jajuan Posted April 5, 2008 Author Report Share Posted April 5, 2008 It seems that CTA's Americanas were the only ones in U.S. were not accessible, because the ones in New Orleans RTA, Seattles, San Diego MTS, and Charlotte CATS were accessible. Yes, I had noticed that detail too. If they had been, they really could have been the predominant model in the CTA fleet as CTA management has been said to have wanted at the time before the local disability groups were successful in their ADA lawsuit against the CTA. I remember the news stories regarding the final rulings in that suit. It played a big role in CTA acquiring the TMCs and 5300s in 1991 and all bus orders from then on being for accessible buses. Quick sidenote, as far as I know at least Seattle was the only system to go wiith the odd choice of a model having a rear mirror. To me, it just didn't fit the overall character of an Americana to have one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anonymous Guy Posted April 5, 2008 Report Share Posted April 5, 2008 Quick sidenote, as far as I know at least Seattle was the only system to go wiith the odd choice of a model having a rear mirror. To me, it just didn't fit the overall character of an Americana to have one. Pictured: MEHVA preserved Americana. I thought the rear-view windows looked fine. Then again, KCM used to have rear-view windows on everything. The New Flyer low floors seem to have broken that trend. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted April 5, 2008 Report Share Posted April 5, 2008 It seems that CTA's Americanas were the only ones in U.S. were not accessible, because the ones in New Orleans RTA, Seattles, San Diego MTS, and Charlotte CATS were accessible. San Diego MTS never owned any Americanas. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Busjack Posted April 5, 2008 Report Share Posted April 5, 2008 Yes, I had noticed that detail too. If they had been, they really could have been the predominant model in the CTA fleet as CTA management has been said to have wanted at the time before the local disability groups were successful in their ADA lawsuit against the CTA. I remember the news stories regarding the final rulings in that suit. It played a big role in CTA acquiring the TMCs and 5300s in 1991 and all bus orders from then on being for accessible buses. Quick sidenote, as far as I know at least Seattle was the only system to go wiith the odd choice of a model having a rear mirror. To me, it just didn't fit the overall character of an Americana to have one.Two corrections: While you are correct that the lawsuits held up CTA bus procurements until lifts were mandated by the 1990 ADA and then CTA had no choice, by then MAN had closed its North Carolina assembly facility for economic reasons (German parts became too expensive). Obviously, the litigation was based on something other than the ADA, which passed in 1990 (see Krambles, CTA at 45, page 53). Also, in 1987 MAN was willing to meet the CTA specification, including for a rear window. The problem was that the other bus manufacturers protested a specification that seemed slanted in favor of one supplier, and the FTA upheld the protest, except that it said CTA was justified in requiring the lift at the front, hence the development of the RTS-08. But you are correct that if CTA had originally had its way, the 4400s would have been MANs delivered in about 1988. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jajuan Posted April 5, 2008 Author Report Share Posted April 5, 2008 Two corrections: While you are correct that the lawsuits held up CTA bus procurements until lifts were mandated by the 1990 ADA and then CTA had no choice, by then MAN had closed its North Carolina assembly facility for economic reasons (German parts became too expensive). Obviously, the litigation was based on something other than the ADA, which passed in 1990 (see Krambles, CTA at 45, page 53). Also, in 1987 MAN was willing to meet the CTA specification, including for a rear window. The problem was that the other bus manufacturers protested a specification that seemed slanted in favor of one supplier, and the FTA upheld the protest, except that it said CTA was justified in requiring the lift at the front, hence the development of the RTS-08. But you are correct that if CTA had originally had its way, the 4400s would have been MANs delivered in about 1988. Thanks for the info Busjack. I knew about the money problems with MAN, I just couldn't remember whether they pulled out of N. Carolina in the 80s or 90s. As for the litigation, that's what I was referring to in terms of it played a role in CTA's subsequent bus orders after the Americanas. Their success came in delaying CTA procurements long enough to have no choice in accessibility once ADA passed. Didn't realize the specifications later called for a rear window. That seems kind of ironic now with roughly 75% of today's revenue service buses having no rear window. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tamir4317 Posted April 9, 2008 Report Share Posted April 9, 2008 I wish the New Flyers would sound like this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7UPTOdwGE7c...feature=related It has a MAN-esque transmission. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.