More Bus Moves

[Busjack]

13 minutes ago, BusHunter said:

But the 64,000 question is. Is it to replace all of them?

Let me refer you back to the 2016 budget, page 70, which says:

Over the next five years, as part of the CTA’s bus modernization plan, CTA will invest $23.9 million to complete the purchase of 425 new forty-foot clean diesel buses.... In addition, FY 2016-2020 funding of $22 million will support the purchase of up to 50 electric or clean diesel buses.The electric buses offer the CTA annual net savings in fuel costs for each electric bus, and over the expected 12-year lifespan a total savings of $300,000 per bus when compared to existing diesel buses at 12 years or older.Funding in FY 2019-2020 of $25.7 million will begin the replacement of New Flyer buses that entered service between FY 2004-2007

Aside from the 50 buses, and the previously noted error in the NF dates, there is nothing mentioned there about replacing Nova buses by, say, the FY2019-2020 budget. It isn't like Pace, which has 6 Orion VIs that are newer than the 2003 NABIs.

Maybe FG keeps the Nova equivalent of bus 301, but that's about it.

[jajuan]

4 hours ago, Busjack said:

Probably correct. I'm surprised it hasn't happened yet, but maybe the testing on 79th has something to do with it.

My and a few others' observations of 701 being seen shadowing buses on high length routes before the current operations on 79th may also play a factor. 

3 hours ago, Busjack said:

Let me refer you back to the 2016 budget, page 70, which says:

Over the next five years, as part of the CTA’s bus modernization plan, CTA will invest $23.9 million to complete the purchase of 425 new forty-foot clean diesel buses.... In addition, FY 2016-2020 funding of $22 million will support the purchase of up to 50 electric or clean diesel buses.The electric buses offer the CTA annual net savings in fuel costs for each electric bus, and over the expected 12-year lifespan a total savings of $300,000 per bus when compared to existing diesel buses at 12 years or older.Funding in FY 2019-2020 of $25.7 million will begin the replacement of New Flyer buses that entered service between FY 2004-2007

Aside from the 50 buses, and the previously noted error in the NF dates, there is nothing mentioned there about replacing Nova buses by, say, the FY2019-2020 budget. It isn't like Pace, which has 6 Orion VIs that are newer than the 2003 NABIs.

Maybe FG keeps the Nova equivalent of bus 301, but that's about it.

Hmmm up to 50 electric or clean diesels buses. The way that's worded it doesn't seem to stop the possibility of getting further buses from 8325-49 if necessary and still getting additional electrics beyond 700 and 701 It's already been noted that FG is probably still sitting on 70-100 too many 6400s for the possibility of salvaging parts for the best operating left in the series. Busjack has noted that if nothing else, we do know for sure at least enough 6400s have to survive long enough to justify CTA receiving the CMAQ grant for the solid 27 electric buses announced. I haven't seen him draw too many conclusions beyond that on that front. In fact, I believe that's all I've seen him say on that front. So I'm really not getting the debate over this that you're having with him BH.

EDIT: To clarity as I did for Busjack in the 6400s thread, you both agree that 8325-49 may need to be procured as well to help knock off operable 6400s outside of those that need to stick around until the arrival of the electrics. This is why I don't get the continued debate between you two. 

[XE NewFlyer]

who sent 1417 on the 54B?

[Sam92]

1 minute ago, XE NewFlyer said:

who sent 1417 on the 54B?

Idk but a lot of weird sightings.  Still got FG 1000's on NP routes yet 1749, 1881 and like 5 more flyers in that range have popped up on FG routes 

[BusHunter]

7 hours ago, jajuan said:

My and a few others' observations of 701 being seen shadowing buses on high length routes before the current operations on 79th may also play a factor. 

Hmmm up to 50 electric or clean diesels buses. The way that's worded it doesn't seem to stop the possibility of getting further buses from 8325-49 if necessary and still getting additional electrics beyond 700 and 701 It's already been noted that FG is probably still sitting on 70-100 too many 6400s for the possibility of salvaging parts for the best operating left in the series. Busjack has noted that if nothing else, we do know for sure at least enough 6400s have to survive long enough to justify CTA receiving the CMAQ grant for the solid 27 electric buses announced. I haven't seen him draw too many conclusions beyond that on that front. In fact, I believe that's all I've seen him say on that front. So I'm really not getting the debate over this that you're having with him BH.

EDIT: To clarity as I did for Busjack in the 6400s thread, you both agree that 8325-49 may need to be procured as well to help knock off operable 6400s outside of those that need to stick around until the arrival of the electrics. This is why I don't get the continued debate between you two. 

This electric contract sounds kind of fishy, up to 50 electrics. I wonder if possibly CTA is looking into 50 electrics and that's why the nova contract stops short? Really though they would need the max on both the nova and electric contracts to eliminate the #6400's. Don't ask me where they get the money though.

