Goodbye NABI's

[Busjack]

That would translate to an estimated value of 4.5 million saved buying NABI. With these buses being more prohibitively expensive than their 40 foot counterparts, it would be harder to afford the purchase. I think that in looking for a good deal for a max amount of buses they were duped into buying these junks.

Resulting, assuming these numbers, of losing about $47 million (plus the additional maintenance cost mentioned by Rodriguez) to save $4.5 million. As Senator Dirksen said (and Pres. Obama has come close to saying), "a billion here, a billion, there, and soon you are talking about real money." The economy may now need that kind of "stimulus."

Update: On rereading the Tribune version (as opposed to the Chicago Breaking News one), it says that "Of the 226 buses, federal funds were used for 80 percent of the purchase cost of 142 buses, or about $55 million." That apparently indicates that the payment for one of the three groups was with other than federal funds, thereby further limiting the amount of exposure to the FTA, if any.

[exitzero]

My thoughts:

I figured the NABIs would never see Chicago streets again based on what I read here and in other places. And that's honestly a good thing. But if NABI wants to save face they would want to at least offer the CTA the ability to replace the LFWs with BRTs. Maybe not like-for-like, but at least then it will appear that NABI have shown at least a good faith effort. Obviously I'm not sure of any repercussions that this would have federally.

[ryanbytes]

A question unasked until now. What the hell was up with the CTA inspectors at the plant? How could they let these buses pass any sort of inspection?

[geneking7320]

My thoughts:

I figured the NABIs would never see Chicago streets again based on what I read here and in other places. And that's honestly a good thing. But if NABI wants to save face they would want to at least offer the CTA the ability to replace the LFWs with BRTs. Maybe not like-for-like, but at least then it will appear that NABI have shown at least a good faith effort. Obviously I'm not sure of any repercussions that this would have federally.

Then we'd have a bunch of funny looking buses that likely have the same mechanical problems.

[Busjack]

A question unasked until now. What the hell was up with the CTA inspectors at the plant? How could they let these buses pass any sort of inspection?

The Tribune in 2005 intimated that the inspectors weren't sent until near the end, and supposedly that the last 50 or so buses were better. But, as you note, probably not.

The thing that has my mind more boggled is the concept of "conditional acceptance" mentioned in the current Tribune article once cracks were detected in the test bus (assumedly the Altoona test one). My understanding of the Uniform Commercial Code (having edited a contract treatise) is either the buyer accepts, and then is obligated to pay, or rejects the goods and the seller has to tender "cured" ones, although acceptance can be revoked if it "was on the reasonable assumption that the non-conformity would be seasonably cured." If any of you want to have at it with Article 2 Part 6 of the UCC, feel free, and of course, I am not giving legal advice to the CTA.

As I previously mentioned, the fatal error was the "conditional acceptance" instead of telling NABI that the bus failed and a condition of the contract was not met.

[Busjack]

My thoughts:

I figured the NABIs would never see Chicago streets again based on what I read here and in other places. And that's honestly a good thing. But if NABI wants to save face they would want to at least offer the CTA the ability to replace the LFWs with BRTs. Maybe not like-for-like, but at least then it will appear that NABI have shown at least a good faith effort. Obviously I'm not sure of any repercussions that this would have federally.

IIRC, sw also suggested this.

Besides what Gene says, apparently NABI is under the (delusional) idea that it will recall the buses, fix them, and the CTA will take them back.

[Tcmetro]

I wish I got to ride the NABI 60-LFW's, now I'll never get the chance . Oh well, they were junk, and it's good that they're getting rid of them if they're so bad.

[Guest]

In my opinion there is plenty of blame to go around. I blame everyone involved in the procurement process for this CTA/NABI mess. There are people who should be held accountable for this. This is a major embarrassment to the CTA. I think NABI has plenty to worry about, no sense on trampling on their grave. What a mess!!

[PACE 834]

In that connection, one would wonder if other authorities, including Pace would take theirs out of service for inspection, sort of like when everyone pulled their Grumman Flxibles in the 1980s when NY reported their problems. While, through either good luck or nontransparent planning by the former head of the 911 center, the 4000s "just happened" to be delivered when the NABIs were pulled, one can't think where Pace would get 294 buses to cover for that number of NABIs in its total fleet of about 700.

I don't recall hearing of any major problems with NABI 35 or 40 foot models that PACE has,since they

don't have any 60 foot artics,am I missing something? :unsure:

[MVTArider]

Well I never rode one either, oh well. On a side thought it would be interesting if someone else (preferably a TA with better maintenance) had bought some 60-LFWs at the same time just to see if they would be experiencing the same problems.

