7000-series - Delivery & Updates

[briman94]

1 minute ago, Pink Jazz said:

If the FTA rules in Bombardier's favor, I have this strange feeling that CTA won't take the options and will bid a separate contract for the replacement of the 3200s and any cars needed for fleet expansion as a potential 8000-series cars.

No need to skip past 7000 just because the bid was cancelled; they wouldn't have cars numbered 7001+ so they could still use those.

[Pink Jazz]

Just now, briman94 said:

No need to skip past 7000 just because the bid was cancelled; they wouldn't have cars numbered 7001+ so they could still use those.

Note that Bombardier is requesting to the FTA that the contract be handed over to them, rather than having the contract rebid.  What I meant is that if the order gets handed over to Bombardier, I have a strange feeling that CTA will only take the base order to replace the 2600-series cars and not exercise any of the options to replace the 3200s and for extra cars for fleet expansion.

[briman94]

Just now, Pink Jazz said:

Note that Bombardier is requesting to the FTA that the contract be handed over to them, rather than having the contract rebid.  What I meant is that if the order gets handed over to Bombardier, I have a strange feeling that CTA will only take the base order to replace the 2600-series cars and not exercise any of the options to replace the 3200s and for extra cars for fleet expansion.

If they only have a couple hundred 7000s, they will probably still use the 7000 numbers. They're running out. Just like 2000-2200, 2201-2400, 2401-2600, 2601-3200. They try to use most of a range when they can. I wonder what they'll do in 30-some years when they have to replace the inevitable 9000-series...

[Pink Jazz]

Just now, briman94 said:

If they only have a couple hundred 7000s, they will probably still use the 7000 numbers. They're running out. Just like 2000-2200, 2201-2400, 2401-2600, 2601-3200. They try to use most of a range when they can. I wonder what they'll do in 30-some years when they have to replace the inevitable 9000-series...

So perhaps in a scenario where the options are not accepted, based on your statement, the next series could be the 7500- or 7600-series cars, right?

[briman94]

Just now, Pink Jazz said:

So perhaps in a scenario where the options are not accepted, based on your statement, the next series could be the 7500- or 7600-series cars, right?

Yeah, if they only get 400-or-so cars. They were going to number the 5000s as 3500s until they decided 1) they needed more than would fit in the "3000" range, and 2) they would be incompatible with previous series completely, so they decided to create a large gap in the numbering.

[BusHunter]

More complaints from Bombardier have surfaced in Crain's. They now say the cars are unsafe for CTA and that CTA is withholding info on the bid process. They are even threatening a freedom of information lawsuit. They look to be standing their ground. This could be a long procurement.

http://www.chicagobusiness.com/article/20160427/BLOGS02/160429832/new-cta-el-cars-may-present-safety-risk-bombardier-says

[Busjack]

48 minutes ago, BusHunter said:

More complaints from Bombardier have surfaced in Crain's. They now say the cars are unsafe for CTA and that CTA is withholding info on the bid process. They are even threatening a freedom of information lawsuit. They look to be standing their ground. This could be a long procurement.

http://www.chicagobusiness.com/article/20160427/BLOGS02/160429832/new-cta-el-cars-may-present-safety-risk-bombardier-says

Undoubtedly, a long procurement, but Hinz is correct that all Bombardier is doing is "ramp[ing] up the verbiage even more." For instance, the "If CSR's design is indeed as depicted in the renderings released by CTA" is highly hypothetical, as the designs are supposed to be aesthetic renderings, not mechanical drawings, as Steele points out.*

Hinz also takes credit for "reporting" about the jobs deal being leaked, something Juniorz factually disputes, and has not been established by evidence.

__________

*Update: And this comes from a company whose structural work did not conform to the structural specifications and had to be redone.

