Jump to content
ajay

2005-2009 New Flyer D40LF(Retiring)

Recommended Posts

20 minutes ago, NewFlyerMCI said:

This was my question too. For some strange reason, I don't see Xcelsior's winning the bid, so Gillig or El Dorado?

As usual, I don't see Gillig bidding, although there was an unidentified third requester for clarifications in the bidding for the 7900s.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/26/2018 at 2:02 PM, Busjack said:

That isn't horribly clear (in the sense of that it's 100 buses in addition to the current contracts), and clearly there are at most 100 6400s to replace. I only take it that there is claimed to be enough money in the 5 year capital plan to replace 100 6400s. What surprises me is that CTA is admitting for the first time in a capital plan that it has to replace 100 6400s. If you want to compare the comparable paragraphs in the 2018 budget:

In 2018 the CTA will procure the remaining 25 buses to complete the recent Nova bus order totaling 450 buses.  ....
Over the next five years, as part of the CTA’s bus modernization plan, CTA will invest $35.5 million in FY 2018-2022 for the purchase of 25 new Nova buses and provide for the initial installment of funds for the anticipated procurement to replace the 1000 Series buses.

First, we have the 25 buses in both years, which means (in response to a prior debate with Andre) that some money is being carried forward to be spent in 2019. Second, the paragraph I quoted said nothing about still having to replace 6400s other than completing the outstanding contract for 25, as compared to the paragraph you quoted from the 2019 to @ajay

 

I dont know where you guys are coming up with 2 sets of 25 nova buses that are coming. According to the contract 25 buses are all that they can get. I think the electrics, #8325's and loss of forest glen routes that travel to skokie and Evanston will just about kill off the 6400s. Need I remind everyone those buses are old and have alot of spares so it's a question of how many they really need. How many old buses run a rush hour period? 

As far as Chicago getting all the electrics just 5 are suppose to show up initially for the #66 experiment. Then the rest will come probably going elsewhere but I wouldn't doubt some will work multiple routes at terminals. Union station bus station comes to mind. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, NewFlyerMCI said:

This was my question too. For some strange reason, I don't see Xcelsior's winning the bid, so Gillig or El Dorado?

As a rider I prefer the Gilligs to the El Dorados.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, BusHunter said:

I dont know where you guys are coming up with 2 sets of 25 nova buses that are coming.

I'm not, It's clear that the only contract for diesel buses is for a total of 450, 425 are on the property and 25 are on order.

The only thing I said was the money was apparently carried over from the 2018 line item to the 2019 line item.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Mr.cta85 said:

My question is when it's time to replace the 1000 series, what bus manufacturer will most likely get the contract? Will cta give it to New Flyer once again to replace the flyers with more flyers since the 1's we had before well currently have should I say lol.

We're still several years from a contract being procured for the beginning of retirements of them, but the usual manufacturers the CTA knows come to mind...

  • New Flyer
  • Nova Bus

I can't say Proterra right now, as they are an all-electric bus company and even though we have two all-electric buses from New Flyer and 20 on order from Proterra, I still think all-electric buses are in their infancy and will be for the next few years or so until they are proven reliable over a period of a lifespan(12 years minimum). The Hybrid Diesel/Electric buses have better emissions than the Clean Diesel models, and both manufacturers make Hybrids.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, sw4400 said:

The Hybrid Diesel/Electric buses have better emissions than the Clean Diesel models, and both manufacturers make Hybrids.

Actually not, either emission-wise or fuel mileage-wise to justify the $200K more per bus. You'll note that CTA has said nothing about 40 ft hybrids in the past 8 or so years, and retired 19 out of 20.

Hybrid car technology now gets 44 to 55 overall mpg for about $1000 more  than a coventional car. I haven't heard  that buses have made similar strides.

 

Share this post


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

Actually not, either emission-wise or fuel mileage-wise to justify the $200K more per bus. You'll note that CTA has said nothing about 40 ft hybrids in the past 8 or so years, and retired 19 out of 20.

Hybrid car technology now gets 44 to 55 overall mpg for about $1000 more  than a coventional car. I haven't heard  that buses have made similar strides.

 

Probably cant afford 1000 hybrids. I dont where you shop but hybrids cost more than a 1000 more a piece. I cant justify paying 5 to 10k extra for this technology. The auto industry is going towards more 4 cylinders. We have 4 cylinder SUVs and actual turbocharged 4 cylinders that can have competitive horsepower upwards of 300hp. The car I drive is almost 300 hp and it has plenty of power. The car frames are light nowadays and you dont need much to take off. Even 180 hp cars are respectable. This is why alot of cars are going bye bye. 4 cyl SUVs make the automakers smile. 

