railfan4072

7000-series - Procurement

545 posts in this topic

4 hours ago, Juniorz said:

As I said above, this was the predictable first step (no different than asking Roger Goodell to rule on Roger Goodell), and required to "exhaust contract remedies." The real question is if Bombardier takes it to the FTA and what the FTA does.

I've commented before that I think Bombardier's attorney (and even more, but irrelevantly, Crain's) overreached, but again we'll have to see if anything happens at the FTA,

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Busjack said:

As I said above, this was the predictable first step (no different than asking Roger Goodell to rule on Roger Goodell), and required to "exhaust contract remedies." The real question is if Bombardier takes it to the FTA and what the FTA does.

I've commented before that I think Bombardier's attorney (and even more, but irrelevantly, Crain's) overreached, but again we'll have to see if anything happens at the FTA,

Probably bombardier will there pockets  are deep enough. If there was any error  here it will  be known once the cars arrive. Not that bombardier gets anything  out of it. 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, BusHunter said:

Probably bombardier will there pockets  are deep enough. If there was any error  here it will  be known once the cars arrive. Not that bombardier gets anything  out of it. 

In short you just said something inherently self-contradictory. Is Alstom still looking over the 5000s? As even someone posting in Crain's pointed out, Bombardier used a defective Chinese part.

There is a reason why CTA solicited for quality control inspectors (see up the thread).

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But the question is are the inspectors doing their job effectively. Nabi comes to mind. A bad part is one thing a bad car is another issue. Its really up to csr to deliver. Rahm is taking a risk i think. Just putting in my 2 cents here.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, BusHunter said:

But the question is are the inspectors doing their job effectively. Nabi comes to mind. A bad part is one thing a bad car is another issue. Its really up to csr to deliver. Rahm is taking a risk i think. Just putting in my 2 cents here.

Like I said, someone working for CTA found the bad wheel bearing journals and that Bombardier had to reweld the front ends. Bombardier didn't volunteer that.

Also, if you remember back 13 years, CTA didn't send inspectors to NABI until after about 190 of the 226 buses were assembled. That's basically what started the practice of having the TA's representatives at the plant.

And on the unrelated point, with a teacher's strike coming up in 9 days, Rahm isn't going to be around to worry about some rail car in 2021.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Busjack said:

Like I said, someone working for CTA found the bad wheel bearing journals and that Bombardier had to reweld the front ends. Bombardier didn't volunteer that.

Also, if you remember back 13 years, CTA didn't send inspectors to NABI until after about 190 of the 226 buses were assembled. That's basically what started the practice of having the TA's representatives at the plant.

And on the unrelated point, with a teacher's strike coming up in 9 days, Rahm isn't going to be around to worry about some rail car in 2021.

Well a teacher's strike isn't set in stone. They only set a date to do so if they don't finally come to an agreement with CPS. Getting back to transit though, I'll agree with you that Rahm isn't going to have this railcar dispute at the top of his agenda especially when prototypes aren't even due for a couple of years if they get to the notice to proceed point of the process. Which comes to my other point, why do folks continue to go to NABI comparisons and predict a manufacturer will produce a number of defective products to the degree that NABI did especially before production has even begun which in this case will be at least a couple of years from now? For the umpteenth time, CTA learned its lesson with that and since that time has been catching defects before they get to the degree of the NABI fiasco as Busjack has also noted. So I think it's time we finally put that fiasco to rest finally once and for all and stop looking for NABI situations everywhere each time CTA is ready to procure new revenue vehicles. Yes there will be defects found from time to time. That's inevitable because buses and rapid transit railcars are complex machines with thousands of parts per vehicle. But in the years since the NABI artic implosion, CTA has managed to keep each subsequent procurement from becoming that by finding any defects while an order is still in delivery and getting them fixed during that part of the process. So can we stop flirting with corporate defamation by predicting NABI type risks where there aren't any?

3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/29/2016 at 11:11 AM, jajuan said:

Which comes to my other point, why do folks continue to go to NABI comparisons and predict a manufacturer will produce a number of defective products to the degree that NABI did especially before production has even begun which in this case will be at least a couple of years from now?

...which brings me to another point (especially when someone said something about whether there will be a CSR car at IRM in 2065).

CSR is not shipping completed cars from Port of Shanghai. Maybe it will ship the shells, unlike Bombardier manufacturing them in NY, but that's about it. CSR (if successful) would still have to  comply with the Buy America Act, which requires assembly in and 60% of the components from the U.S.

The CT Board video indicated that the CSR proposal was 69% Buy America components, and that CSR would use 19 vendors CTA already does. Thus, for instance, there will be Vapor door controls manufactured in Buffalo Grove, no matter what company is the final assembler.

The final assembly is to be in Chicago. Thus, the only analogy would be that if the assembly (starting in 2020) were bad, people who worked at NABI couldn't get jobs across the state line at Nissan, q.e.d. the people working at CSR  couldn't get jobs at Ford, 1 mile to the north. I'm not going to presume that 4 or 5 years in advance.

 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/29/2016 at 8:15 AM, Busjack said:

I've commented before that I think Bombardier's attorney (and even more, but irrelevantly, Crain's) overreached, but again we'll have to see if anything happens at the FTA,

Crain's has both a summary and the text of the CTA decision here.

Consistent with what I said above:

The CTA "finds that the (Bombardier) protest relies on misstatements of fact, speculation, wholly unfounded accusations of misconduct and legally baseless arguments made by a proposer that simply failed to put forward the best-value proposal," Morey wrote.

