NABIs Pulled from Service

[Busjack]

...

Not knocking NOVA Bus, they make good 40' buses, but the CTA got burned by NABI in 2003, which was also fairly new to the articulated market.

Except it has been noted that Nova supplied artics to NY MTA for the SBS, and has an order for 153 artics for TTC.

That's a heck of a lot more experience than CTA being the only customer of the 60LFW.

I put the odds at 50-50. Maybe 51-49 Nova.

[jajuan]

Except it has been noted that Nova supplied artics to NY MTA for the SBS, and has an order for 153 artics for TTC.

That's a heck of a lot more experience than CTA being the only customer of the 60LFW.

I put the odds at 50-50. Maybe 51-49 Nova.

Exactly. So sorry sw, it can't be said that NF has this in the bag. Some on here were quick to say NF had it in the bag for the 40 foot portion of that RFP and CTA ended up choosing Nova.

[jajuan]

I don't think renardo was suggesting that, only that they could have been rebuilt in 2009....except CTA determined that they couldn't, at least economically.

EIther way once the CTA pulled them, it was pretty much a given that CTA was determined that the NABIs weren't coming back if Huberman negotiating with the feds months before they actually got pulled is any indication.

[Busjack]

Exactly. So sorry sw, it can't be said that NF has this in the bag. Some on here were quick to say NF had it in the bag for the 40 foot portion of that RFP and CTA ended up choosing Nova.

Not to forget the 29-801, 30-801, 31-801 and 32-801 series of Nova artics in Montreal, on the list See pointed out.

...which I forgot yesterday.

[jajuan]

Not to forget the 29-801, 30-801, 31-801 and 32-801 series of Nova artics in Montreal, on the list See pointed out.

...which I forgot yesterday.

I thought there was another Canadian big city that had artics from Nova. But that still pretty much cements the possibility that NF doesn't have this in the bag as thought.

[Busjack]

I thought there was another Canadian big city that had artics from Nova. But that still pretty much cements the possibility that NF doesn't have this in the bag as thought.

As predictable, cptdb wiki has a list.

[jajuan]

As predictable, cptdb wiki has a list.

A list which shows that, even though wikis get tricky when it comes to accuracy (as evidenced by that wiki stating the Allison transmission 1000s are 1830-2029 when actually that breakdown is 1930-2029 if I'm not mistaken. Looks like this wiki took Bill V.'s break down of the options where he has 1830-2029 being the final option to incorrectly mean that 1830-1929 are included in the Allison NFs), Nova still has a lot more experience with artics even here in the United States than sw was giving them credit.

[renardo870]

I don't think renardo was suggesting that, only that they could have been rebuilt in 2009....except CTA determined that they couldn't, at least economically.

That is what I was saying. In 2009, when the buses became a problem, rebuild or save what could have been saved at that time. I mean, 225 buses not on the street all at once isn't something one wouldn't notice. But the 6000s were mothballed after the 2010 cuts so go figure.

[Busjack]

That is what I was saying. In 2009, when the buses became a problem, rebuild or save what could have been saved at that time. I mean, 225 buses not on the street all at once isn't something one wouldn't notice. But the 6000s were mothballed after the 2010 cuts so go figure.

It was noticed, except it was said at the time "CTA is putting new accordion buses on the street, and those buses are not by the same manufacturer."

[jajuan]

It was noticed, except it was said at the time "CTA is putting new accordion buses on the street, and those buses are not by the same manufacturer."

Which brings up your point that Huberman stated the 4000s were for some ridiculous 3 for 4 substitution when he pretty much knew he would need them to replace the 7500s.

[RailBus63]

Which makes me wonder why they agreed to a multi year repayment. This would give NABI a way to weasal out of the deal. Wouldn't a pay it all plan be fradulent if they then turned around and said well we're bankrupt?

The CTA likely agreed to a multiyear payment because NABI probably wouldn't agree to a full payment up front, and the authority did not want to risk NABI walking away from the deal - there was always the chance that CTA could lose the lawsuit and winding up with nothing.

[Busjack]

.... there was always the chance that CTA could lose the lawsuit and winding up with nothing.

That's always the legally necessary consideration for a settlement (or that CTA was giving up its lawsuit for money).

In fact, CTA theoretically could have been found liable for $13-15 million on NABI's original claim for the unpaid balance.

I have the feeling, though that NABI agreeing first to scrapping the buses* and then settling indicated that it realized it didn't have much of a chance. Still wonder what it is going to do against Detroit Diesel** and whether that litigation goes forward.

______________

*I mentioned to jajuan before that the agreement to scrap the buses was not relevant, but that was in the sense that it couldn't come up at trial if it had gone that far.

**There was the CTA claim against NABI that the engines clogged up, and NABI then brought in Detroit Diesel as a party to the suit.

[i8itall4u]

How many saw 7586 being towed by a heavy duty hooker at 20 mph, in the left nb lane of the Ryan locals at Pershing this morning? Why 20 you scream? Because the tow truck driver jacked up the front end of the articulated bus and surprise; the articulated joint was dragging on the pavement.

[Busjack]

How many saw 7586 being towed by a heavy duty hooker at 20 mph, in the left nb lane of the Ryan locals at Pershing this morning? Why 20 you scream? Because the tow truck driver jacked up the front end of the articulated bus and surprise; the articulated joint was dragging on the pavement.

Didn't see it, but the real question should have been why it wasn't on a flatbed.

[i8itall4u]

Didn't see it, but the real question should have been why it wasn't on a flatbed.

...and what scrap yard was it going to nb on the e-way? This was about 6:45am by the way.

[Busjack]

...and what scrap yard was it going to nb on the e-way? This was about 6:45am by the way.

There was speculation about that before. There appears to be one near Cermak and Morgan. Edit: If not there, somewhere near there.

[sw4400]

Didn't see it, but the real question should have been why it wasn't on a flatbed.

I don't think there is such a thing as a 60' flatbed. Or even a 40' one, otherwise I'm sure the CTA would have these as their tow vehicles rather than the wreckers they are using.

[Busjack]

I don't think there is such a thing as a 60' flatbed. Or even a 40' one, otherwise I'm sure the CTA would have these as their tow vehicles rather than the wreckers they are using.

The NABIs were delivered on flatbeds. There were pictures at the time, and that followed the stink about transporters driving Novas into questionable areas in Detroit, resulting then in the directive that deliveries be by flatbed. Apparently that was forgotten by the time the New Flyers were transported.

Also, apparently L cars are delivered on flatbed trucks.

I'm sure we would have heard it on the morning traffic report if the bus had split in two during the rush hour in the left of the local lanes.

[BusHunter]

I don't think there is such a thing as a 60' flatbed. Or even a 40' one, otherwise I'm sure the CTA would have these as their tow vehicles rather than the wreckers they are using.

The NABI's were delivered on flat bed trucks. They didn't drive those buses to Chicago. They probably don't really care how they get the buses to the junk yard, they are scrap anyway, but I don't know what they are doing to the highway!! Maybe they should've tried to float the rear.

[Busjack]

The NABI's were delivered on flat bed trucks. They didn't drive those buses to Chicago. They probably don't really care how they get the buses to the junk yard, they are scrap anyway, but I don't know what they are doing to the highway!! Maybe they should've tried to float the rear.

Usually the spec says that it is the scrapper's responsibility to load the bus on a flatbed. However, other than the news reports and the one agenda item on this contract, I don't recall the contract specifications ever having appeared on the procurement page.

Update: My last observation is also relevant to that we don't know to what scrap yard they are being hauled, although obviously not to Sims at 93rd and Ewing.