2012 40'/60' Procurement

[East New York]

From how others have been understanding the RFP, they are specifically asking for the manufacture and delivery of both 40 foot buses and articulateds together not separately. Minimum 300 to a max of 450 for the 40 footers and minumum 50 to a maximum of 150 for the articulated buses. So from that understanding they're seeking manufacturers who have a proven record in both bus model sizes.

No, I have a copy of the RFP. It's not mandatory that that any of the bidders submit proposals for both bus lengths. CTA is aware that MTS will not have a 60 foot version anytime before 2016.

Would the CTA consider the high floor RTS legend or just the low floor extreme?

I'm really not sure if they would consider the high floor. Maybe if they were for an express type service like the ones we will get here in NYC.

Personally, I couldn't see CTA ordering any high floor buses for regular transit service though.

[jajuan]

No, I have a copy of the RFP. It's not mandatory that that any of the bidders submit proposals for both bus lengths. CTA is aware that MTS will not have a 60 foot version anytime before 2016.

I'm really not sure if they would consider the high floor. Maybe if they were for an express type service like the ones we will get here in NYC.

Personally, I couldn't see CTA ordering any high floor buses for regular transit service though.

Perhaps not mandatory but they're still likely to want to go with one manufacturer when it comes time for a final decision even if it is theoretically possible to split the order between more than one company. And I get you're possibly routing for MTS since in a sense CTA has worked with them before by way of the former TMC, so if CTA did look at bids from them it very likely wouldn't be for high floors since as stated CTA hasn't bought high floors in 17 years. MTS would just have to have a darn good track record on low floor RTS's since they are untested in Chicago and given the current legal battle going on because of the NABI 60-LFWs. And on a side note, MTS does need to update and correct it's homepage video because Chicago doesn't currently have RTS bus models and hasn't had any for a few years now. And Chicago's RTS buses definitely weren't the last to get retired out of its recent older bus retirements as that video makes the pitch that TAs do. They actually were the first to go followed by the older of the two Flxible models that recently were in service and lastly the newer Flxible model.

[BusExpert32]

And on a side note, MTS does need to update and correct it's homepage video because Chicago doesn't currently have RTS bus models and hasn't had any for a few years now.

Maybe they're predicting the future? :lol:

[Busjack]

Maybe they're predicting the future?

And Pace will soon be ordering new Orion Is.

MTS would just have to have a darn good track record on low floor RTS's since they are untested in Chicago and given the current legal battle going on because of the NABI 60-LFWs.

Which was exactly my point. Foamers aside, I pointed out that MTS defaulted on the NJT contract, so unless CTA is totally insane (and Kruesi is now a goat farmer), I don't see why it would want to buy another lawsuit. Especially since the RFP is quite clear about the qualifications the bidder must meet.

Maybe East New York could explain to us why he is so focused on a bus manufacturer that went through a bankruptcy and hasn't produced anything since.

[See Tea Eh]

I don't see how it's relevant that "CTA" has experience with some of the folks that are now running Millennium Transit because they happened to work on the RTS contract when CTA bought those buses over two decades ago.

For one, it was over two decades ago that those buses were ordered, and I don't think anyone involved in the procurement of those original RTSs is still even at CTA (there was a huge exodus of management experience during the Rodriguez era; and no, I don't count those who hired on as a part-time bus operator and are still around, since they weren't involved in the procurement of the vehicles).

Second, much has changed, both at CTA in particular and in the transit bus industry as a whole, in the intervening 20 years. If CTA was really that impressed with the RTS, they could have bought more of them (but instead, they went with Flxible, twice; and also note that CTA didn't really want the RTS in the first place). CTA hasn't operated an RTS in, what, four years or so? It's not like they're adding to an existing fleet of largely similar vehicle types as with the 100-bus artic order that they got from Seattle this time around. So, I don't really think past experience counts for anything once you exceed a certain point. For the RTS, we're past that point. Would be no different if GM announced tomorrow that they were going to launch a low-floor fishbowl and expected a bunch of orders because most transit systems in the country had a history of operating fishbowls in the past.

