Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
sw4400

Bombardier In Financial Peril

Recommended Posts

Same Bombardier. Tried to be a big boy in rail car world by taking over Hawker-Siddeley in Thunder Bay. Did OK until the Toronto fiasco - years behind schedule building new cars for TTC. Rumours that late penalties will sink them have been circulating for a while now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, sw4400 said:

Not sure if this is the rail company also that produced the 5000-Series railcars, or just a airplane manufacturer. 

First paragraph said "maker of trains and airplanes."

To add to Andre's list, I'm sure being being boxed out of MBTA, CTA, and MTA didn't help.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Busjack said:

First paragraph said "maker of trains and airplanes."

To add to Andre's list, I'm sure being being boxed out of MBTA, CTA, and MTA didn't help.

To add to this, Airbus took over the C series jets Bombardier was building and renamed the jets Airbus 220.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BBD did pretty well with the New York and Chicago subway cars. The TTC order went completely fubar for reasons that are hard to understand. Same plant, same workforce, just can't do anything right all of a sudden.

Share this post


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

BBD did pretty well with the New York and Chicago subway cars.

Not when NY barred Bombardier from bidding on the current procurement because it was not on time on the last one, CTA's response to Bombardier's protest of the 7000s award stated that Bombardier was guilty of delays in delivering the 5000s. The NYC thread also has references to Bombardier not being on time for a BART contract.

I don't think you are in a position to judge the technical merits of the cars, if that's what you are trying to do. Certainly CTA concluded in its response to the protest that Bombardier's 7000s proposal was not so technically superior to CRRC's as to justify the higher cost.

A conclusion I personally drew from the CTA response was that a company in good shape would not have filed consistent meritless protests in both Boston and Chicago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Busjack said:

Not when NY barred Bombardier from bidding on the current procurement because it was not on time on the last one, CTA's response to Bombardier's protest of the 7000s award stated that Bombardier was guilty of delays in delivering the 5000s. The NYC thread also has references to Bombardier not being on time for a BART contract.

I don't think you are in a position to judge the technical merits of the cars, if that's what you are trying to do. Certainly CTA concluded in its response to the protest that Bombardier's 7000s proposal was not so technically superior to CRRC's as to justify the higher cost.

A conclusion I personally drew from the CTA response was that a company in good shape would not have filed consistent meritless protests in both Boston and Chicago.

I have to agree with @Busjack here... wheel casting & bearing issues(so bad the press said they were close to causing a derailment), dynamic brakes failing and even frames not properly secured(missing a bolt) all are in the troubled history of the 5000-series railcars.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In my view the Toronto Rocket cars looked like a cakewalk for the TTC who bought them compared to the R179s and 5000s. For the 5000s alone, they were pulled from service at least once due to bad trucks, had incomplete body frame welds, and numerous other issues. The R179s fared even worse. The entire first bodyshell set was rejected by the MTA because of bad quality, delaying the debut of the cars by a year, and when they finally did get put in service, it didn’t take them long to get put back in the shop for faulty doors. I don’t remember correctly, but either the train wouldn’t move because it sensed not all doors were closed even when they were, or the doors opened when the train was in motion.

The biggest complaint with the Rockets is that if the doors fail to close three times, the train needs to be rebooted, and that might even be fixed now. Oh well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, sw4400 said:

I have to agree with @Busjack here... wheel casting & bearing issues(so bad the press said they were close to causing a derailment), dynamic brakes failing and even frames not properly secured(missing a bolt) all are in the troubled history of the 5000-series railcars.

That can be all blamed on bad parts. Bombardier is a good company, they just got bit in their buster browns by not doing their homework not checking on their suppliers. Dont know who was the parts manager or engineers of the North American division but they failed the company. The European high speed rail sector is impressively littered with bombardier products and the airline division is impressive enough that major airlines are buying their product. It's just shocking how the us rail division is. There really isn't a strong manufacturer of cta like trains. We haven't seen the crrc trains yet so the jury is still out on those.

Bad parts are really important to sniff out. There was one airline that actually crashed due to cheap imitation aftermarket parts. It wasn't a bombardier plane though. I'm sure you could find it online. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, BusHunter said:

 and the airline division is impressive enough that major airlines are buying their product. 

As I stated earlier,  Airbus has taken over the manufacturing of their newest planes and rebrands them the Airbus A220.  As far as regional jets go, most airlines are opting for Embraer e-jets, so Bombardier's aviation unit is taking a beating also.  Bombardier faced major delays trying to launch their C series jets.  If not for Delta's large order, the project's future was grim.  It was dim enough for Airbus to step in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is something that seems to affect everything these days - bad parts. Buy cheap, get cheap. But these days, seems buy expensive, get cheap is becoming normal.