Also these NABIs are owned by the CTA (right?); if the new DE60LFs were to develop problems of this level, since they are leased would they just be sent back to New Flyer and the lease terminated?*

*In normal business conducting without backroom runaround/internal politics etc.

[daerah]

According to NABI.

http://www.nabusind.com

http://www.nabusind.com/news/NABI%20Recall...Final%20_2_.pdf

There will be a recall of all articulated buses produced before Sep. 30, 2007. BRT-60s and our infamous 60-LFWs. They will inspect, repair/replace and reinforce the "fastening systems" ..as they're calling it.

So, I'm going to guess...the NABIs we have at CTA....wont be gone for long...in some shape or another, they'll be back. Thats all if CTA is willing to take them back, after NABI does its complete overhaul.

Im rooting for the NABIs to come back..the 4000s suck!... too slow on the take off..but the nice thing about them, they dont slip and slide in the rain and snow, like the nabis did. Hopefully nabi will address that issue too.

[jesi2282]

I just finished reading the press release from NABI, I noticed it said that NABI is voluntarily initiating a repair campaigan to fix the buses, which I'm guessing basically means NABI is willing to fix the buses for free. But since its voluntary I'm guessing its up to CTA to decide if it wants the buses repaired.

I have a good feeling these buses will never be back on Chicago streets, I don't think CTA wants to deal with these buses or NABI anymore.

[Busjack]

I don't recall hearing of any major problems with NABI 35 or 40 foot models that PACE has,since they

don't have any 60 foot artics,am I missing something?

The main thing all of us are missing is pace2322, who hasn't been around these boards for about 8 or 9 months, but whose signature was "The only Good nabi is the one in the scrap Line." to which I said "So you like 6173? " to which he said "Thats right, Any time i see thats bus it makes me fell good.That thing was a pos i wish we can scrap alll of them." I think his main complaint was lack of heat.

My more serious point was that since any NABI bus has a second world (Hungarian) body and was assembled by the crew in Alabama that CTA criticized and sent inspectors in 2005, a conscientious transit authority would now have them inspected, given that the CTA statement said that the defects "did not form a consistent pattern." It would be one thing if CTA was saying that they were all cracking at the articulation joint, but that doesn't seem to be the gist of their complaint. Now, it could be that the fact that they were flexing at the joint may have cracked other things, but, as I noted, a conscientious transit authority would at least now be warned.

[Busjack]

I just finished reading the press release from NABI, I noticed it said that NABI is voluntarily initiating a repair campaigan to fix the buses, which I'm guessing basically means NABI is willing to fix the buses for free. But since its voluntary I'm guessing its up to CTA to decide if it wants the buses repaired.

I have a good feeling these buses will never be back on Chicago streets, I don't think CTA wants to deal with these buses or NABI anymore.

As daerah noted, the notice starts with recalling the BRTs because of a defective fastening system, and then mentions the CTA's. The CTA portion is consistent with what the later editions of the Tribune story said.

The recall itself is to comply with the Motor Vehicle Safety Act. It is voluntary only in the sense that the Secretary of Transportation did not order it (see 49 USC secs. 30118, 30119). The regulation requiring the so called voluntary recall is at 49 CFR 577.5 ("Notification pursuant to a manufacturer's decision").

So, jesi, the term "voluntary" is a word of art, but I think your conclusion is correct whether CTA would want the buses back. The whole thing probably ends up in the lap of the Cook County Circuit Court,* where, if its Law Division has the usual backlog, you might get a decision in 7 years, or the FTA or NHTSA** will show its hand sooner. The Tribune is correct that the issue is who gets stuck for the [undepreciated portion of the] $102 million loss (probably more, considering Rodriguez's claim of additional repair costs, which NABI didn't cover under its warranty).

As the Tribune articles indicate, this is probably after the fact CYA, especially given that NABI later claims in the press release that they stand behind their work and warranty obligations, when this has been in litigation. If, in fact, they stood behind their warranty obligations, this would have been resolved in 2005, when CTA first withheld funds on the contract.

________________-

*The statement that NABI hasn't had a chance to inspect 7542 or the other buses is more a matter of litigation strategy. I'm sure that once CTA made its announcement in February, NABI could have sent its representative to Chicago to monitor what the structural engineer was examining.

**Remember that when a disgruntled purported former employee made certain claims about the New Flyers, I said to take it to the NHTSA, which he confused with the NTSA.

Also, a link to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration recall site.

