Series Consolidation: Penny-wise, but Pound Foolish.

[wordguy]

Since a number of regular posters have been critical of this plan, I thought that for whatever it's worth, I'd add my $0.02. Whoever came up with the idea seems to believe that money can be saved by reducing training time and inventory needs. Maybe so in the short term, but over the long run I believe that additional costs will outstrip any savings. Here's why:

No matter how reliable a series of bus might be overall, once the fleet begins to age, it'll become more expensive to maintain (as well as consume more fuel). So, imagine the situation at FG and Archer 4-5 years up the pike with all but a handful of their buses in their 12th year of service --- just like 74th Street now!

Aging buses will still be operating in base service 24/7 while much newer equipment at other garages will be idle. In addition to 74th Street today, this was the situation at NP and 103rd as well until their 1000s arrived. As everyone remembers, it was pretty disastrous. It seems to me that common sense would dictate that the oldest buses should be limited to peak-period service. In order for that to happen, the oldies would need to be redistributed throughout the system. Sure, training and inventory costs would be greater, but I just can't believe that the expense of over-using elderly buses wouldn't be a LOT greater,

especially considering the ever-escalating price of diesel fuel.

Did anyone actually do long-term budget projections? I sorta doubt it. If so, I'd have serious questions about their assumptions.

Series consolidation would pose another problem, too. As riding patterns change, so do equipment needs at each garage. Buses often need to be reassigned to adjust to the changes. With a few different series at each garage, it would be easy to make the needed changes. Remember what happened at the Archer barn after 3/23? Optimas were filling AM rush-hour runs on Archer Avenue because there was a shortage of Novas. So, because Archer no longer had NFs, there were only two other garages that could give Archer the needed Novas. Fortunately, one of them, 77th St., was able to spare a few. It makes no sense to concentrate a series as large as the Novas at only two barns (assuming that the CTA follows through with the plan).

What's the solution? Easy! As deliveries continue, distribute the 40-foot NFs throughout the system. Do the same with the surviving 6000s, limiting their service to peak periods. Every garage except NP should still have plenty of operators and mechanics who are Flxible-savvy. Keep the Novas at 77th St. in place and 're-exchange' Novas and NFs between Chicago Ave. and Archer. In the long-run, it might make sense to send some Novas to other garages as well since, for the next several years there'll probably still be well over 450 of them.

Well, I've said my piece. Any thoughts?

[Busjack]

While the above comment makes sense, a few other things to throw in:

• This really doesn't seem to be a deterrent to bus swapping. Others noted that because Kedzie gets NF doesn't mean that its 4400s aren't shipped off to 103, instead of scrapped. There was BusHunter's theory that the real aim was to consolidate 4400s and install BusTracker elsewhere. If they were going to be thorough with the theory of fleet consolidation, 77th's Novas should have been set to FG.
  
• By getting 1213 buses in a period of a couple of years, CTA did not meet its goal of preventing the whole system from going to pot at once (not meant in the Joakim Noah sense ). The original idea, more recently repeated by Huberman, was to consistently get 150-175 new buses per year.* In effect, next year this time, there might be maybe 100 old (high floor) buses left. But when we get to 2018 (guess what folks, if there is an Olympics, that's two years after that ), the CTA bus fleet will be in the same condition as in 2005--at least 1213 buses that will be eligible for replacement in the next 3 years, under FTA guidelines (if they don't change).
  
• No matter what, 77 and NP seem to beat the hell out of its buses more than other areas.
  

I still believe that since Archer serves the 11th and 14th Wards, some politician will take care of it (at least if the current geographical arrangement holds up). You had real weak alderpersons around Englewood and Woodlawn (one of which was arrested for stuffing her pockets).

One thing we can agree on...CTA doesn't budget much in the future, as Doomsday threats proved. Maybe they are getting a little better, such as with their projections that the hybrids pay maybe half for themselves.

___________

*The only time that was implemented was when there was the gap in deliveries between 6708 and 6709, which was the start of the 2002 option.

[BusHunter]

While the above comment makes sense, a few other things to throw in:

[*]This really doesn't seem to be a deterrent to bus swapping. Others noted that because Kedzie gets NF doesn't mean that its 4400s aren't shipped off to 103, instead of scrapped. There was BusHunter's theory that the real aim was to consolidate 4400s and install BusTracker elsewhere. If they were going to be thorough with the theory of fleet consolidation, 77th's Novas should have been set to FG.

