600-series Proterra BE40/ZX5 - Updates

[artthouwill]

1 hour ago, Busjack said:

On the June Finance subcommittee agenda:

Technically there isn't a contract to assign, but who's going to get it??? Who's saying New Flyer?

Is this basically a  "reassignment " of Proterra's assignment?  Perhaps the new owners can't or won't fill the CTA order for Proterras that would still have needed to be built and delivered.  Perhaps this will also prompt Pace to act accordingly.

New Flyer should be the obvious favorite here, but we are talking about the CTA.  So it wouldn't surprise me if Gillig actually would win this assignment.   

[Busjack]

14 hours ago, artthouwill said:

Is this basically a  "reassignment " of Proterra's assignment?  Perhaps the new owners can't or won't fill the CTA order for Proterras that would still have needed to be built and delivered.  Perhaps this will also prompt Pace to act accordingly.

New Flyer should be the obvious favorite here, but we are talking about the CTA.  So it wouldn't surprise me if Gillig actually would win this assignment.   

Based on what BC Transit said and that CTA contracts were listed in the same court order, I assume that there is no contract. However, given how the contract with the body supplier were handled, it's possible that Phoenix wants to renegotiate the contract. We'll have to wait for either it being discussed tomorrow or the ordinance posted to find out what happened.

As for Pace, maybe Metzger will say something tomorrow, or Pace may just be congratulating itself for making 40 years and praying it makes 41, but it was not listed on the court order.

[Busjack]

7 hours ago, Busjack said:

We'll have to wait for either it being discussed tomorrow or the ordinance posted to find out what happened.

 

Item 19.A-1: "No questions."..

I guess we'll have to wait for the ordinance.

[Tcmetro]

Here's the ordinance: 

https://www.transitchicago.com/file.aspx?DocumentId=9679

Reassigned to Phoenix Cars (Proterra successor) with no change to the contract.

[Busjack]

4 hours ago, Tcmetro said:

Here's the ordinance: 

https://www.transitchicago.com/file.aspx?DocumentId=9679

Reassigned to Phoenix Cars (Proterra successor) with no change to the contract.

I noted the possibility of that, but don't now see why the rejection and board approval of the same terms were necessary, when that would have been the result of the bankruptcy court's order of sale. Phoenix must have convinced CTA of something in the 3 month interim (the reference to honoring all service obligations may be a clue).

[Busjack]

On 8/11/2024 at 11:58 AM, YoungBusLover said:

...

Also #600,#602,#603 & #622 are at 77th as well. Farebox has been removed among parts from #600. 

On the other hand, @maths22's tracker indicates most of the rest have been in service recently:

 

12 out of 23. Could be better, but not so bad.

[YoungBusLover]

5 hours ago, Busjack said:

On the other hand, @maths22's tracker indicates most of the rest have been in service recently:

 

12 out of 23. Could be better, but not so bad.

It's a pleasant surprise to see half the fleet back in action, I hope whatever issues they had were resolved for the colder months ahead.

[Al Mac]

On 10/17/2024 at 7:13 PM, Smolensk said:

Thank you, I appreciate your response.  But the detour was along 3 major thoroughfares.  There were several stoplights along the path where she could have let me off and I would have been quite happy.

 

On 4/15/2018 at 2:19 PM, Aiden Tabucic said:

Are they going to repair 700 or is it just going to be 701 now

That’s a really really good question! I hope so and just run it on the #2/ and or 79th street .

 

[Erin Mishkin Jr.]

1 hour ago, Al Mac said:

 

That’s a really really good question! I hope so and just run it on the #2/ and or 79th street .

 

Those are retired permanently.

[Al Mac]

6 hours ago, Erin Mishkin Jr. said:

Those are retired permanently.

Waste of money! 

[Adam Hubbard]

Is 700 and 701 expected to come out of retirement to get repairs and be back in service?

[Busjack]

22 hours ago, Erin Mishkin Jr. said:

Those are retired permanently.

 

10 hours ago, Adam Hubbard said:

Is 700 and 701 expected to come out of retirement to get repairs and be back in service?

@Adam Hubbard:You don't seem able to read what was posted up the thread. Why repost a question that was asked and answered?

15 hours ago, Al Mac said:

Waste of money! 

I was thinking this is the wrong thread, but the 700s one is so old that I couldnt find it. The original purchase was for a 2-year trial. What was probably the waste of money (and I don't know if it was local or federal money) was the change order in Ordinance 018-051:

Looks like for the $1.2 million, CTA only got a couple of trips on 79 and the Midway charger.

[Busjack]

I wonder how serious this item is in the Buying Plan:

Also the plan and 2025 Budget have references to Phase 2 of the Route 66 project; I wonder how that is distinguished from what came before:

[Tcmetro]

That at least helps to understand what the next order may look like. Based on the capital plan, CTA is planning to replace the 2008 New Flyer articulateds with electric buses, so it will be interesting to see if the RFP includes 40', 60', or some combo of buses.

