|
|
Post by bluelineshawn on Jun 13, 2007 9:15:21 GMT -8
Metro is excersizing its option with Breda for the additional 50-car order. It looks like they are planning on replacing the entire blue line fleet. They say that the current cars are so outdated that a mid-life overhaul would cost as much as a new car. Yet they ARE planning on $202 million mid-life overhaul of the red line cars...go figure?!? Anyway according to the memo 34 of the new cars will be for the blue line and 16 will be for Expo. The cars will be mostly purchased in 2009 and 2010. |
|
|
|
Post by Tony Fernandez on Jun 13, 2007 11:18:54 GMT -8
I'm sure that Metro is doing whatever is cheapest; at least I hope so.
|
|
|
|
Post by bluelineshawn on Jun 13, 2007 13:04:53 GMT -8
I'm sure that Metro is doing whatever is cheapest; at least I hope so. They're doing the most cost effective plan for the blue line. I get the impression that it would be slightly cheaper to refurbish the cars, but at only slightly cheaper it wouldn't make any sense. I'm sure that some similar logic must apply for the red line, but we should be just about be able to get all new cars for $202 million. The light rail cars are $3.5 million each. I would think that new red line cars would be about half that. Maybe that assumption is where I'm off the mark. |
|
|
|
Post by Elson on Sept 4, 2007 0:12:36 GMT -8
The Red Line cars have a longer lifespan, in part because the heavy rail vehicles are made more durably than LRVs, and also that they are not as exposed to the elements.
|
|
|
|
Post by bluelineshawn on Sept 4, 2007 12:43:53 GMT -8
I wouldn't say that they're more durable when they're going to spend as much on the overhaul as they would on an entirely new fleet. Maybe my math is off...
|
|
|
|
Post by Elson on Sept 4, 2007 14:03:06 GMT -8
I wouldn't say that they're more durable when they're going to spend as much on the overhaul as they would on an entirely new fleet. Maybe my math is off... Your math is not off, but your estimation is wrong. Heavy Rail cars cost *at least* the equivalent amount as LRVs. Dunno where you got that silly idea that they cost "half as much" as LRVs. Maybe an beat-up used NYC R-44 purchased on E-bay would cost that amount, LOL. And don't forget that all heavy rail cars come in permanently-connected pairs of two unit sets, so the price of the set is actually twice the price. There are 108 units of LRVs in the subway fleet. $202 million into 108 is about $1.8 million each. And don't forget inflation -- our current Red Line vehicles cost $1.5 million each -- in early 1990s dollars, that is. In terms of perspective, the P865 Nippon Sharyo cars on the Blue Line cost $1.2 million in late-1980s dollars and the P2000 Siemens cars on the Green and Gold lines cost $2 million in mid-1990s dollars. New heavy rail vehicles, per unit, would cost over $3 million today. To replace the entire 108-car fleet would cost at least $324 million. |
|
|
|
Post by bluelineshawn on Sept 4, 2007 16:12:17 GMT -8
There are 108 units of LRVs in the subway fleet. $202 million into 108 is about $1.8 million each.You're mixing them up. The $202 million is for 104 HRV's. So 104 into 202 is $1.9 million each that we are spending on the overhaul. We are buying 50 additional LRV's (on top of the original 50 car order) for $174.5 million or $3.5 million each. My understanding has been that LRV's are on average more expensive than HRV's. Mainly because all LRV's come with operators cabs (and the associated control/electrical equipment) at both ends where our HRV's only need one cab and half of them don't even need that. According to nycsubway.org NYCT's current order of R160's cost about $1.5 million each. It's not an apples to apples comparison with us, but our new HRV's should cost closer to the R160's than to an LRV. For reference some differences between the R160 order and our potential order would include: - 60 ft vs. 75 ft cars - 1,000+ cars ordered versus 100+ - longer trains and therefore a lower percentage of cars with operators cabs - fewer seats - conductors cab vs. no conductor required
|
|
|
|
Post by Elson on Sept 4, 2007 17:32:43 GMT -8
There are 108 units of LRVs in the subway fleet. $202 million into 108 is about $1.8 million each.You're mixing them up. The $202 million is for 104 HRV's. So 104 into 202 is $1.9 million each that we are spending on the overhaul. We are buying 50 additional LRV's (on top of the original 50 car order) for $174.5 million or $3.5 million each. My understanding has been that LRV's are on average more expensive than HRV's. Mainly because all LRV's come with operators cabs (and the associated control/electrical equipment) at both ends where our HRV's only need one cab and half of them don't even need that. According to nycsubway.org NYCT's current order of R160's cost about $1.5 million each. It's not an apples to apples comparison with us, but our new HRV's should cost closer to the R160's than to an LRV. For reference some differences between the R160 order and our potential order would include: - 60 ft vs. 75 ft cars - 1,000+ cars ordered versus 100+ - longer trains and therefore a lower percentage of cars with operators cabs - fewer seats - conductors cab vs. no conductor required Typo there. Meant to say 108 heavy rail cars.. The $3.5 million LRVs are brand new product (P2550). If we put a bid out to design and build a brand new state of the art heavy rail vehicle they would cost *at least* that much. The majority of our subway cars were designed with late-1980s features. What's also interesting is that Metro has now relied on a single manufacturer (Breda) to supply both subway and LRV cars. |
|
|
|
Post by jejozwik on Jan 9, 2008 17:12:12 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by bluelineshawn on Jan 9, 2008 17:17:49 GMT -8
Thanks!
I had to update my personal metro bookmarks as well. I never made the switch to "metro" until the "mta" addresses stopped working.
|
|