While talking of theories, something else to throw in. The #6000's at FG were completed (as I stated before somewhere else on here) when all this consolidation Nova talk came to light. I think (but cannot prove) that the reason FG never got the #6400's from 77th was because the #6000's there had already been completed for Bustracker so the buses stayed put. It's sort of fishy to me. Remember the other day when I said that only A and F would be the Garages equipped for BusTracker without the consolidation plan. If you tap into their resources by making them swap, you can effectively spread around the workable Bustracker buses to other Garages that were weak with Bustracker equipment. It seems to me the manager at FG has convinced headquarters that everything was alright up there. So they kept there buses. You know that when the next round of NF's hit a new garage, the #6000's that could be transferred to 77th would most likely only be there until the artics arrive. 77th I think, has to go live before getting these artics so to grease the wheels of progress why not do that. It will effectively buy you a few months. If you start the artics delivering to NP, you can follow up Kedzie, 77th, possibly chicago and then implement them (NP) with Bustracker. Regardless though I believe 103rd and Np will be waiting a while to start the tracker due to a lack of workable buses. At least 200 more NF's 40's or 60's need to be delivered to fill those voids. They could still be on schedule though, because by the time you hit three garages with Bustracker, that's 3 months. That's more than enough time to start up one of those two garages at least by then.

[wordguy]

While the above comment makes sense, a few other things to throw in:

[*]This really doesn't seem to be a deterrent to bus swapping. Others noted that because Kedzie gets NF doesn't mean that its 4400s aren't shipped off to 103, instead of scrapped. There was BusHunter's theory that the real aim was to consolidate 4400s and install BusTracker elsewhere. If they were going to be thorough with the theory of fleet consolidation, 77th's Novas should have been set to FG.

It sure hasn't! In fact, since the arrival of the earliest 1000s, many older buses have been reassigned multiple times. (Two examples: #5743 from Archer to 77th to 103rd to Chicago Ave; #5381 from 77th to Chicago to Kedzie and back to Chicago. The list goes on ....

[*]By getting 1213 buses in a period of a couple of years, CTA did not meet its goal of preventing the whole system from going to pot at once (not meant in the Joakim Noah sense ). The original idea, more recently repeated by Huberman, was to consistently get 150-175 new buses per year.* In effect, next year this time, there might be maybe 100 old (high floor) buses left. But when we get to 2018 (guess what folks, if there is an Olympics, that's two years after that ), the CTA bus fleet will be in the same condition as in 2005--at least 1213 buses that will be eligible for replacement in the next 3 years, under FTA guidelines (if they don't change).

Replacing 150-175 buses a year would be ideal. However, at least since the early '70s, the CTA has followed a pattern of purchasing large numbers of buses in a short period of time followed by long, nearly fallow stretches. Between late '72 and early '77, 1870 GMC 'Fishbowls' were delivered. As a result, from the mid '80s until the early '90s, the CTA was burdened with a massive number of buses 'aging out' at the same time. (Disclosure: I was a CTA bus operator myself between '69 and '75). Then, in a span of less than a year, late '90 through mid '91, the CTA received 961 new buses. So, as Busjack illustrated, a similar 'massive aging out' recurred recently. Yep, it could well happen again about eight or ten years up the pike. (Olympics? I dunno! )

One thing we can agree on...CTA doesn't budget much in the future, as Doomsday threats proved. Maybe they are getting a little better, such as with their projections that the hybrids pay maybe half for themselves.

Could be, but considering this latest Super-Station/Airport Express fiasco, I wouldn't hold my breath. :o

[Busjack]

Could be, but considering this latest Super-Station/Airport Express fiasco, I wouldn't hold my breath.

Yep, but they are putting that on Kruesi's watch. Easy to do. And they are still saying that it is cheaper than excavating under the now existing buildings.

[jajuan]

Yep, but they are putting that on Kruesi's watch. Easy to do. And they are still saying that it is cheaper than excavating under the now existing buildings.

Speaking of this fiasco with the Superstation underneath Block 37, Busjack didn't you actually beat the news media to the punch about this at least a couple months ago? At that time it was still at the stage of being rumor.