• M9 and M9A Procurement & Acceptance

  • Discussion of the past and present operations of the Long Island Rail Road.
Discussion of the past and present operations of the Long Island Rail Road.

Moderator: Liquidcamphor

  by DutchRailnut
here is interesting tidbit:

"Buy America Act"- what the requirements for European suppliers?

We plan to issue two RFPs simultaneously- an RFP for a base order of 76 Cars with options
for up to 600 additional Cars (the M-9), and an RFP for 160 Cars (the M-9A). The M-9 will be
governed by NYS terms and conditions, and the M-9A by FTA required terms and conditions.
Carbuilders may bid on either or both; the Cars will be required to be interoperable.
The rolling stock provisions of Buy America (see 49 CFR 661.11) will apply to M-9A.
Generally, these regulations require 60% of the cost of all components to be produced in the
US. Final assembly must be in the US and all iron, steel and manufactured parts must be
produced in the US. Buy America will not apply to M-9. With respect to M-9, the Railroads
will seek to maximize the NYS content of the Cars, in accordance with NYS law.
  by R36 Combine Coach
In the case of Bombardier, the Plattsburgh plant can now complete full assembly of cars, including car shells on site, as now with the CTA 5000s. So a full cart can be made in NY State.
  by MattAmity90
So I'm guessing that the M9 cars will be capable of being matched up with the M7s, just like the M1s and M3s?
  by DutchRailnut
read the RFP's !! they only need to be compatible for non revenue and rescue moves.
  by Fan Railer
DutchRailnut wrote:read the RFP's !! they only need to be compatible for non revenue and rescue moves.
Appearances should still be quite similar though, am I correct?
  by DutchRailnut
not much you can do with a maximized 85 foot box that has to seat 120 passengers, and has to have a walk through end,
so passengers can get from car to car, It sure wound not look like a TGV or Shinkansen ;-)
  by Tommy Meehan
There is an update in the MTA report on the July meeting (there is no meeting in August) of the Metro-North and Long Island Committees.

Seven carbuilding firms attended the M-9 pre-bid conference in June. The railroad is moving ahead with the request for proposals only for 76 M-9 cars. These are planned as replacements for M-3s.

The federally funded M-9A cars are specifically for the East Side Access project. Requests for proposals for these cars are being postponed for one year because of the updated ESA schedule.

The link is below. The very brief comment is on page 12.

http://www.mta.info/mta/news/books/pdf/ ... _MNRLI.pdf

  by DutchRailnut
Think there is confusion at MTA board again, a M-9a would be a MNCR car and have nothing to do with LIRR or ESA.
  by Tommy Meehan
I thought that too but that is what LIRR is calling them. Apparently there will be three separate procurements. One for the M-9s for M-3 replacements paid out of the MTA capital budget. Another for ESA cars paid for (at least in part) with federal funds. Then the cars designed for Metro-North use.

Maybe the Metro-North cars will be designated M-9B?
  by DutchRailnut
nope, remember this is MTA board, those people could not manage a hotdog cart without getting confused about Mustard, Ketchup, Relish
  by LongIslandTool
The cars ordered for East Side Access will differ from the LIRR cars in several ways. There is still consideration being given to forming a new operating authority to run trains into and out of Grand Central. Similar to the NYAR agreement, a non-union entity would be formed to operate over LIRR tracks.

Last month the LIRR has also formed an agreement with and obtained permission from the UTU (the trainmens' union) to proceed with testing a "belt-pack" remote control for yard switching. As on many railroads, the yard conductor would then control an unmanned yard switcher. There has been some recent talk of equipping M-9 acquisitions with this remote capability to permit yard switching by conductors without requiring an engineer.

This is all in the talking stage, but without opposition from the UTU, this is expected to come into its own eventually.
  by Tommy Meehan
DutchRailnut wrote:nope, remember this is MTA board...
The person quoted in the report is actually your friend Helena Williams.

It's not that big a deal, we'll all find out eventually.

I wonder if Metro-North would adopt the remote control feature on their M-9s?

Did anyone notice the request for proposals specified the M-9s be able to MU with M-7s?
  by DutchRailnut
Due to cost of crew Facilities we are working on remote train control, so Engineers can telecommute a train to GCT and Back, instead of facilities/ no meals/ rest facilities ,
each engineer would be provided with a dedicated computer and guaranteed Internet line for Locomotive control.
no more deadman /safety glasses / cab heat etc, use your own coffee / lunch etc at home..
  by Tommy Meehan
Dutch I know you're kidding but I wouldn't circulate that idea too much. :)

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 59