[Busjack]

Well I never rode one either, oh well. On a side thought it would be interesting if someone else (preferably a TA with better maintenance) had bought some 60-LFWs at the same time just to see if they would be experiencing the same problems.

Also these NABIs are owned by the CTA (right?); if the new DE60LFs were to develop problems of this level, since they are leased would they just be sent back to New Flyer and the lease terminated?*

*In normal business conducting without backroom runaround/internal politics etc.

The lease is a financial lease with Traxis, which is a Cerebrus company also doing business as NABI Financial Services. (See the Case Study.)

Hence, if there were a default on the lease, it would be analogous to a foreclosure on a mortgage, and Cerebrus, not New Flyer would be stuck. I previously mentioned that this wasn't like renting a car from Hertz, but leasing a car from someone other than the manufacturer's captive finance company.

However, New Flyer would be liable on the 12 year warranty required by the Standard Bus Procurement Guidelines. The response by "Proposer 1" to the RFP for the up to 900 hybrid articulated buses included various items where the manufacturer of a component didn't offer a coextensive warranty, but the response was essentially "too bad."

[Anonymous Guy]

I have the feeling that the buses will be still be repaired by NABI, but instead be repackaged for sale to another transit agency.

[daerah]

I have the feeling that the buses will be still be repaired by NABI, but instead be repackaged for sale to another transit agency.

I second that motion.

I would imagine cta would have to "accept" them back, but this is the second time...so they may reject them back.

However, NABI may now realize, that with their on-going litigation with cta, they will surely lose the case and will more than likely be sued by other transit agencies nationwide and possibly world-wide, and will be further in the whole than they'd like. It may be perhaps more cost-efficient to supply cta with 200+ "brand" new buses, whether a renewed/redesigned version of the 60LFW, specifically built-for-cta as they referred to the current 60LFW,..as NABI put it "...60LFW articulated buses, which is a model built specifically for the CTA." Or supply them with 200+ "brand" new BRT-60s. Cta does have Bus Rapid Transit endeavors, and that would help kick off that campaign, of course that project is still contingent upon funding.

Or

Cta may be forced by Federal Pressure to "Accept" the buses, since the manufacturer willingly and "voluntarily" recalled, repaired and possibly replaced the defective equipment. Not to mention, since the Feds initially wrote the check for the buses to begin with. NABI could settle out of court, renew the warranty and extended greatly, for parts and labor and all that good stuff, in exchange for cta to drop the lawsuit, and reinstate the NABI buses back in their fleet.

Either way, I'm still rooting for NABI. I just hope the right thing is done.

[jacksone44]

I second that motion.

I would imagine cta would have to "accept" them back, but this is the second time...so they may reject them back.

However, NABI may now realize, that with their on-going litigation with cta, they will surely lose the case and will more than likely be sued by other transit agencies nationwide and possibly world-wide, and will be further in the whole than they'd like. It may be perhaps more cost-efficient to supply cta with 200+ "brand" new buses, whether a renewed/redesigned version of the 60LFW, specifically built-for-cta as they referred to the current 60LFW,..as NABI put it "...60LFW articulated buses, which is a model built specifically for the CTA." Or supply them with 200+ "brand" new BRT-60s. Cta does have Bus Rapid Transit endeavors, and that would help kick off that campaign, of course that project is still contingent upon funding.

Or

Cta may be forced by Federal Pressure to "Accept" the buses, since the manufacturer willingly and "voluntarily" recalled, repaired and possibly replaced the defective equipment. Not to mention, since the Feds initially wrote the check for the buses to begin with. NABI could settle out of court, renew the warranty and extended greatly, for parts and labor and all that good stuff, in exchange for cta to drop the lawsuit, and reinstate the NABI buses back in their fleet.

Either way, I'm still rooting for NABI. I just hope the right thing is done.

I second THAT!

[Busjack]

I have the feeling that the buses will be still be repaired by NABI, but instead be repackaged for sale to another transit agency.

Maybe in Mexico (like the CTA trolley buses after 20 years of work) or one of the breakway Soviet Republics in Central Asia. If their customs control is loose enough to allow them in. Certainly not in any country that has an active bus assembly industry.

[Busjack]

NABI could settle out of court, renew the warranty and extended greatly, for parts and labor and all that good stuff, in exchange for cta to drop the lawsuit, and reinstate the NABI buses back in their fleet.

Either way, I'm still rooting for NABI. I just hope the right thing is done.

