Here comes the next New Flyer option

[BusHunter]

Thought you guys might want to know this. Last night I saw #1630 at michigan/ontario heading west. It's destination sign said "Chicago my kind of town". It's interior lights were off and some guy was driving it in blue colored work clothes. It's run was signed to 103rd, but I forgot what run, maybe something like 528. I'm not really sure on that though. In other news #1627 was out on the #125 and #1629 was out on the #151 last night in service. It's good to see the next option starting this soon without a pause. They should really make some good headway now with the New Flyer deliveries.

[pace2322]

Yea, Just think about it. Within the next year we will be over run with boxes for buses. Its to bad that soon everything will look like a box.

[geneking7320]

Yea, Just think about it. Within the next year we will be over run with boxes for buses. Its to bad that soon everything will look like a box.

What you said made me think of the "Old Flyers" and MAN Americanas the CTA previously operated.

Those buses looked boxy also.

Gene King

[jajuan]

Personally I don't find anything wrong with the straight lines or angles of New Flyers and Americanas. That's a big reason why I like these newer Flyer models the CTA has been acquiring the last couple years. The lines remind me a lot of the the Americanas which for me were the CTA's best model of buses acquired. The NOVAs are cool but those curves in the front are too 'space age' sometimes for me. I've heard a few people describe them as spaceships on wheels.

I just find it interesting that if this is indeed the first bus of the next option, it would be going to 103rd instead of going to another garage. I would have thought that the next garage to get new equipment, whatever garage that may turn out to be, would start receiving its new buses with the beginning of Option 3 instead continuing to add to 103rd and/or North Park's Flyer count.

[Guest]

I guess we have to look at this thing realistically, this is the next generation of transit buses. As I stated before in past blogs as sad as it is for me too, the time of the high floor transit bus has past and a new era of low floor transit buses are now the norm. One city that still has a large fleet of high floor buses, Los Angeles. They will have high floor models for at least the next several years. Their high floors consist of Neoplan AN440s, TMC RTSs, New Flyer D40HF models. I really like L.A.s fleet of of NF D40HF buses, I wish Chicago had these models. The NF low floors arent too bad looking. It is the model that is fast becoming the preferred transit bus just as the GMC fishbowl was in the 60s and 70s.

BTW, I got hurt last week on the job so Im out of action from CFD and Pace for a few weeks!

[jajuan]

BTW, I got hurt last week on the job so Im out of action from CFD and Pace for a few weeks!

Sorry to hear about that I hope you get well soon. I won't have the benefit of reading about some of your insights on Pace operations for a while. Living in the city, they've been quite informative along with some of our other members who get to observe Pace operations on a regular basis.

As for our thread topic, I'm not totally opposed low-floor bus models because looking at it from the transit agencies point of view, there are some benefits to these buses such as the faster boarding times for wheelchairs. The limitation of front seats because of the front wheel wells can be a drag, and I will miss the sense of sitting 'high up' when along side a car. However, like you say it is the current tide of things today to have low-floor buses.

[Anonymous Guy]

What you said made me think of the "Old Flyers" and MAN Americanas the CTA previously operated.

Those buses looked boxy also.

Gene King

In my opinion, the "spiritual successor" to the MAN Americana's aesthetics is the Gillig Advantage:

[Busjack]

There seems to be mixing of the concepts of "low floor" and "flat faced box."

Most of the manufacturers have some sort of "Next Gen" "BRT" or "Redesigned" body style available. The question previously posed here was whether the new style was standard (apparently so in the case of Orion VIIs) or extra cost (in the case of New Flyer) and we know the local agencies won't spend more for style.

As far as high floor, there is the big NJ order from NABI. I have seen a picture around the web (this one from bustalk.info) that it will have a new front with projector headlights, but the rounded rectangle windows (instead of the flush ones), appearing to me to be a weird combination.

[jajuan]

In my opinion, the "spiritual successor" to the MAN Americana's aesthetics is the Gillig Advantage:

Yeah I can see that position. That's a cool picture. Because Chicago doesn't have any, the latest version of the Flyer in the CTA fleet is the closest thing to hold that spot.