[East New York]

Perhaps not mandatory but they're still likely to want to go with one manufacturer when it comes time for a final decision even if it is theoretically possible to split the order between more than one company. And I get you're possibly routing for MTS since in a sense CTA has worked with them before by way of the former TMC, so if CTA did look at bids from them it very likely wouldn't be for high floors since as stated CTA hasn't bought high floors in 17 years. MTS would just have to have a darn good track record on low floor RTS's since they are untested in Chicago and given the current legal battle going on because of the NABI 60-LFWs. And on a side note, MTS does need to update and correct it's homepage video because Chicago doesn't currently have RTS bus models and hasn't had any for a few years now. And Chicago's RTS buses definitely weren't the last to get retired out of its recent older bus retirements as that video makes the pitch that TAs do. They actually were the first to go followed by the older of the two Flxible models that recently were in service and lastly the newer Flxible model.

According to CTA, they WANT MTS to bid on the contract, so they are the ones that let it be known actually. Thats how this all came to be.

But what is there to test? An RTS is an RTS. Just in a low floor version. MTA tested out the low floor for a week and they loved it. Times, and things do change. MTA said they would never purchase another RTS in life when they canceled the Nova hybrid order. Now they will be accepting 90 new high floors, and 90 new low floors. Now that Orion is gone, Nova and New Flyer are the only qualified builders for many agencies that include MTA. This doesnt sit well with may agencies, and they are looking at MTS as a formidable competitor.

And Pace will soon be ordering new Orion Is.

Which was exactly my point. Foamers aside, I pointed out that MTS defaulted on the NJT contract, so unless CTA is totally insane (and Kruesi is now a goat farmer), I don't see why it would want to buy another lawsuit. Especially since the RFP is quite clear about the qualifications the bidder must meet.

Maybe East New York could explain to us why he is so focused on a bus manufacturer that went through a bankruptcy and hasn't produced anything since.

Again, MTS did not default on the NJT contract, it was canceled because of funding issues, and now MTS is working on a brand new deal for NJT. MTS just exited bankruptcy this year, and is now resuming production. There is no relation between NABI and MTS either. NABI produced an unreliable bus, whereas MTS has produced the best RTS buses to date.

Let's just say that I am invested in the success of Millennium, and the warranty on all their buses blows everything else anyone has to offer right out of the water.

I don't see how it's relevant that "CTA" has experience with some of the folks that are now running Millennium Transit because they happened to work on the RTS contract when CTA bought those buses over two decades ago.

For one, it was over two decades ago that those buses were ordered, and I don't think anyone involved in the procurement of those original RTSs is still even at CTA (there was a huge exodus of management experience during the Rodriguez era; and no, I don't count those who hired on as a part-time bus operator and are still around, since they weren't involved in the procurement of the vehicles).

Second, much has changed, both at CTA in particular and in the transit bus industry as a whole, in the intervening 20 years. If CTA was really that impressed with the RTS, they could have bought more of them (but instead, they went with Flxible, twice; and also note that CTA didn't really want the RTS in the first place). CTA hasn't operated an RTS in, what, four years or so? It's not like they're adding to an existing fleet of largely similar vehicle types as with the 100-bus artic order that they got from Seattle this time around. So, I don't really think past experience counts for anything once you exceed a certain point. For the RTS, we're past that point. Would be no different if GM announced tomorrow that they were going to launch a low-floor fishbowl and expected a bunch of orders because most transit systems in the country had a history of operating fishbowls in the past.

Because MTS is essentially the same old company with a new name, the bus is techinically qualified according to CTA. And the reason Flxible got the subseqquent orders is because they were the low bidder. Nothing more, and nothing less. CTA is the one who informed MTS how they will be evaluated, and yes there are still a few people at the Authority that were there during the original contract. Its not really about what any of us think, its about what CTA said themselves.

MTS has 16 core customers lined up, and evaluations open on 149 more. Their lead customer which is ordering 2000 buses recently visited the CTA as a reference for the RTS-08. They said after the teething problems, and excluding the door issues, the buses performed really well, and they are definitely open to getting new buses from MTS.

Now remember, most all this information is coming directly from CTA, and 98% of it I got straight from the horses mouth. As I said, this is going to be very interesting!

[westing]

If MTS puts out a bid I hope it doesn't end up getting accepted. The RTS design is so dated and dare I say... a bit ugly. Aesthetics doesn't seem to play much of a role at all in the procurement process but it might be good if they did. It would be frustrating to be stuck with these "retro" buses when New Flyer and Nova have such nice modern designs that would aid in attracting riders.

