700-series XE40 - Deliveries & Assignments

[monsieurmétro]

On 11/20/2021 at 5:50 PM, BusHunter said:

Kind of suspicious to me. They go to NF get a new pan charger and then do a mid life rehab? The buses must barely have any miles on them. What is there to rehab. The buses cause they are electric have no engine and alot of other things like exhausts. When 700 had the fire it probably needed some new parts as well so how do they rehab something that is new. It seems to me now they are in the same boat as the 600s, you barely see them. For what cta is trying to do with chargers at the terminals, they were better off before. At least the buses ran.

I hope the intel is wrong. 15 buses sitting at SS for 6 months is not my idea of a successful venture. Maybe they can shuttle employee around the lot!! Lol!!

I agree. Shouldn't CTA choose the electric buses first over the diesel (or hybrids, if they're operating those anymore) whenever they're available? How are buses selected to be run on a particular run?

[Sam92]

51 minutes ago, monsieurmétro said:

I agree. Shouldn't CTA choose the electric buses first over the diesel (or hybrids, if they're operating those anymore) whenever they're available? How are buses selected to be run on a particular run?

As far as I know the only way they tend to dedicate buses to certain routes is having an artic roster in which they make sure even in artic shortages that they keep certain runs with an artic I’m sure electric buses might have something similar since only certain routes will have ebus friendly stuff on route don’t quote me though I’m just a civilian ?

[Busjack]

8 hours ago, BusHunter said:

...

Funny Pure Michigan is actually used in tandem with the state of Michigan's electric bus program. Dont know how it ended up over here. ...

From YoungBusLover's post

 

I don't know about that, nor the significance of "RECHARGE YOUR BATTERIES" on the letterboard. However, like the TV commercials, Michigan tourism paid for the ad, but it isn't getting its money's worth if the bus is not leaving the shops.

[Busjack]

8 hours ago, YoungBusLover said:

... 

 

...

 

4 hours ago, Mr.NewFlyer1051 said:

this is a pic from a while ago 700-701 are on the 79th fence wit the 8350’s

Since they have 7 windshield stickers, any word on how they are to be used?

[Busjack]

1 hour ago, BusHunter said:

... But really the proterras are worse. They have been dilly dallying since 2018 and all they have in service is 9 buses. ...

The first load was 6 buses. As noted above, the other 14 are a more recent issue.

[Busjack]

7 hours ago, Shannoncvpi said:

700 & 701 stay on the SS gate their never coming off if they do they do 79th then go right back to the gate must be serous issues with them

Better not be, with CTA having spent an additional $1.2 million to rehab the buses and install the Midway charger. I figure with both being New Flyer and testing some Proterras at Midway, there's still some testing and training happening. Anyway, everything in 2022 has been phlegmatic.

[Shannoncvpi]

4 hours ago, Busjack said:

Better not be, with CTA having spent an additional $1.2 million to rehab the buses and install the Midway charger. I figure with both being New Flyer and testing some Proterras at Midway, there's still some testing and training happening. Anyway, everything in 2022 has been phlegmatic.

Lol I don't see how the 700's still in testing when their going on 9 years old now 

[Busjack]

13 hours ago, Shannoncvpi said:

Lol I don't see how the 700's still in testing when their going on 9 years old now 

As indicated in the cited ordinance, they were converted to overhead charging, so, at a minimum, they have to see how long the charge lasts. Also, since the charger is in the 63 bay, they may have to rework the 63 schedule blocks.

[jajuan]

On 11/26/2022 at 7:45 PM, Shannoncvpi said:

Lol I don't see how the 700's still in testing when their going on 9 years old now 

Well in the case of the 700s, it's similar to how it was with the 800s and 900s. Both of those models were test buses a big chunk of their service lives. At the time, CTA was testing which type of hybrid bus worked better for CTA's needs given Chicago's weather and road conditions: parallel hybrid drive (the 800s) or series hybrid drive (the 900s). CTA determined parallel drive hybrids were more suitable, resulting in the 4000s when CTA needed new artics to replace the NABI 7600s, which as most of us know turned out to be junk that only made it through four years of service before CTA pulled them all. The 800s and 900s both lasted longer than their initial test periods with the 800s making it just past a decade. If not for ISE going out of business, making parts for the 900s' Thundervolt drive unavailable, the 900s probably could have been around as long as the 800s. 

