unsuccessful design, of course, in addition to the well known fact that Wikipedia is not a source. Maybe you should tell LA that all NABIs are defective.

Let's face it, unless you are the QC inspector in Plattsburg, you don't know what is the nature of this problem, and, based on recent trends in this forum, the actual QC inspector would not be posting here.

[jtrosario]

You are really going out on a limb here, assuming (1) they are the same problem, and (2) Bombardier is using a 35 year old unsuccessful design, of course, in addition to the well known fact that Wikipedia is not a source. Maybe you should tell LA that all NABIs are defective.

Let's face it, unless you are the QC inspector in Plattsburg, you don't know what is the nature of this problem, and, based on recent trends in this forum, the actual QC inspector would not be posting here.

Thanks for the reality check and for adding the "Let's face it..." paragraph after your original post. The point of Bombardier getting it's designs and patents from Pullman is still on Bombardier's website. BTW, I'm not assuming anything, especially points 1 and 2 mentioned, and certainly didn't mean to offend anyone to the point of personal attacks. Please accept my apology, I am no expert, and only made this last post for anyone to read or look at either link for their own interest.

[cjk177]

I would guess that it is somewhere in the middle of your two postions--certainly not aesthetic, but while affecting the integrity of the castings, being more of a Quality Control thing. Matt, who commented on the CTA Tattler, may have a better grasp of what it is, given that all CTA has given the rest of us to go on is what was in its press release. Apparently, according to CTA, it has something to do with the mold used to cast a wheel bearing housing.

At least, if QC is catching these, I hope what I said in the first sentence there is the case, i.e. that the bugs are worked out before any more are accepted. If that happens, there is no reason to go into shock.

From the press release you can tell it's a problem with the raw metal pieces supplied to make the finished housings. Any reasonable quality management system would require that they stop using any similar parts (same supplier or process) until the root cause is found and fixed or a new supplier is found that can meet the quality requirements. I would agree that this is an indicator that QC is working and they are willing to address issues proactively.