[pace2322]

Low floor buses maybe ok for smaller places. But for towns like Chicago we dont need them all there are doing are takeing room away from loads. I hate haveing a low floor on a route like the 352. By the time u get to 147st going north thats it. Then u get call in for pass ups. How can u fit 30-40 more people when u are jam pack to the front? Also the ride on them are not that great. If u had one for eight hours then a high floor. Everone wolud know how much more there back doesnt hurt with the hight floor. Also u can see alot better on a high floor then a low floor. Thers something u may not see ahead of u that u may not see in a lowfloor.

[Guest]

Low floor buses maybe ok for smaller places. But for towns like Chicago we dont need them all there are doing are takeing room away from loads. I hate haveing a low floor on a route like the 352. By the time u get to 147st going north thats it. Then u get call in for pass ups. How can u fit 30-40 more people when u are jam pack to the front? Also the ride on them are not that great. If u had one for eight hours then a high floor. Everone wolud know how much more there back doesnt hurt with the hight floor. Also u can see alot better on a high floor then a low floor. Thers something u may not see ahead of u that u may not see in a lowfloor.

I can understand what your saying. When Im working the 326 Irving Pk. occasionally its assigned an Orion and a NABI but on some days there have been both morning runs assigned with NABIs and they can be back breakers. The Orion bus already broken in and the suspension is much better than the NABIs it isnt much of a problem but with the NABIs, many parts of the 326 are littered with potholes especially the Irving Park stretch in both directions which make using the NABIs a problem sometimes.

[Guest]

Sorry to hear about that I hope you get well soon. I won't have the benefit of reading about some of your insights on Pace operations for a while. Living in the city, they've been quite informative along with some of our other members who get to observe Pace operations on a regular basis.

As for our thread topic, I'm not totally opposed low-floor bus models because looking at it from the transit agencies point of view, there are some benefits to these buses such as the faster boarding times for wheelchairs. The limitation of front seats because of the front wheel wells can be a drag, and I will miss the sense of sitting 'high up' when along side a car. However, like you say it is the current tide of things today to have low-floor buses.

Thank you Jajuan for the kind thoughts I really appreciate it. I suffered a severe ankle sprain while on a call on those darn potholes. I later notified my supervisor at Academy about my injury and he tells me to just recover and call him when Im ready to come back.

Anyway, with regards to low floors I guess will take time to get used to. Im not totally used to them yet although a couple of models dont look too bad. This will raise a few eyebrows but I think the NABI 35 and 40ft models look pretty cool, they run ok when they want to. CTAs artics although we all know how bad they are from an operations point of view, from a design POV they actually look pretty good. They dont have such a low floor look to them. The Novas are ok as well. Im not crazy about the Gillig and Orion models, NF models are ok. CTAs newer buses look better without the a/c unit on top. When Im working the 606 we pass United Airlines headquarters on Algonquin Rd. and on occasion you will see their fleet of Neoplan low floors operating, they have both the older and newer 440 models. They look ok, not the best but there ok. Ive gotten a bit used to the NF models because as I stated before they have become a a very familiar bus around the U.S. and Canada. But of course as you say we have to look at a transit systems operating point of view. If I had to choose between a low floor lift and a high floor lift i would have to choose the LF because Im sure as weve all seen HF lifts can break down and sometimes theres no solution then the bus has to be taken out of service. With LF buses if the lift fails you just simply pull on a nylon tab and it comes out which saves us time and delays.

[jajuan]

Thank you Jajuan for the kind thoughts I really appreciate it. I suffered a severe ankle sprain while on a call on those darn potholes. I later notified my supervisor at Academy about my injury and he tells me to just recover and call him when Im ready to come back.

Anyway, with regards to low floors I guess will take time to get used to. Im not totally used to them yet although a couple of models dont look too bad. This will raise a few eyebrows but I think the NABI 35 and 40ft models look pretty cool, they run ok when they want to. CTAs artics although we all know how bad they are from an operations point of view, from a design POV they actually look pretty good. They dont have such a low floor look to them. The Novas are ok as well. Im not crazy about the Gillig and Orion models, NF models are ok. CTAs newer buses look better without the a/c unit on top. When Im working the 606 we pass United Airlines headquarters on Algonquin Rd. and on occasion you will see their fleet of Neoplan low floors operating, they have both the older and newer 440 models. They look ok, not the best but there ok. Ive gotten a bit used to the NF models because as I stated before they have become a a very familiar bus around the U.S. and Canada. But of course as you say we have to look at a transit systems operating point of view. If I had to choose between a low floor lift and a high floor lift i would have to choose the LF because Im sure as weve all seen HF lifts can break down and sometimes theres no solution then the bus has to be taken out of service. With LF buses if the lift fails you just simply pull on a nylon tab and it comes out which saves us time and delays.

