7900-series Nova LFS - Updates

[BusHunter]

Considering I made a point a couple of months ago that more was going on with the removal of Novas from 77th than just getting ready for the 7900s delivery en masse, it's possible. And I'm admitting here that would mean my thought that 77th got taken out of the running because of that removal was mistaken. As I mentioned then, I had based that thought on the logical idea that they'd stick to garages that currently have an allotment of 6400s. I know, I know. Crazy to think CTA management would follow a logical pattern.

Well no #7900 this morning on the #24. I remember I did state that the #7900's would go to four garages and someone on here shot down that idea. Looks like now it will be 100 buses apiece to 77th, Chicago and 74th and FG will get 100 NF's back from 77th which will enable them the chance to get rid of the first year nova's at fg. Fg will probably receive the last option then.

[jajuan]

Well no #7900 this morning on the #24. I remember I did state that the #7900's would go to four garages and someone on here shot down that idea. Looks like now it will be 100 buses apiece to 77th, Chicago and 74th and FG will get 100 NF's back from 77th which will enable them the chance to get rid of the first year nova's at fg. Fg will probably receive the last option then.

Dude are you going to let me admit I probably made an error (we won't know for sure until we actually start seeing deliveries beyond more than one garage), or are you going waste space jumping to step on my admission? Sheesh.

[andrethebusman]

As of 5/20, CTA internal computer system sez 7900 assigned 77th, 7901 South Shops.

[ajm522]

As of 5/20, CTA internal computer system sez 7900 assigned 77th, 7901 South Shops.

7900 may be making the rounds for training purposes. Chicago Garage may have been trained now its 77th turn. After 77th the bus may travel to 74th or FG for training. I know it's still a NOVA and drivers already know how to drive the 6400's but it's still a new bus nonetheless, which may require training. They might of ran it on 24 that day just because they probably had a shortage of busses.

[sw4400]

As of 5/20, CTA internal computer system sez 7900 assigned 77th, 7901 South Shops.

7901 should be released for service soon... it's been reported at South Shops a few weeks ago(Apr. 29th to be specific).

[BusHunter]

7901 should be released for service soon... it's been reported at South Shops a few weeks ago(Apr. 29th to be specific).

If so they should have just released it to 77th and left #7900 to make the rounds. Something tells me that this will be #7900's permanent location and 77th could be getting the buses first since they are so worried about operators getting hurt at 77th. Also the lack of testing points to the fact that they have seen what they want to see and are ready to proceed with the order. Most likely the next buses will be coming any day now if you look at the payments which reflects what they will receive by 30 days after the payment date. As far as the NF's, they really must not have had a choice in taking the those away, things were that bad. The question is now will FG get it's NF's back or will they just send those to 74th?

[Busjack]

If you look at the payments which reflects what they will receive by 30 days after the payment date....

No it doesn't,. it means that the invoice is to be paid 30 days after the invoice states that the milestone is met. Read it again.

[YoungBusLover]

7901 should be released for service soon... it's been reported at South Shops a few weeks ago(Apr. 29th to be specific).

Yes indeed,it looked was getting prepped for service in the southwest side garage,I was surprised to see it sitting there that early in the morning.

[ctrabs74]

7900 may be making the rounds for training purposes. Chicago Garage may have been trained now its 77th turn. After 77th the bus may travel to 74th or FG for training. I know it's still a NOVA and drivers already know how to drive the 6400's but it's still a new bus nonetheless, which may require training. They might of ran it on 24 that day just because they probably had a shortage of busses.

Except the 7900s are completely different from the 6400s, so that's going to require training operators and mechanics. That's like saying the 4000s and 4300s are the same bus since they're both New Flyer artics.

[BusHunter]

Funny though I recall 5750 stating that he drove a training #6400 bus on the #54A. I believe it was #6712. They were already a year into delivery before FG got a training bus then.

[Busjack]

Funny though I recall 5750 stating that he drove a training #6400 bus on the #54A. I believe it was #6712. They were already a year into delivery before FG got a training bus then.

I don't know about 5750, but I personally saw 6712 and 6715 outside FG, when they first came with C tags. Thus. that training was several months before they actually got buses (about 6756?), but a year after the 6400 series first started up. Of course, there was the hiatus between deliveries of Option 1 and Option 2,

[andrethebusman]

Except the 7900s are completely different from the 6400s, so that's going to require training operators and mechanics. That's like saying the 4000s and 4300s are the same bus since they're both New Flyer artics.

When the 4300's started showing up at 103rd, there was no "training" for drivers - they just started showing up on routes one day. They really are almost identical from a driver's point of view. From maintenance's point of view, well that is a different question.