[Busjack]

And once again, MTS did not screw up the NJT order. If that was the case, they wouldnt want 150 high floor express buses right now.

So, why, after taking delivery of about 10 RTSs, NJT suddenly gave a low floor contract to NABI? That's well documented.

Also, why was it reported that Millennium couldn't get financing to complete the NJT order?

Are you a "Im a Transit Systems Engineer & Consultant" for Millennium? Sort of like the consultant who made the false claim here that NABI didn't have an opportunity to inspect its CTA junk? Otherwise, explain to us why, based on the RFP, Nova and NF aren't the only bidders qualified to meet all aspects of the specification?

Now remember, most all this information is coming directly from CTA, and 98% of it I got straight from the horses mouth. As I said, this is going to be very interesting!

Oh, another purported leaker. As I said before:

If there is anyone from CTA reading this forum, your prospective contractors or consultants are leaking all over this board.

[jajuan]

According to CTA, they WANT MTS to bid on the contract, so they are the ones that let it be known actually. Thats how this all came to be.

But what is there to test? An RTS is an RTS. Just in a low floor version. MTA tested out the low floor for a week and they loved it. Times, and things do change. MTA said they would never purchase another RTS in life when they canceled the Nova hybrid order. Now they will be accepting 90 new high floors, and 90 new low floors. Now that Orion is gone, Nova and New Flyer are the only qualified builders for many agencies that include MTA. This doesnt sit well with may agencies, and they are looking at MTS as a formidable competitor.

Again, MTS did not default on the NJT contract, it was canceled because of funding issues, and now MTS is working on a brand new deal for NJT. MTS just exited bankruptcy this year, and is now resuming production. There is no relation between NABI and MTS either. NABI produced an unreliable bus, whereas MTS has produced the best RTS buses to date.

Let's just say that I am invested in the success of Millennium, and the warranty on all their buses blows everything else anyone has to offer right out of the water.

Because MTS is essentially the same old company with a new name, the bus is techinically qualified according to CTA. And the reason Flxible got the subseqquent orders is because they were the low bidder. Nothing more, and nothing less. CTA is the one who informed MTS how they will be evaluated, and yes there are still a few people at the Authority that were there during the original contract. Its not really about what any of us think, its about what CTA said themselves.

MTS has 16 core customers lined up, and evaluations open on 149 more. Their lead customer which is ordering 2000 buses recently visited the CTA as a reference for the RTS-08. They said after the teething problems, and excluding the door issues, the buses performed really well, and they are definitely open to getting new buses from MTS.

Now remember, most all this information is coming directly from CTA, and 98% of it I got straight from the horses mouth. As I said, this is going to be very interesting!

And just because CTA may want to see a bid from MTS doesn't necessarily mean that they are the best qualified to get the contract and provide all the particulars of that contract. By your own admission MTS isn't even going to have a workable articulated model until 2016 at the earliest when part of the deal from CTA's end is that they get all the requested buses by 2014. And looking at their website, MTS either doesn't yet have a working low floor bus model or is just now getting it off the drawing boards this year, which in either case means that it is untested. That's not a good sign given as I previously stated the NABI legal battle that's still ongoing and if CTA wants to stick with low floor buses now that its entire fleet is low floors and given one of the bigger issues CTA had with their high floor accessible buses in their later years of service prior to retirement was the lifts malfunctioning by either not deploying or getting stuck in mid-deployment because of hydraulic issues that got more frequent with the age of the bus. CTA even intimated a big reason they transitioned to low floors starting in 2001 starting with the NOVA purchase is that ramps where easier to maintain than hydraulic lifts. Plus whatever kneeling functions any of the high floor buses had quickly disappeared, which can be a problem with the significant number of seniors or disabled within CTA's passenger base who even though may not use a wheelchair but still may have some mobility limitations that make it difficult to negotiate the high steps of a high floor bus.

[BusExpert32]

If MTS puts out a bid I hope it doesn't end up getting accepted. The RTS design is so dated and dare I say... a bit ugly. Aesthetics doesn't seem to play much of a role at all in the procurement process but it might be good if they did. It would be frustrating to be stuck with these "retro" buses when New Flyer and Nova have such nice modern designs that would aid in attracting riders.

I'm a rider and I'm not attracted to the Nova and New Flyer "nice modern designs" at all. But anyway, it doesn't matter, since 99% of riders don't care what the bus looks like. They just need to get from point A to point B.