Aesthetically speaking the a/c units remind me of 4041 and 4290 before the unit on 4290 was removed.

[Guest]

Aesthetically speaking the a/c units remind me of 4041 and 4290 before the unit on 4290 was removed.

I remember those MANs with the a/c units on top, Sutraks? Did they ever work? I dont recall. I drove that bus a couple times when I worked out of Kedzie and it didnt work but it made the bus look very bulky, #4041 had a paint job also done to it. I remember CTA displaying it at the roadeo one year.

[jajuan]

I remember those MANs with the a/c units on top, Sutraks? Did they ever work? I dont recall. I drove that bus a couple times when I worked out of Kedzie and it didnt work but it made the bus look very bulky, #4041 had a paint job also done to it. I remember CTA displaying it at the roadeo one year.

I don't recall them ever working. I remember first seeing 4290 and being surprised that it had the same unit as 4041. That year I saw it, the unit was removed later that summer. Yes 4041 had a couple different paint jobs outside the regular livery during its last years of service. I remember it being painted over sky blue with a few others one year for an Illinois State Lottery promotion. The final year or so it was painted over for a cultural event. I can't remember which one though.

[Anonymous Guy]

Yeah I can see that position. That's a cool picture. Because Chicago doesn't have any, the latest version of the Flyer in the CTA fleet is the closest thing to hold that spot.

Unfortunately, King County Metro doesn't have any Gillig Advantages either, which is a bummer, 'cause I loved the Americana's looks. They ended up replacing the Americanas with the ever-so-common New Flyer D40LFs.

[Busjack]

On Today's press release from CTA's Website, from the 2nd to last paragraph is self-explainatory.

All I have to say is Sunday will be a Historical moment.

What surprised me is that the Press Release said they were using carbon steel instead of stainless in the chassis. Unless something has changed in the steel industry (and this indicates that it hasn't) the reason why the standard bus spec called for stainless rather than carbon was that the Toronto (old) Flyers were rust buckets. I wonder if some brains decided on something that will fall apart before the end of its service life, or there is some additive to the steel to keep it from corroding.

At least they disclosed what some of the tweaks were.

[geneking7320]

Low floor buses maybe ok for smaller places. But for towns like Chicago we dont need them all there are doing are takeing room away from loads. I hate haveing a low floor on a route like the 352. By the time u get to 147st going north thats it. Then u get call in for pass ups. How can u fit 30-40 more people when u are jam pack to the front? Also the ride on them are not that great. If u had one for eight hours then a high floor. Everone wolud know how much more there back doesnt hurt with the hight floor. Also u can see alot better on a high floor then a low floor. Thers something u may not see ahead of u that u may not see in a lowfloor.

This is why I've advocated CTA considering moving to a "standard" bus of 45ft in length.

I think that would help make up capacity lost with 40ft low floor buses.

[BusHunter]

What surprised me is that the Press Release said they were using carbon steel instead of stainless in the chassis. Unless something has changed in the steel industry (and this indicates that it hasn't) the reason why the standard bus spec called for stainless rather than carbon was that the Toronto (old) Flyers were rust buckets. I wonder if some brains decided on something that will fall apart before the end of its service life, or there is some additive to the steel to keep it from corroding.

At least they disclosed what some of the tweaks were.

I totally agree with you Busjack. This is perhaps the first bonehead move of the Huberman administration. Switching to carbon steel is a recipe for failure. Why would he do this to such a good performing bus? It's good to save money, but cut too much and you will have junk for a fleet. Well I guess we know what New Flyer #1000's will retire first now. I hope this hasn't been done with the 60 footers on order. The NABI's may be junk, but at least they won't rust out. As far as an additive to the steel, nothing is better than the real thing. Has the additive proved to be better or does it even work? They probably raised a few eyebrows at New Flyer when they heard about this. If anyone knows about bus chassis it's New Flyer.

[sw4400]

What surprised me is that the Press Release said they were using carbon steel instead of stainless in the chassis.

