CTA Buses: Retirements & Future Procurements(General)

[sw4400]

Moving topic here to keep topics on point.....

 

[sw4400]

1 hour ago, Busjack said:

But the point was that nothing other than the overhauls will be done to or with the 4000s until that is completed or nearly completed.

Well, speaking of overhauls and future retirements..... I got a rare chance to ride #804 yesterday(my first time on a DE40LF). It rides good still, despite being 10 years old and unrehabbed(still has the fluorescent lighting when it was delivered). The remaining DE40LF buses here might be gone in the next couple of years, as I don't think the CTA will fund rehabs on 10 or less buses. The loss of them will be negligible to Kedzie, I'm sure, with over 180 D40LF's assigned.

[See Tea Eh]

Losing ten buses (if they work) without replacement will be noticeable to any garage.

[Busjack]

2 hours ago, See Tea Eh said:

Losing ten buses (if they work) without replacement will be noticeable to any garage.

But then there is float of about 500 (see the math's Excel Challenge) and the More Bus Moves thread, so the "without replacement" is fairly meaningless.

[jajuan]

11 hours ago, Busjack said:

But then there is float of about 500 (see the math's Excel Challenge) and the More Bus Moves thread, so the "without replacement" is fairly meaningless.

Not if that float of 500 isn't rearranged to cover those ten buses, which I think that's the point he was making based on Sw framing his initial post in that way if you look at where sw says "The loss of them will be negligible to Kedzie, I'm sure, with over 180 D40LF's assigned."

[Busjack]

1 minute ago, jajuan said:

Not if that float of 500 isn't rearranged to cover those ten buses, which I think that's the point he was making based on Sw framing his initial post in that way if you look at where sw says "The loss of them will be negligible to Kedzie, I'm sure, with over 180 D40LF's assigned."

I was replying to See, not sw.

[jajuan]

24 minutes ago, Busjack said:

I was replying to See, not sw.

Granted, but his statement was based on sw's as my prior post attempted to out. My apologies if my use of "he" made it a bit unclear that I meant See in that instance and not sw.

[Busjack]

On 8/18/2016 at 3:12 PM, Busjack said:

I decided to take the maths22 Excel Challenge for the entire system, since the FG one indicated about a 30% spare ratio. Done as of 8 a.m. to keep the comparison constant.

mathswholesystem.xls

Anyway, it comes up with 1282 buses in service out of a total of approx. 1870 (RTAMS say 1888 as of Jan 2016). That also indicates a spare ratio of 30%. While some are accident casualties or the like, there doesn't seem any shortage of buses to cover increased runs.

I remember a controversy in the late 1990s that the FTA wanted its money back because CTA had too many spare L cars, and CTA justified it by saying (before the rehabs) that the fleet was unreliable. This sounds like it is getting into that territory.

And today at  8 a.m.

Sept 6.xls

Result:1285 buses. Correction: 95th is on here, so unless there are other ghost buses, fleet demand is hardly affected.