Getting back to the 700s, their initial test was to determine if electric buses were viable as part of CTA's fleet. But then when CTA made the pledge to go all electric along with other TAs making that commitment and transition away from buses operated by carbon based fuels, they were converted to overhead charging as noted by Busjack and became part of the same test as the 600s to gauge the effectiveness of quick charging in normal bus operations and examine how efficiently the buses remain powered after a quick charge. 

[Shannoncvpi]

On 11/28/2022 at 6:11 PM, jajuan said:

Well in the case of the 700s, it's similar to how it was with the 800s and 900s. Both of those models were test buses a big chunk of their service lives. At the time, CTA was testing which type of hybrid bus worked better for CTA's needs given Chicago's weather and road conditions: parallel hybrid drive (the 800s) or series hybrid drive (the 900s). CTA determined parallel drive hybrids were more suitable, resulting in the 4000s when CTA needed new artics to replace the NABI 7600s, which as most of us know turned out to be junk that only made it through four years of service before CTA pulled them all. The 800s and 900s both lasted longer than their initial test periods with the 800s making it just past a decade. If not for ISE going out of business, making parts for the 900s' Thundervolt drive unavailable, the 900s probably could have been around as long as the 800s. 

Getting back to the 700s, their initial test was to determine if electric buses were viable as part of CTA's fleet. But then when CTA made the pledge to go all electric along with other TAs making that commitment and transition away from buses operated by carbon based fuels, they were converted to overhead charging as noted by Busjack and became part of the same test as the 600s to gauge the effectiveness of quick charging in normal bus operations and examine how efficiently the buses remain powered after a quick charge. 

So that explains why the 700's rarely gets used now their testing is over with 

[Busjack]

1 hour ago, Shannoncvpi said:

So that explains why the 700's rarely gets used now their testing is over with 

I don't think anyone said that.

[Shannoncvpi]

19 hours ago, Busjack said:

I don't think anyone said that.

I was asking bro 

[artthouwill]

20 minutes ago, Shannoncvpi said:

I was asking bro 

It didn't seem like a question considering the? Wasn't at the end of the comment.   I don't know why CTA isn't running the 700s

  They just barely have been running the 600s.  Even though the 700s were retrofitted to have overhead charging it may be possible that other parts that may be needed that aren't compatible with either the other New Flyers or the other electric buses and CTA could deem not worth buying parts for two older buses.  It would seem like they would or should make that investment since they invested in the overhead conversion

  But something mechanical or electrical could be wrong which would render them inoperable..

Interesting that CTA is testing Proterras and has some electric Novas on order but has shunned New Flyer to this point for acquiring any more electrics.

  We will see what CTA will do when its time to replace the artics.

[Busjack]

1 hour ago, artthouwill said:

It didn't seem like a question considering the? Wasn't at the end of the comment.   I don't know why CTA isn't running the 700s

  They just barely have been running the 600s.  Even though the 700s were retrofitted to have overhead charging it may be possible that other parts that may be needed that aren't compatible with either the other New Flyers or the other electric buses and CTA could deem not worth buying parts for two older buses.  It would seem like they would or should make that investment since they invested in the overhead conversion

  But something mechanical or electrical could be wrong which would render them inoperable..

Interesting that CTA is testing Proterras and has some electric Novas on order but has shunned New Flyer to this point for acquiring any more electrics.

  We will see what CTA will do when its time to replace the artics.

I agree about the lack of question mark.

However, the rest doesn't make sense. I do not understand the presumption on this board that because the 8350s, 7000s, 600s and 700s had a slow roll-out, they must be defective. (Yes,I'm shouting.) Do you really believe that after paying $1.2 million to New Flyer, NF didn't provide spare parts? Or after wrapping the buses, CTA intended to defraud Michigan tourism. Possible, but not likely.

I don't have any inside information, but I am convinced that no one here does either. There are more likely explanations in the public domain, like Pace saying that it bought the Gillig bus to see how it worked in various divisions and in Winter weather, 74th Garage needing upgrades (anyone here working there?), lack of mechanics or trainers, etc.

CTA engaged in fraud during the Huberman years, but I'm not convinced of it now.

[Bus1883]

1 hour ago, artthouwill said:

It didn't seem like a question considering the? Wasn't at the end of the comment.   I don't know why CTA isn't running the 700s

  They just barely have been running the 600s.  Even though the 700s were retrofitted to have overhead charging it may be possible that other parts that may be needed that aren't compatible with either the other New Flyers or the other electric buses and CTA could deem not worth buying parts for two older buses.  It would seem like they would or should make that investment since they invested in the overhead conversion

  But something mechanical or electrical could be wrong which would render them inoperable..