 

Was reading on internet a day or so ago govt is looking into CRRC as being a "security issue" being Chinese owned, and being able to access US high tech which might get put to nefarious use by China. There seems to be talk about pushing them out...

Share this post


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

That can be all blamed on bad parts

Maybe what @sw4400said, but it seems like its biggest problem, at least with regard to Thunder Bay and the BART order was production control.

2 hours ago, artthouwill said:

so Bombardier's aviation unit is taking a beating also.

Looking at sites like Bloomberg, the biggest problem seems to be in aviation. In addition to selling the passenger jet to Airbus, it sold its turbo prop business, and its remaining business seems to be executive jets.Selling assets to maintain cash flow sounds awfully like....Sears.

Another source indicates that Bombardier is shipping the BART cars, and has Montreal orders.

Share this post


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

...In addition to selling the passenger jet to Airbus, it sold its turbo prop business, and its remaining business seems to be executive jets.Selling assets to maintain cash flow sounds awfully like....Sears...

Unfortunately true. Although the CRJ and the Q-Series (Dash-8) are still listed on their commercial aviation website, both programs have taken substantial hits, especially the CRJ because of obvious competition.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BART having same problems with BBD slow delivery and road failures. Montreal saw the scrawl on the wall and went with the Chinese. Let's see if they manage to get all 775 BART cars actually done.

This is somewhat reminiscent of Flxible's end, though there the problem was more orders than they could put through and the late penalties killed them.

Share this post


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

As I stated earlier,  Airbus has taken over the manufacturing of their newest planes and rebrands them the Airbus A220.  As far as regional jets go, most airlines are opting for Embraer e-jets, so Bombardier's aviation unit is taking a beating also.  Bombardier faced major delays trying to launch their C series jets.  If not for Delta's large order, the project's future was grim.  It was dim enough for Airbus to step in.

Bombardier is probably trying to do too much with too many products and the entire operation is getting sloppy.

Airbus has had issues too with parts. On Qantas 72, the A330 was getting false readings from its computer causing the plane to dive. (You can wikipedia the flight) Actually caused alot of injuries and an investigation showed it happened on two other planes. Northrop Grumman got the blame for the computer issue but computers can be bad things if they have issues. 

I'm skeptical of the CRRC's but what choice is their that's left. I always wondered why Kawasaki didn't bid. The MTA uses their cars. The CTA needs to get with them because they buy alot of cars and can probably give them good info on what's good and what's not. Plus its product is similar to CTA. Making rail cars is nice but when your making scores of different designs all with different sub structures your going to have issues. 

Did you guys ever hear not to buy the first year model of any car, to buy the 2nd. Cause in the 2nd year all the defects are worked out in the first. I got a 2nd year model car no issues. I hear the first year was riddled with problems. I even hear people refer to it as junk. That is unfortunate but we all can learn from each other mistakes that why we are here. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, BusHunter said:

Bombardier is probably trying to do too much with too many products and the entire operation is getting sloppy.

Airbus has had issues too with parts. On Qantas 72, the A330 was getting false readings from its computer causing the plane to dive. (You can wikipedia the flight) Actually caused alot of injuries and an investigation showed it happened on two other planes. Northrop Grumman got the blame for the computer issue but computers can be bad things if they have issues. 

I'm skeptical of the CRRC's but what choice is their that's left. I always wondered why Kawasaki didn't bid. The MTA uses their cars. The CTA needs to get with them because they buy alot of cars and can probably give them good info on what's good and what's not. Plus its product is similar to CTA. Making rail cars is nice but when your making scores of different designs all with different sub structures your going to have issues. 

Did you guys ever hear not to buy the first year model of any car, to buy the 2nd. Cause in the 2nd year all the defects are worked out in the first. I got a 2nd year model car no issues. I hear the first year was riddled with problems. I even hear people refer to it as junk. That is unfortunate but we all can learn from each other mistakes that why we are here. 

Please forgive me as I know this is off topic and I will not pursue this any further. Was it a 2017 Buick LaCrosse as I gave mine back. The 2018 much better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No a 2016 200. But I have friends that said the '15 is junk. Dont know if it's the grade of car either. My car is a 200C all options. My friends have a base model. The base was built too cheaply with a subpar engine (175 hp)trying to save gas. I got the premium engine and its overpowered (295 hp) The '17 had a 3rd engine in the middle. Probably what should have been the base. I do like the car though. Gas ain't bad 250 miles on a full tank about $28-30 to fill. Power like a Charger. Around 25 miles a gallon. Chrysler/Dodge makes good cars. I'm definitely a fan of the brand. 

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
Sign in to follow this  

×