[East New York]

As for the comments about the astetics of the bus, its an all new face. As for the low floor history, there are 2 buses. The first was a 42.5 footer built by Nova in 2003, and the second is a 40 footer built by MTS in 2005. That bus recently returned from Altoona, and NYC tested it out for a week prior as well.

Again, no prospective bidder has to bid on both the 40 & 60 foot requirements, so none of that really matters.

So, why, after taking delivery of about 10 RTSs, NJT suddenly gave a low floor contract to NABI? That's well documented.

Also, why was it reported that Millennium couldn't get financing to complete the NJT order?

Are you a "Im a Transit Systems Engineer & Consultant" for Millennium? Sort of like the consultant who made the false claim here that NABI didn't have an opportunity to inspect its CTA junk? Otherwise, explain to us why, based on the RFP, Nova and NF aren't the only bidders qualified to meet all aspects of the specification?

Oh, another purported leaker. As I said before:

If there is anyone from CTA reading this forum, your prospective contractors or consultants are leaking all over this board.

What the hell are you talking about? I dont know any particulars about that NABI contract, nor have I ever said I did.

Secondly, anyone can find out the information I posted. It's not G-14 Classified buddy!

Third point, Nova and NF are going to be the only other bidders..... That info came straight from Nova and NF as well, so I guess there is a huge leak. Somebody better hurry and patch that thing.

And as far as the NJT thing goes, they told me something totally different. But it is what it is. Im not going to argue about this with you. Especially since I'm almost certain I know who you are. Lol

[Busjack]

As for the comments about the astetics of the bus, its an all new face. As for the low floor history, there are 2 buses. The first was a 42.5 footer built by Nova in 2003, and the second is a 40 footer built by MTS in 2005. That bus recently returned from Altoona, and NYC tested it out for a week prior as well.

Again, no prospective bidder has to bid on both the 40 & 60 foot requirements, so none of that really matters.

What the hell are you talking about? I dont know any particulars about that NABI contract, nor have I ever said I did. [Apparently you don't know the meaning of the word "Like."--Busjack]

Secondly, anyone can find out the information I posted. It's not G-14 Classified buddy!

Third point, Nova and NF are going to be the only other bidders..... That info came straight from Nova and NF as well, so I guess there is a huge leak. Somebody better hurry and patch that thing.

And as far as the NJT thing goes, they [who are they?--Busjack asks] told me something totally different. But it is what it is. Im not going to argue about this with you. Especially since I'm almost certain I know who you are. Lol

If you do, post it, and I'll tell you you are wrong, Dante Robinson.

I came to the conclusion at the top of the thread only by reading the specifications and public information on the Web, including the various companies' web sites, links to them posted here, and newspaper articles. I don't have any confidential information. As jajuan points out, Millennium sure hasn't updated its site.

Basically, you tried to pull a sell job saying "Now remember, most all this information is coming directly from CTA, and 98% of it I got straight from the horses mouth," but, when called on it, you now admit that Millennium isn't bidding. So, what was the point?

[jajuan]

Yes what exactly was the point of this exercise if Millenium isn't going to bid? And Busjack the sell job began in his first posts in the thread when he gave all us the admonition that we were to keep in mind that CTA could award the contract to all bidders, one bidder or just two. That's where we all were given the implication that Millenium was putting forward a bid and in contention for at least a chance to build the 40 footers. Turns out they (CTA) are actually are only seeing bids from manufacturers who are able to produce both artics and 40 foot standards. Looks like what we got out of the exchange was a bit of confirmation of your and a couple other's hypothesis that it would likely only be Nova and New Flyer that present bids.

And I see East missed my point completely of the low floors being untested as in it's not being used beyond just an experimental test bed for a short period a few years ago by one TA and isn't yet actually being produced and bought in significant numbers by at least a few TAs out of the hundreds that exist in the US. In fact, it hasn't been bought by any TA. Therefore the bus is unproven, a road that I will say yet again CTA does not want to find itself back on when you consider the ongoing legal battle it's fighting over the NABI artics. But it's moot now anyway given the admission that Millenium won't be bidding.

[See Tea Eh]

I don't see where East said MTS wasn't going to bid on the CTA contract. Maybe I missed that line.