What suprises me is Circle Seven's error and the fact you didn't notice it... He states that they mention the carbon steel use in the second to last paragraph, when it's actually the third paragraph into the Press Release. You're usually good at noticing the small errors, Busjack. :o

[Busjack]

What suprises me is Circle Seven's error and the fact you didn't notice it... He states that they mention the carbon steel use in the second to last paragraph, when it's actually the third paragraph into the Press Release. You're usually good at noticing the small errors, Busjack.

I moved Circle Seven's quote from another thread. It seemed like this thread became "I hate low floor buses" instead of "the next New Flyer option" and the quote was from the "Spring Picks" thread. However, the point I was trying to make was related to the option (if I was to dump on anyone, it would be for the subsequent reply in the Spring Picks thread saying about the same thing I did). His reference to the second to last paragraph (moving a route from 103rd to Kedzie) was relevant in the Spring Picks context.

I do remember that several years ago, you had picked up on the press release that the option could be stainless or carbon steel, and I pooh poohed that at the time, and we both ended up wrong.

As far as an additive to the steel, nothing is better than the real thing. Has the additive proved to be better or does it even work? They probably raised a few eyebrows at New Flyer when they heard about this. If anyone knows about bus chassis it's New Flyer.

My reference to additives goes back to that I worked in a steel mill open hearth lab for two years during college, but am not a metallurgist. Maybe the alloys in carbon steel make it better than it was (new cars don't rust as fast as they did 15 years ago, or maybe they use something like CorTen), but not being a metallurgist, I can't make that conclusion. However, since the common bus spec calls for stainless steel or an equivalent corrosion resistant frame, maybe they know something I don't, although I would have interpreted the specification as requiring stainless steel, aluminum (as in the Optimas), or plastic (Compobus).

As far as New Flyer "hearing about that," the link in sw's prior post indicates that New Flyer knew about it several years ago.

For that matter, will the announcement that the last 400 will have smaller engines redo the thinking about garage consolidation (some garages get 200 or so of 1629 and under, and others 200 or so of the last 400)? Who knows in this climate?

[busfan2847]

I totally agree with you Busjack. This is perhaps the first bonehead move of the Huberman administration. Switching to carbon steel is a recipe for failure. Why would he do this to such a good performing bus? It's good to save money, but cut too much and you will have junk for a fleet. Well I guess we know what New Flyer #1000's will retire first now. I hope this hasn't been done with the 60 footers on order. The NABI's may be junk, but at least they won't rust out. As far as an additive to the steel, nothing is better than the real thing. Has the additive proved to be better or does it even work? They probably raised a few eyebrows at New Flyer when they heard about this. If anyone knows about bus chassis it's New Flyer.

New Flyer supplies chassis in either steel :-

"Construction

In our standard low-floor models (30, 35, 40, and 60-foot), the chassis and frame are designed and constructed in either heavy-duty, semi-monocoque carbon or 100% stainless-steel. High-tensile steel plate and tubing make up the skeletal structure, with sealed aluminum panels covering the frame, protecting it and the shell underside from moisture and debris. All New Flyer buses are tested and proven to be engineered and constructed and to provide long service hours in extreme weather conditions."

[Busjack]

New Flyer supplies chassis in either steel :-

"Construction

In our standard low-floor models (30, 35, 40, and 60-foot), the chassis and frame are designed and constructed in either heavy-duty, semi-monocoque carbon or 100% stainless-steel. High-tensile steel plate and tubing make up the skeletal structure, with sealed aluminum panels covering the frame, protecting it and the shell underside from moisture and debris. All New Flyer buses are tested and proven to be engineered and constructed and to provide long service hours in extreme weather conditions."

Thanks. Googling, here's the link for that. However, if there is an accident puncturing the aluminum shell, then what? [Rhetorical question]

[jajuan]

New Flyer supplies chassis in either steel :-

"Construction

In our standard low-floor models (30, 35, 40, and 60-foot), the chassis and frame are designed and constructed in either heavy-duty, semi-monocoque carbon or 100% stainless-steel. High-tensile steel plate and tubing make up the skeletal structure, with sealed aluminum panels covering the frame, protecting it and the shell underside from moisture and debris. All New Flyer buses are tested and proven to be engineered and constructed and to provide long service hours in extreme weather conditions."

Someone has finally done one thing that Busjack has been saying there hasn't been enough of, state a reliable source for the information they give to support there position.