[Busjack]

19 hours ago, Shannon tahoeppv said:

Our electric bus junk most don't go out 🤣🤣 & we then moved all of our long term hold buses

 

14 hours ago, artthouwill said:

At this rate CTA will have to find new funding sources for diesel buses. What's the point of buying electric buses?  I guess if they don't run,  they achieve zero emissions 

I don't know if the problem is experimental technology or just inherent to Proterra, but there is an outstanding recall of Proterra buses for a "software update to correct an overheating issue."  (FTA)

There doesn't seem to be as many reported problems with NF and Gillig.

[Shannon tahoeppv]

3 hours ago, Busjack said:

 

I don't know if the problem is experimental technology or just inherent to Proterra, but there is an outstanding recall of Proterra buses for a "software update to correct an overheating issue."  (FTA)

There doesn't seem to be as many reported problems with NF and Gillig.

🤣🤣 they just been nothing but problems since cta got them in what 2019 & took 2-3 years for em to hit the streets

[Erin Mishkin Jr.]

I've been noticing an interesting trend with 622 being taken out of service every morning, despite the runs it's on (primarily 63-601, but sometimes 63-602 or 63-604), are supposed to end in the evening. I don't know whether there is a reason for this or if they want to take it OOS early meaning there will normally be a missing bus when they take 622 OOS at Midway in the morning. This shows they can't always keep up with their "10 minutes or better service" down 63rd. For example, at 11:00 AM in the morning going east at Pulaski, there's supposed to be a bus to Stony Island about every 8 minutes and normally if they take 622 out of service at Midway at 10:30 AM, normally a replacement bus doesn't show up until the next westbound run at about 11:45 AM.

Here's what time the runs 622 has been on is supposed to go out of service.

63-601 - scheduled end time at 5:34 PM

63-602 - scheduled end time at 5:10 PM

63-604 - scheduled end time at 7:12 PM

It has once been put on 63-617 after it was on it's normal 63-601 and another bus for 63-601 left Midway 10 minutes late and no other bus was sent for 63-617 until they took 622 OOS to Stony Island for it to partially complete the run.

Here is what I noticed each time it was out this pick.

3/24 - on 63-601 - taken OOS at Stony Island at 11:45 AM and there was no bus for 63-601 until 5:10 PM, and 1424 immediately showed up at Oakley at 5:10 PM and then it went to pull in at Midway.

3/26 - on 63-602 - the map says it appears to have broke down at Rockwell going west at about 12:08 PM, and was taken OOS at 12:40 PM. The replacement bus for 622 was 1446, and 1446 showed up at Cottage Grove going west at 1:50 PM, successfully completing the trip and pulling in on time.

3/27 - on 63-601 - 622 was taken OOS at Midway at about 10:30 AM. The replacement bus for the run, 1483, showed up at the Red Line going west at about 12:05 PM and was able to complete the rest of 63-601 on time. No bus was on 63-601 between Midway and Stony Island going east, and then up to the Red Line going west.

3/28 - on 63-604 - taken OOS at Ashland going west at 9:20 AM. 1501 was the immediate replacement bus at Ashland and 63-604 had 100% attendance that day as both buses were able to complete all the rounds of that run without missing a trip.

3/31 - on 63-601 - 622 was once again taken OOS at Midway at 10:30 AM. The replacement bus that day was 1420, and it showed up at Cottage Grove going westbound at 11:52 AM. Again, 63-601 had no bus going east from Midway to Stony Island from 10:45 AM to 11:39 AM.

4/1 - on 63-601 - 622 was taken OOS again at 10:30 AM, and the replacement bus is 1542, showing up at Stony Island at 11:45 AM. The westbound run was 100% completed with 1542, but that same 10:45-11:39 eastbound run had no bus.

4/2 - on 63-657 - started its run at Midway 20 minutes late, but was able to successfully complete the entire trip for 63-657 into 10:00 PM without missing a run.

4/3 - on 63-601 - 622 was taken OOS at Midway at 6:15 AM, but had an immediate replacement at Midway with 8081 leaving 10 minutes late, but the run was covered 100% with 8081 for the rest of that day.

4/7 - on 63-601 - appears to have broke down at Stony Island at 7:15 AM and the replacement bus showed up at Stony Island at 9:30 AM which was 1387, later that day 1387 ended up sitting at Union for over an hour before being replaced by 8021 (over 45 minutes late) right after the Red Line going west. Appears a 992 took 8021 to the driver and took 1387 to the garage. 8021 was sent OOS back to Stony Island upon its arrival to Midway and then completed its final run to Midway.

 

I'm just wondering why 622 always goes OOS early on its morning runs, there might be some reasoning involved but that's just what I've been noticing every day this pick it's been out (except for the one evening run it did).