Wasn't the artics leased? If so CTA cant really afford those either. I wonder how much we are saving buying electric?  Is electric that much cheaper? CTA or even regular Joe's need windmills to really save. If you go out east in Findlay, Ohio they have a farm that has 500 windmills you can see from I-80 or I-24. I think I was reading it helps power Toledo. .

Share this post


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

but hybrids cost more than a 1000 more a piece.

AAA/True Car. And as I mentioned before I bought one.

9 hours ago, BusHunter said:

Wasn't the artics leased?

The first 150 were. But plenty of other buses (such as the 6400s are), and CTA bonded out options 3 and 4 of the 1000s, too. Again, you tell us if you understand the various bonds and leases at the back of each CTA budget book. If you are defining "afford" as "pay cash," CTA can't afford anything. It certainly can't afford the 95th station and 7000s, which are, in most part, TIFIA loans,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

4000-4149 were "sold" and "leased back" under an IRS provision of the time so that the investor group who "bought" them could write off the depreciation while CTA got some badly needed cash. There were many of these deals done for a few years until the IRS changed the provision. 

This is very different from the deal CTA had with Mack for the 7200's in 1956 where the CTA in essence paid for them over 10 years and Mack held title until the "car loan" was paid off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, andrethebusman said:

4000-4149 were "sold" and "leased back" under an IRS provision of the time so that the investor group who "bought" them could write off the depreciation while CTA got some badly needed cash. There were many of these deals done for a few years until the IRS changed the provision. 

This is very different from the deal CTA had with Mack for the 7200's in 1956 where the CTA in essence paid for them over 10 years and Mack held title until the "car loan" was paid off.

Incorrect.  You can search the CTA site for Traxis and PNC, as I did elsewhere in this forum. If you described the Mack transaction correctly, they were exactly the same.

Update: The post with the links is here. See, especially, the PNC ordinance which says "provided that the terms require that unencumbered title to all vehicles reverts to the Chicago Transit Authority upon payment of the final installment."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No these are different. The Mack deal was because CTA needed the buses and didn't have the money, so Mack cut a deal Flx would not to do a lease-purchase. Flx wanted money right away, Mack was willing to finance.

The 4000 deal was because CTA cannot write off depreciation and the investors could. Basically a tax-avoidance deal for the people behind Traxis.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, andrethebusman said:

No these are different. The Mack deal was because CTA needed the buses and didn't have the money, so Mack cut a deal Flx would not to do a lease-purchase. Flx wanted money right away, Mack was willing to finance.

The 4000 deal was because CTA cannot write off depreciation and the investors could. Basically a tax-avoidance deal for the people behind Traxis.

Sorry, you're wrong!

Did you read any of the links? Did you read any of the budgets?

For instance, at page 109 of the 2019 budget:

The CTA may also use long-term lease obligations to finance or refinance capital equipment. Prior to entering into any lease financing, the Authority will evaluate three factors: the useful life of assets financed, the terms and conditions of the lease, and the budgetary, debt capacity and tax implications.

And on page 111:

lease.thumb.png.8f56413861e3de94514ccb4441da68d7.png

And on page 129:

lease.png.bc66c35ecaf48fed555e1928549c302c.png

I also know darn well what a safe harbor lease is. An investor pays the TA for the depreciation deduction, but there is not a repayment obligation. Neither of the two described above are like that,CTA is paying debt obligations to pay for the two series of buses.

Maybe you were trying to make a distinction that New Flyer Financial* wasn't the lessor. A distinction without a difference.

The record here is quite clear. If someone told you to the contrary, they gave you bad information. Repeating it doesn't make it better.

Are you going to read the above excerpts?

 

______________

*If there is any such entity. There was NABI Financial Services, but it was their affiliated company, Traxis.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In my opinion,I think 1001-1020 is gonna retire first. Correct me if i wrong but i said that because they are 2005 models.

Edited by ajay
Wrong Spelling

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, ajay said:

Im really hope CTA or Pace gets some XD40s XD60s,or XN40s. Like pace got those Orion 7 Next Gens. They should have got more.

Your wishful thinking will probably never become a reality. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, ajay said:

Im really hope CTA or Pace gets some XD40s XD60s,or XN40s. Like pace got those Orion 7 Next Gens. They should have got more.

Well, we're several years from this starting.... who knows? New Flyer might replace the Xcelsior with something else by then. And then, you still have Nova Bus and the X-Factor(that being another bus manufacturer).

New Flyer and Nova Bus would be the top two because the CTA knows them both and has had good buses from them(6400-Series and 7900-Series from Nova Bus and 5800-Series and 1000-Series, 800-Series and 900-Series from New Flyer-I omitted the 60' because we're talking 40' here).