Still, him stating that he is

invested in the success of Millennium

clearly indicates that he is not looking at the situation with impartial eyes (though, it was obvious even without that statement).

[BusExpert32]

Third point, Nova and NF are going to be the only other bidders..... That info came straight from Nova and NF as well, so I guess there is a huge leak. Somebody better hurry and patch that thing.

Busjack and jajuan, East is not admitting that MTS will not bid on the CTA contract. He's saying that Nova and New Flyer said they're the only bidders.

[jajuan]

Busjack and jajuan, East is not admitting that MTS will not bid on the CTA contract. He's saying that Nova and New Flyer said they're the only bidders.

Read his direct statement you're quoting again and the context in which he gives it. He explicitly says MTS is not bidding and that his statement is backed up by NOVA and New Flyer indicating in their company records that they are the two bidders. He was basically saying the info he was giving anybody can research through public company information presented by the companies involved and in that context his statement was an example of how one researches the information discussed in this thread.

[BusHunter]

I know this much. CTA had alot of problems with high floor lifts failing, many times stranding the customer. I don't think they want to go down that road again, besides when a low floor lift fails, all you have to do is get up and go over and pick up the lift and drop it manually. If they look at bus performance over the last six years, I think it's clear who they going to choose.

[jajuan]

I know this much. CTA had alot of problems with high floor lifts failing, many times stranding the customer. I don't think they want to go down that road again, besides when a low floor lift fails, all you have to do is get up and go over and pick up the lift and drop it manually. If they look at bus performance over the last six years, I think it's clear who they going to choose.

Well if we just look at that part of it Bushunter, we only can make a good guess that they want to stick with low floor buses in general. It's actually a toss up when it comes to New Flyer and NOVA. New Flyer doesn't have it completely in the bag outright.

[See Tea Eh]

Is there an easy online link to where Nova or New Flyer state they're the only bidders (or, for that matter, where they state that they've bid on the contract at all)?

East's statement was that New Flyer and Nova were the only other bidders, which I took to mean that MTS could have bid.

[YoungBusLover]

You know i wouldn't mind seeing an RTS back in Chicago. :D

[BusExpert32]

Read his direct statement you're quoting again and the context in which he gives it. He explicitly says MTS is not bidding and that his statement is backed up by NOVA and New Flyer indicating in their company records that they are the two bidders. He was basically saying the info he was giving anybody can research through public company information presented by the companies involved and in that context his statement was an example of how one researches the information discussed in this thread.

He said Nova and New Flyer are going to be the only other bidders, aside from MTS, whose success East is invested in.

[artthouwill]

He said Nova and New Flyer are going to be the only other bidders, aside from MTS, whose success East is invested in.

Somebody actually read the post!!! The key word in it was OTHER.

[East New York]

Busjack and jajuan, East is not admitting that MTS will not bid on the CTA contract. He's saying that Nova and New Flyer said they're the only bidders.

Correct. I never said that either.....

I know this much. CTA had alot of problems with high floor lifts failing, many times stranding the customer. I don't think they want to go down that road again, besides when a low floor lift fails, all you have to do is get up and go over and pick up the lift and drop it manually. If they look at bus performance over the last six years, I think it's clear who they going to choose.

I agree with,you 100% and stated that myself. That was worse lift Lift-U ever made, and these doors were the worst Vapor ever produced to date. Hoewver, these two facts are now irrelivant as well because Lift-U and Vapor products are 10 times better, and a high floor bus isnt even part of this discussion, so a lift on an old bus doesnt really matter when compared to a new ramp. Nova and New Flyer make excellent buses. Ive driven them, inspected them, and maintained them myself. My only point is the RTS is up to the competition.

Well if we just look at that part of it Bushunter, we only can make a good guess that they want to stick with low floor buses in general. It's actually a toss up when it comes to New Flyer and NOVA. New Flyer doesn't have it completely in the bag outright.

Again, high floor buses are not even the topic of discussion. I dont know why it keeps coming up.

Somebody actually read the post!!! The key word in it was OTHER.

Thank you!!

As far as the MTS website, yeah I agree about that video.... Its about 5 years old. I think the website was overhauled just prior to APTA. MTS however updates their facebook regularly.

[BusExpert32]

So has MTS put in a bid already?

[East New York]

So has MTS put in a bid already?

No, and from what I understand their proposal won't be complete until the end of next month.