[jajuan]

There is the factor that there is a 12 year difference though in how the 6400s were put together and how the 7900s will be put together while there is only a 4 year difference between the 4000s and 4300s. So that might possibly increase the chances that certain controls are in a different place than operators are used to them being on the 6400s, which is what I think ctrabs74 was probably getting at. Or there could be differences in how the two different versions of the LFS handle because of that 12 year gap in model years. The question becomes though is that 12 year gap enough to generate enough differences in control placement and vehicle handling/response to different controls to make a 7900 seem like a completely different type of bus from a 6400 and thus warrant a need for a bout of training?

[geneking7320]

Does anyone know if the engine placement of the 7900s causes significant differences to the driving performance?

[ctrabs74]

There is the factor that there is a 12 year difference though in how the 6400s were put together and how the 7900s will be put together while there is only a 4 year difference between the 4000s and 4300s. So that might possibly increase the chances that certain controls are in a different place than operators are used to them being on the 6400s, which is what I think ctrabs74 was probably getting at. Or there could be differences in how the two different versions of the LFS handle because of that 12 year gap in model years. The question becomes though is that 12 year gap enough to generate enough differences in control placement and vehicle handling/response to different controls to make a 7900 seem like a completely different type of bus from a 6400 and thus warrant a need for a bout of training?

That was where I was going with it... IIRC, the 7900s have an Allison transmission compared to the ZFs in the 6400s, so that's got to be a factor in requiring training on the 7900s as well.

I'm wondering if there was a similar type of training required for the 6000s despite the 5300s having been in service for a few years prior, despite the fact that both series were Flxibles.

[sw4400]

There is the factor that there is a 12 year difference though in how the 6400s were put together and how the 7900s will be put together while there is only a 4 year difference between the 4000s and 4300s. So that might possibly increase the chances that certain controls are in a different place than operators are used to them being on the 6400s, which is what I think ctrabs74 was probably getting at. Or there could be differences in how the two different versions of the LFS handle because of that 12 year gap in model years. The question becomes though is that 12 year gap enough to generate enough differences in control placement and vehicle handling/response to different controls to make a 7900 seem like a completely different type of bus from a 6400 and thus warrant a need for a bout of training?

It's yes and no, jajuan... looking at what specs were mentioned at the Chicago Magazine article...

• Heavier(40,000 lbs(7900's) vs. 39,560(6400's) ). It doesn't seem like much, but may affect braking distance and how the bus drives. Also, the e-cooling system is probably something both Bus Operator and Mechanic need to know about.
• More HP(280hp(7900's) vs. 250hp(6400's)... Like learning braking distance, the Bus Operator will need to know how fast these buses move, so they don't lightly hit the accelerator and "crunch!" the bus hits a car five feet in front of them because the bus moves twice as fast as the older Novas which would've been brought to a stop about two feet from that car safely at a light.

These are the two standouts for me that warrant a possible training of Bus Operators.

[artthouwill]

I've never worked for CTA so I don't know what "training" involves for bus operators. The only two trainings I ever received was when I first learned how to drive a bus (which was a 35ft GMC Fishbowl). The other was learning to drive a stick shift motorcoach (which was only one lesson). Everything else was get in it and drive. t was just a matter of learning where different things were on the bus whether it was transit or coach. It doesn't take much to adjust. If there was one thing that I had to keep in mind with all of the equipment I drove was the braking on the Orion Is. Those brakes were designed so that they wouldn't lock up. Upon learning that, I adjusted by braking somewhat sooner than I would on another bus, knowing that this bus wasn't going to stop on a dime like other buses. Yet I've never locked brakes on any bus that had decent brakes.

Things that need to be accounted for on new equipment include turning radius, acceleration, braking, and road handling. Most bus models will operate the same. By that I mean each manufacturer's line of buses has certain characteristics that are pretty much the same in all of its models. For instance, MCI coaches tend to lean when turning. This goes from the old MC8s MC9s, 102s, and the E4500 ano J4500s.

Based on my own personal experiences, there really shouldn't be much to train on concerning the new Novas, at least from a driver's standpoint. If you own a Ford, you don't need training on how to drive a Chevy or a Toyota or even a newer Ford, unless you are learning to drive a stick or you are buying a hybrid or a stretch limo.

[jajuan]

It's yes and no, jajuan... looking at what specs were mentioned at the Chicago Magazine article...

• Heavier(40,000 lbs(7900's) vs. 39,560(6400's) ). It doesn't seem like much, but may affect braking distance and how the bus drives. Also, the e-cooling system is probably something both Bus Operator and Mechanic need to know about.
• More HP(280hp(7900's) vs. 250hp(6400's)... Like learning braking distance, the Bus Operator will need to know how fast these buses move, so they don't lightly hit the accelerator and "crunch!" the bus hits a car five feet in front of them because the bus moves twice as fast as the older Novas which would've been brought to a stop about two feet from that car safely at a light.