Share this post


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

Im really hope CTA or Pace gets some XD40s XD60s,or XN40s. Like pace got those Orion 7 Next Gens. They should have got more.

To address this specifically:

  • CTA isn't getting any CNG buses because it would have to make the same infrastructure improvements (rehabbing a garage to remove open flames in the furnace; constructing a fueling station) that Pace did at South (for which the state capital program paid, and if you were awake at all during the election last week, there currently isn't one).
  • The only reason Pace got the 2 Orion hybrids was that Sen. Mark Kirk and the politicians in Highland Park made a stink about hybrid buses, and supposedly only Orion made a midbus one. Besides their never being as efficient as thought, Daimler put Orion out of its misery a couple of months later.

You can look up these matters on this forum.

8 hours ago, YoungBusLover said:

Your wishful thinking will probably never become a reality. 

If the requests for clarifications to both the CTA and Pace requests for proposals indicate anything, NF is not interested in the business except only on its terms. Nova seemed somewhat flexible as indicated by such questions as "do the wires have to be that color?" to which CTA said yes, and somehow Nova still got the contract, or Nova proposing its type of floor, to which both CTA and Pace replied could be proposed.

Since someone mentioned Orion 7s, the Standard Bus Procurement Guidelines were developed by NY MTA and TTC because of prior rust buckets,and the Orion 7 conformed to them. While both CTA and Pace use something that looks like them (CTA said that the NABIs were bid on them) both show certain commonalities, such as that the frames must withstand some kind of extremely corrosive road salt used here. As noted in the New Eldorados? topic, the Pace specification has become very specific.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, YoungBusLover said:

Your wishful thinking will probably never become a reality. 

Just like Sw4400 said,Who knows? CTA still needs to get rid of their DE60LFs in the next few years. But they might go get some NovaBus LFSAs. Still.

Share this post


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

Just like Sw4400 said,Who knows? CTA still needs to get rid of their DE60LFs in the next few years. But they might go get some NovaBus LFSAs. Still.

On what timeframe are you operating? The 1000s are scheduled first, and only a few are on the current 5 year capital plan. The artics are now only getting midlife rehabs, and there are 100 too many of them.

Maybe you have the psychic ability to tell us what bus models and manufacturers will be around in 2027.

Share this post


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

On what timeframe are you operating? The 1000s are scheduled first, and only a few are on the current 5 year capital plan. The artics are now only getting midlife rehabs, and there are 100 too many of them.

Maybe you have the psychic ability to tell us what bus models and manufacturers will be around in 2027.

Well he's a younger member so I don't think he understands the real operations that take place with ordering,rehabbing and retiring equipment such as the 100 or so #1000's that are slated for retirement in the next 4 - 5 years from now. Knowing how CTA is by now I doubt 100 will get retired of the jump after seeing how long it took for the #6400's to bite the dust but this overall topic serves no real purpose until CTA gets a liable deal done with these upcoming Electric buses, correct me if i'm wrong though. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, YoungBusLover said:

Well he's a younger member so I don't think he understands the real operations that take place with ordering,rehabbing and retiring equipment

I was assuming so. The next place I was going to go was "what were you predicting in 1996 would be purchased to replace the 200 D901 Rustbuckets due for immediate replacement?" Flxible was just about to go  out of business, for instance. But, based on your comment, there would not be any point to pursuing that. 

53 minutes ago, YoungBusLover said:

until CTA gets a liable deal done with these upcoming Electric buses, correct me if i'm wrong though. 

I'm not sure what you mean by this. At this point, CTA is only contractually obligated to take 25 Novas and 20 electrics. There are options for 25 more electrics, which CTA can exercise or not. Other than that, there isn't any other outstanding contract, so CTA would have to solicit another one to purchase any buses in addition to the 70 indicated in the preceding sentences. However, the contract for up to 45 electric buses doesn't preclude CTA from soliciting proposals for diesel or any other kind of buses.  

Share this post


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

I was assuming so. The next place I was going to go was "what were you predicting in 1996 would be purchased to replace the 200 D901 Rustbuckets due for immediate replacement?" Flxible was just about to go  out of business, for instance. But, based on your comment, there would not be any point to pursuing that. 

I'm not sure what you mean by this. At this point, CTA is only contractually obligated to take 25 Novas and 20 electrics. There are options for 25 more electrics, which CTA can exercise or not. Other than that, there isn't any other outstanding contract, so CTA would have to solicit another one to purchase any buses in addition to the 70 indicated in the preceding sentences. However, the contract for up to 45 electric buses doesn't preclude CTA from soliciting proposals for diesel or any other kind of buses.  

I meant to say a reliable deal (typo on my part). 

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

×