If it would cost anything close to what Rodriguez said to fix the fleet, I don't see NABI wasting its money doing it (subject to my post immediately above). As I indicated yesterday, I don't believe the BS in their press release; they were only covering their behinds after CTA announced its lack of intent to use the buses.*

The Feds may want a monetary settlement for the 2/3rds of the buses they paid 80% for (which probably are 50% depreciated), but they can't force CTA to use the buses (just as they couldn't force NYC MTA to use the Flxibles in 1980 or so). Also, as in the New York case, CTA will say that they have to use the money to replace them (with NFs either leased or from the state capital bill**). Also, don't forget that Huberman was negotiating with the feds since September (is that part of the basis of the "get your pictures by summer" comment ).

Again, it's just speculation, but it is 99 to 1 that they never are seen on Chicago streets in revenue service again. More probable is that if some transit authority has an RFP for remanufacured engines and transmissions (not engine parts, as some of you thought I meant the last time) NABI may offer these, although that may not necessarily be the case if reports that they clogged the particulate traps are true. There may also be some other parts, such as flip out windows, that could be offered on the aftermarket, too.

____

*Reinforcing this belief: the statement in the Tribune that "Hours after receiving inquiries from the Tribune on Thursday, the bus maker issued a voluntary recall" (emphasis added).

**Crunching the numbers down to this level, having received 4000-4044 should take care of the obligation.

[MVTArider]

The lease is a financial lease with Traxis, which is a Cerebrus company also doing business as NABI Financial Services. (See the Case Study.)

Hence, if there were a default on the lease, it would be analogous to a foreclosure on a mortgage, and Cerebrus, not New Flyer would be stuck. I previously mentioned that this wasn't like renting a car from Hertz, but leasing a car from someone other than the manufacturer's captive finance company.

However, New Flyer would be liable on the 12 year warranty required by the Standard Bus Procurement Guidelines. The response by "Proposer 1" to the RFP for the up to 900 hybrid articulated buses included various items where the manufacturer of a component didn't offer a coextensive warranty, but the repose was essentially "too bad."

Okay, thanks for the clarification

[artthouwill]

What will happen next?

A. NABI fixes all 225 buses properly. Will CTA accept them back? I don't think they would voluntarily. I actually believe these NF orders were specifically designed to replace the NABIs. It would have to be proven that these buses were safe to put back on the street AND very very costly for the CTA to reject them as opposed to accepting them back.

B. NABI substitutes these buses with their new BRT 60ft buses. I don't think this is likely for that would set a dangerous precedent with other transit agencies. "Giving away" 225 new buses would certainly put NABI out of business.

[BusHunter]

What will happen next?

A. NABI fixes all 225 buses properly. Will CTA accept them back? I don't think they would voluntarily. I actually believe these NF orders were specifically designed to replace the NABIs. It would have to be proven that these buses were safe to put back on the street AND very very costly for the CTA to reject them as opposed to accepting them back.

B. NABI substitutes these buses with their new BRT 60ft buses. I don't think this is likely for that would set a dangerous precedent with other transit agencies. "Giving away" 225 new buses would certainly put NABI out of business.

Sounds like choice A. NABI is going to fix these buses (or so they say) and present them back to CTA. They issued a recall because they see there going to lose a lawsuit with more than one break reported now, it proves it's not a fluke but a real problem. If they repair them (as far as the breakage problem) and CTA still refuses them and CTA cannot prove that the bus is unsafe by testing them in service, then CTA will end up taking the loss on their purchase. This way that lawsuit would be moot. Sounds like maybe we will see them in service eventually, but on a very limited basis. Like the RTA Grummans we may see a few then they'll retire. Either way a big mess!!

[qwantae]

WOW!!! What a horrible situation, Poor 7500s, even though I never cared for them in the beginning when they were brand new. But all I have to say is that MANs (7100s and Seattles) did a better job than them and I'm glad that more 4000s FLYERS are coming in quickly to get rid of shortage issues and they are doing great and never saw any of them broken down yet. I would tell this that I will miss the 7500s on Rt#14.

R.I.P NABI 7500s

[jajuan]

I know some are routing for the NABIs to be fixed up and placed back on the road, but I'm doubting that we will ever see them again. Looking at it from an engineering standpoint, there are just too many flaws noted on these things. The most glaring flaw that pops to mind is the fact that the weld of the chassis connections did not match the specifications provided to the CTA and had no uniformity from bus to bus. You basically had a bunch of buses that were just slapped together in a haphazard way. Also you have the FTA involved in the picture and having been brought in we learn back as early as September. Those present very long odds of these buses returning to Chicago revenue service.