Interesting that CTA is testing Proterras and has some electric Novas on order but has shunned New Flyer to this point for acquiring any more electrics.

  We will see what CTA will do when its time to replace the artics.

I can’t remember when the last time they’ve ran that is how long they’ve possibly been sidelined. CTA seems to run everything else in and out but those 2 buses. 

[Shannoncvpi]

2 hours ago, Bus1883 said:

I can’t remember when the last time they’ve ran that is how long they’ve possibly been sidelined. CTA seems to run everything else in and out but those 2 buses. 

One of them ran back in the summer time but only 1 time 

[busfan2847]

17 hours ago, Bus1883 said:

I can’t remember when the last time they’ve ran that is how long they’ve possibly been sidelined. CTA seems to run everything else in and out but those 2 buses. 

From data from bustracker, the last time they were in service was:

700 - 8/9/2021

701 - 3/17/2021

[jajuan]

On 11/29/2022 at 6:41 PM, Shannoncvpi said:

So that explains why the 700's rarely gets used now their testing is over with 

 

On 11/29/2022 at 7:52 PM, Busjack said:

I don't think anyone said that.

Yeah I definitely didn't say that. I was concurring with Busjack's acknowledgment that the buses were converted to overhead charging to be a part of the same testing as the 600s, which for the 700s would be their second test. As for why they haven't run for a while, let's remember that CTA has that huge maintenance backlog at South Shops, which has had numerous artics and 40-footers sidelined for months. They've been receiving both the 8350s and 600s and trying to get their rollout going. They had to complete terminal chargers at designated slots at both Navy Pier and Midway to get the 600 rollout in gear. Add to that, they've had all of the above affected by the serious labor shortage that hit them and other TAs. I'll have to agree with Busjack that there's more than enough evidence of what's possibly affected the 700s being out on the road without getting to the conclusion of defects being part of the problem. The biggest contributors I see are the labor shortage and the maintenance backlog that's highly likely fueled by said shortage.

[Shannoncvpi]

On 12/1/2022 at 10:54 AM, busfan2847 said:

From data from bustracker, the last time they were in service was:

700 - 8/9/2021

701 - 3/17/2021

Dam over a year since they was on the streets

[William Miles]

why doesn't the cta add more 700series up to 900 series. Have they ever thought about that

[YoungBusLover]

8 minutes ago, William Miles said:

why doesn't the cta add more 700series up to 900 series. Have they ever thought about that

They have in the form of the current fleet of #600s. As it has been explained time and time again the #700s,#800s & #900s were all merely test stage fleets for future purchases. 

[Busjack]

10 hours ago, William Miles said:

why doesn't the cta add more 700series up to 900 series. Have they ever thought about that

If you are asking numbering, that's arbitrary. (Just look at Pace numbers.) Only things to which CTA has contractually committed are up to 600 Nova Buses, 45 Proterras, and apparently 6 Nova LFSe+s.  After that CTA says it is only buying electric buses. What fleet numbers they have only matters to the inventory computer. If you are asking if CTA should buy more NF CHARGE buses, that depends on who is the lowest responsible bidder that has production capacity.

If @YoungBusLover or I haven't answered your question, please state it more clearly.

[Busjack]

On 12/1/2022 at 10:54 AM, busfan2847 said:

From data from bustracker, the last time they were in service was:

700 - 8/9/2021

701 - 3/17/2021

However, not in @maths22's tracker.

11 hours ago, jajuan said:

 

Yeah I definitely didn't say that. I was concurring with Busjack's acknowledgment that the buses were converted to overhead charging to be a part of the same testing as the 600s, which for the 700s would be their second test. ...

Based on these two comments, it looks like they were tested when they were returned, but on a plug-in charge, and whatever testing is to be done on the Midway charger is still a work in progress.

[Busjack]

Looking around to post in the right topic, I came across in the original 2011 Electric Bus Procurement topic posts starting here that the TIGGER grant was for a 1-year test, so the 12-year rule wouldn't apply here. However, I still contend that CTA didn't spend $1.2 million from some other source just to wrap and park the buses.

[busfan2847]

On 12/3/2022 at 2:02 PM, Busjack said:

However, not in @maths22's tracker.

 

No I keep my own records based on data from Maths22. Have been doing it since 2017. Not listed on bustracker run history, but if you go back to those dates you will find the record in the archive.

8/9/2021 @ 8am

Bus    #Route      #Block ID (?)Garage

700   79:    79th   79 -7087 (77th)

3/17/2021 @ 8am

701   79:    79th   79 -7077 (77th)