[XE NewFlyer]

4004 on the 19 as 103rd run why

[cta5658]

1 hour ago, XE NewFlyer said:

4004 on the 19 as 103rd run why

Prediction: Extra (aka Fill In run)

[sw4400]

13 hours ago, Busjack said:

Let me refer you back to the 2016 budget, page 70, which says:

Over the next five years, as part of the CTA’s bus modernization plan, CTA will invest $23.9 million to complete the purchase of 425 new forty-foot clean diesel buses.... In addition, FY 2016-2020 funding of $22 million will support the purchase of up to 50 electric or clean diesel buses.The electric buses offer the CTA annual net savings in fuel costs for each electric bus, and over the expected 12-year lifespan a total savings of $300,000 per bus when compared to existing diesel buses at 12 years or older.Funding in FY 2019-2020 of $25.7 million will begin the replacement of New Flyer buses that entered service between FY 2006-2009

Aside from the 50 buses, and the previously noted error in the NF dates, there is nothing mentioned there about replacing Nova buses by, say, the FY2019-2020 budget. It isn't like Pace, which has 6 Orion VIs that are newer than the 2003 NABIs.

Maybe FG keeps the Nova equivalent of bus 301, but that's about it.

I don't know why CTA originally said FY 2004-2007..... they should know the age of the fleets. If not, look at the manufacturers info.

[Busjack]

7 hours ago, sw4400 said:

I don't know why CTA originally said FY 2004-2007..... they should know the age of the fleets. If not, look at the manufacturers info.

This ain't Pace.

[jajuan]

12 hours ago, sw4400 said:

I don't know why CTA originally said FY 2004-2007..... they should know the age of the fleets. If not, look at the manufacturers info.

Besides, you're late. I noted that error about a week or two ago already.

[sw4400]

10 hours ago, jajuan said:

Besides, you're late. I noted that error about a week or two ago already.

  

 

[jajuan]

12 hours ago, sw4400 said:

  

 

[Sam92]

Not really a bus move but whoever mentioned artics on western has been heard cause I've been seeing them on pm runs last few nights.  Same on the 29 state 

[Busjack]

12 minutes ago, Sam92 said:

Not really a bus move but whoever mentioned artics on western has been heard cause I've been seeing them on pm runs last few nights.

There were occasional ones from NP since when it got it from Archer. Probably a bit early for Lane Tech, though.

[Sam92]

37 minutes ago, Busjack said:

There were occasional ones from NP since when it got it from Archer. Probably a bit early for Lane Tech, though.

Yeah but someone was mentioning the artics that were supposed to be regularly scheduled as part of decrowding.  They haven't been seen for a good while till recently and its been around the same time so pretty consistent. 

[jajuan]

15 hours ago, Sam92 said:

Not really a bus move but whoever mentioned artics on western has been heard cause I've been seeing them on pm runs last few nights.  Same on the 29 state 

On both local and express Sam? I would imagine that now that X49 has been reinstated since they first said that they'd put a few artics on Western (of course through NP) that that standard they set would also extend to a couple of NP runs on X49 as well. And then that also would suggest in either case that NP would need to get artics TSP ready also for when Western gets TSP by year's end.

[i8itall4u]

On ‎8‎/‎16‎/‎2016 at 9:26 PM, Sam92 said:

Idk but a lot of weird sightings.  Still got FG 1000's on NP routes yet 1749, 1881 and like 5 more flyers in that range have popped up on FG routes 

Can someone explain the reason(s) why FG and NP or any other garages would share, for example, 5 buses/operators? 5 loaned and 5 borrowed equals a 0 gain/loss.

[ajm522]

54 minutes ago, i8itall4u said:

Can someone explain the reason(s) why FG and NP or any other garages would share, for example, 5 buses/operators? 5 loaned and 5 borrowed equals a 0 gain/loss.

There are alot of reasons why garages share/loan busses. From shortage of operable buses to a need for extra service beyond capacity of one particular garage. 

[jajuan]

1 hour ago, ajm522 said:

There are alot of reasons why garages share/loan busses. From shortage of operable buses to a need for extra service beyond capacity of one particular garage. 

I think what he was getting at was why didn't NP just send back FG's five buses that were loaned to it rather than loaning out a similar number of buses to FG.

[ajm522]

33 minutes ago, jajuan said:

I think what he was getting at was why didn't NP just send back FG's five buses that were loaned to it rather than loaning out a similar number of buses to FG.

Oh thank you that makes sense. I'm sure there is a reason. 

[Busjack]

2 hours ago, ajm522 said:

Oh thank you that makes sense. I'm sure there is a reason. 

I don't know, but could it be related to interlining and what Andre said the scheduling software could do?

[Sam92]

8 hours ago, jajuan said:

On both local and express Sam? I would imagine that now that X49 has been reinstated since they first said that they'd put a few artics on Western (of course through NP) that that standard they set would also extend to a couple of NP runs on X49 as well. And then that also would suggest in either case that NP would need to get artics TSP ready also for when Western gets TSP by year's end.

Idk every time I catch it it's like 9 or 10 but it's got a run number of a PM pullout

[patman119]

8234 is on the 151 right now.

[patman119]

2 minutes ago, patman119 said:

8234 is on the 151 right now.

And 8244 is as well.

[andrethebusman]

Air & Water show.