These are the two standouts for me that warrant a possible training of Bus Operators.

Which is pretty much part of what I was thinking when I posed the point of the 12 year space in model years bringing about a difference of specs. Do you have that possibility of the knowledge and expectation of how a 6400 responds being different enough to what you actually get from a 7900 to warrant some form of retraining on the 7900 model? You not only have to factor in braking distance differences, but there is the acceleration factor. A higher weight would mean a natural expectation of smaller acceleration and an impulse to press harder on the accelerator. But at the same time the higher horsepower means the effects of higher weight is offset in some way but operators don't have experience yet with how much that offset is so they might actually overcompensate on how hard they think they may need to press down on the accelerator in a 7900 compared to a 6400.

[BusHunter]

I think it's more for the CTA execs and inspectors to see what's up with the bus. If it fails when it hits the road then it looks bad for CTA. Like with the artics with the touch doors (#4000's) had the sticker placed wrong. Now if they would've tested that in service they would've discovered it quicker than they did. Anyway you wouldn't want 50 buses showing up and then discovering the frame is showing premature cracking on the city's potholes. I don't really see training being done at all the garages just maybe a friendly looking over. Now when the electric Xcelsiors show up they will be extensively tested by all. We might not even see them in service right away.

[Busjack]

... Now when the electric Xcelsiors show up they will be extensively tested by all. ...

I really doubt that because (1) they aren't suitable for most routes, and (2) they are only getting two charging stations.

Aside from whether the feds are spending $2.4 or so million for only a one year service life, they are like the fuel cell buses, to see if the concept of a battery bus is feasible at all.

I still think you will see them only on a route like 124, with a charging station under Wacker Dr. or at Navy Pier.

[BusHunter]

I really doubt that because (1) they aren't suitable for most routes, and (2) they are only getting two charging stations.

Aside from whether the feds are spending $2.4 or so million for only a one year service life, they are like the fuel cell buses, to see if the concept of a battery bus is feasible at all.

I still think you will see them only on a route like 124, with a charging station under Wacker Dr. or at Navy Pier.

All meaning all who come in contact with them. The technology is so new, the only working example is the prototype running in Canada. This is going to be another #5900's type experiment. Garage personnel, operators, servicers anyone who is involved with these will need some type of training. Speaking of charging stations, wouldn't it make more sense to put one at the garage and on the route it runs. If the bus discharges at the garage how will it ever leave the garage?

[ctrabs74]

All meaning all who come in contact with them. The technology is so new, the only working example is the prototype running in Canada. This is going to be another #5900's type experiment. Garage personnel, operators, servicers anyone who is involved with these will need some type of training. Speaking of charging stations, wouldn't it make more sense to put one at the garage and on the route it runs. If the bus discharges at the garage how will it ever leave the garage?

Don't worry... Fearless Leader and his Faithful Sidekick Forrest have it all figured out (or at least they'll figure it out before Election Day 2015). </sarcasm>

[Busjack]

Correct thread, please...

I was looking again at the contract page for Nova bus and they submitted a few more payments.

http://vcsearch.transitchicago.com/vendorContractDetail.php?pageNum_WADAtbl_payment=2&totalRows_WADAtbl_payment=24&CONTRACT_NUM=C12FT101275135

If we look back at when #7900 showed up, I believe #7901 was with it. That was 2/3/14 and the contract payment was 1/31/14. These newest payments mostly on May 6th, reflect that the CTA may be receiving these within 30 days, so the magic date these may come to SS is by June 5th. If they are not here by then I'll be really wondering what happened to them.

The May 6th payments were reported here before. I also explained here what the 30 days meant, but you apparently chose to ignore that again.

The only new payments are May 19th, which I assume is third payment on 7900, and May 22, which appears to be the second payment on 7901.

[BusHunter]

Correct thread, please...

The May 6th payments were reported here before. I also explained here what the 30 days meant, but you apparently chose to ignore that again.

The only new payments are May 19th, which I assume is third payment on 7900, and May 22, which appears to be the second payment on 7901.

If it mean't what you said it mean't, then please explain how a bus can get from 1/2 built or built at the factory to on CTA property 3 days later with no future payment. So until I see proof that refutes otherwise, I will choose to ignore you again.

[Busjack]

If it mean't what you said it mean't, then please explain how a bus can get from 1/2 built or built at the factory to on CTA property 3 days later with no future payment. So until I see proof that refutes otherwise, I will choose to ignore you again.

Because CTA can sit on the invoice for 30 days before paying it, according to the terms of the contract. Go back and read the excerpt that I attached to this thread.

As I told sw, unless you are on the factory floor in Plattsburgh, you don't know what the degree of completion is, although Lothian found enough invoices indicating that 20 were drivable in the factory, presumably 30 days before the invoices were paid.