Also, whether this was some sort of deal with Emanuel to bring the plant to Hegewisch:

But Bombardier, too, promised to do "some assembly" here, and to open a $5 million Services Center of Excellence here, Moray wrote, and therefore the statement could have applied to either company.

The article also reveals (for the first time of which I know) that Kawasaki was the unsuccessful bidder on the 5000s contract.

A CTA spokesman said that Bombardier itself profited from a similar incident 10 years ago when it offered the lowest price but was out-rated by a competitor, a division of Kawasaki. Bombardier got the $1 billion deal.

And in response to someone who posted the theory that Bombardier has rights from the first Invitation for Bids that was cancelled:

protest.jpg

(emphasis added).

There are also references to that since in the addenda it appeared that Bombardier and Kawasaki were submitting a joint bid, Bombardier was bound by the answers given to Kawasaki, the CNR CSR merger, Bombardier had raised its price over that in the canceled IFB, and that Bombardier was not interested in a CTA briefing on the deficiencies of its Best and Final Offer until the day before the protest deadline.

My other observation is while this is signed by Carole Morey, obviously the CTA's lawyers wrote most of the response to the protest.

I'm not the FTA, but my assessment is that CTA sufficiently CYA, and there's not much the FTA can do on this record.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A few other things from the scribd decision:

  • Notice to proceed was issued on April 8, 2016, so the clock is now running. [Disregard anything what I previously said about the NTP.]
  • The second Bombardier bid was about the same as the first Sumitomo bid.
  • On the US jobs created point, Bombardier included subcontractors while CSR did not, and since CSR proposed mostly the same subcontractors, proposed more new U.S. jobs.
  • Any statement Emanuel made did not refer to CSR and was made long after the evaluation committee scored the proposals.
  • Bombardier filed essentially the same protest against CNR with MBTA, and then joined the Huyndai-Rotem suit, which H-R lost (although the writer disclaimed going into Bombardier's motivation).
  • Although Bombardier said it could deliver the cars a year earlier than CSR, it was 10 months late on the prototype 5000s, a year late on the rest of the 5000s,  and late on other orders. Then it claimed that CTA would be imposing liquidated damages based on the accelerated schedule Bombardier itself proposed.
  • Bombaridier was given an opportunity to supplement its protest after CTA produced what FOIA materials it did.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone think that what happened on November 8th, 2016 might have some impact on the whole CTA/CSR contract for the 7000-Series railcars?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, sw4400 said:

Anyone think that what happened on November 8th, 2016 might have some impact on the whole CTA/CSR contract for the 7000-Series railcars?

Only if only huge tariffs are put on imports, but probably not even that, as they still will have 69% U.S, content.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No one saw a special consist of 5000 series running on the Blue line.....testing suspension equipment....no doubt in preparation of 7000 series contracts.  They are scheduled to return with bags of sand to simulate actual passenger loads.  If you see them on the Forest Park branch don't start rumors that 5000s are going to the Blue line, LOL. Known as being rough trackage, the Forest Park is a good test for railcar suspension.  

 

DH

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, chicagopcclcar said:

No one saw a special consist of 5000 series running on the Blue line.....testing suspension equipment....no doubt in preparation of 7000 series contracts.  They are scheduled to return with bags of sand to simulate actual passenger loads.  If you see them on the Forest Park branch don't start rumors that 5000s are going to the Blue line, LOL. Known as being rough trackage, the Forest Park is a good test for railcar suspension.  

 

DH

How long would that be going on for?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, garmon757 said:

How long would that be going on for?

Next week.  Look for wiring on the outside supporting sensors.

DH

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, chicagopcclcar said:

Next week.  Look for wiring on the outside supporting sensors.

DH

Thanks

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, BusHunter said:

Question is what happens after the order is filled?

Asked and answered before. If CRRC doesn't get another contract by 2026, it becomes like the Pullman and Amerail plants. And Chicago undoubtedly will have a new mare by then.

Same question could be raised about the Nippon Sharyo USA plant in Rochelle.Looks like that's all they'll get from Metra for a while (other than the assigned VRE options, if that deal has gone through), but they say they have a contract for high level passenger cars with Caltrans and IDOT.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just hope federal funding is not cut prior to completion of the order.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, geneking7320 said:

I just hope federal funding is not cut prior to completion of the order.

As this pertains to funds for the 7000-Series, I will say this..... There was talk by a certain individual about defunding Chicago of Federal funding from everything except law enforcement purposes because we are a sanctuary city, and that's all I'm going to say on that point on the forum. PM if you want to discuss this further...

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, geneking7320 said:

I just hope federal funding is not cut prior to completion of the order.

 

23 minutes ago, sw4400 said:

As this pertains to funds for the 7000-Series, I will say this..... There was talk by a certain individual about defunding Chicago of Federal funding from everything except law enforcement purposes because we are a sanctuary city, and that's all I'm going to say on that point on the forum. PM if you want to discuss this further...

Transportation appropriations are part of multiyear transportation bills, not the general federal budget, nor appropriations for general city programs.If I were concerned about any budget issue, it would be state appropriations.

However, unless this contract is like the average Pace one that says in about 5 different ways that the contract is terminated if there isn't any money, I am assuming that CTA has identified the funds for the quantity indicated in the Notice to Proceed, although (maybe due to the protest) I don't see the usual Press Release with the contract award saying what the funding sources (such as TIFIA or CTA bonds) are.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Busjack said:

I don't see the usual Press Release with the contract award saying what the funding sources (such as TIFIA or CTA bonds) are.

The ABC7 story reminded me that part of that board meeting video was approving the bond issue.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now