[BusHunter]

2 hours ago, Busjack said:

Undoubtedly, a long procurement, but Hinz is correct that all Bombardier is doing is "ramp[ing] up the verbiage even more." For instance, the "If CSR's design is indeed as depicted in the renderings released by CTA" is highly hypothetical, as the designs are supposed to be aesthetic renderings, not mechanical drawings, as Steele points out.*

Hinz also takes credit for "reporting" about the jobs deal being leaked, something Juniorz factually disputes, and has not been established by evidence.

__________

*Update: And this comes from a company whose structural work did not conform to the structural specifications and had to be redone.

I think there is going to be a lawsuit here eventually. Bombardier is just ramping up the pressure because it feels it's argument is sound. I think if they look up the press releases for the local papers or even CTA they'll find something about the city gaining jobs from the execution of this contracted bid. I remember the mare saying that. But they would have to prove there is a conspiracy there and that is what would be difficult.

As far as the anti climber, they are probably nitpicking, I admit something was off in the rendering for me. It is troubling though that two cities said CSR's product was inferior and not up to standards. When CTA gave it's OK it basically gave permission for a company to build a product in an uncharted market, with a yet unproven product at least here in the states. I seem to remember NABI having it's first artic order here with the #7500's the only model of that particular bus they ever built. That was unproven also. CTA should at least highly inspect the prototype if CSR gets that far. But this whole process is probably in for major delays. Bombardier's argument would have hit a brick wall though only if CSR would call themselves CNR MA. That I don't get. But still does MBTA have a CNR train someone can examine?

[Busjack]

22 minutes ago, BusHunter said:

But still does MBTA have a CNR train someone can examine?

Googling indicates that it is just getting around to a groundbreaking on the Massachusetts assembly plant. This article indicates that deliveries start in 2018.

Another article indicates that Hyundai Rotem was unsuccessful in getting an injunction, but raises the distinction that "Massachusetts officials went without federal funding on the project so they could require that assembly work take place somewhere in the commonwealth."

 

[BusHunter]

37 minutes ago, Busjack said:

Googling indicates that it is just getting around to a groundbreaking on the Massachusetts assembly plant. This article indicates that deliveries start in 2018.

Another article indicates that Hyundai Rotem was unsuccessful in getting an injunction, but raises the distinction that "Massachusetts officials went without federal funding on the project so they could require that assembly work take place somewhere in the commonwealth."

 

The Hyundai action may suggest Bombardier has an uphill climb ahead of them. It's hard to overturn something once it's been decided. It's like baseball, in an instant replay, you have to prove the call was made against you and overturn the umpire. I bet more calls by percentage are held up. The hyundai argument is really not all that different from bombardier. The MBTA just went with someone who could provide more jobs they allege. 

[Busjack]

11 minutes ago, BusHunter said:

The Hyundai action may suggest Bombardier has an uphill climb ahead of them. It's hard to overturn something once it's been decided. It's like baseball, in an instant replay, you have to prove the call was made against you and overturn the umpire. I bet more calls by percentage are held up. The hyundai argument is really not all that different from bombardier. The MBTA just went with someone who could provide more jobs they allege. 

Essentially correct. The difference, as I implied in the previous post, is whether Bombardier is just laying the ground for a further protest to the FTA by exhausting its contract remedy with CTA.

[jajuan]

I have to admit I find it quite ironic that Bombardier is causing the biggest stink here with the 7000s. Not only did they have to redo a good number of the cars they delivered soon after delivering them as , but they had to give CTA six free cars as compensation for late deliveries I believe it was. Plus didn't they have a secret deal with CTA which would in part have them place a maintenance facility here scuttled because of the secrecy behind it and because they would have done an end run around the bid process, something competing bus manufacturers successfully convinced the feds was the case in that failed deal with MAN, resulting in the 4400s being TMCs instead of additional Americanas. So for Bombardier to be main rail manufacturer making a protest in a way makes them looking like they're being a sore loser. After all had they got chosen this time, one of the other companies could just as easily have been protesting them since they did get the 5000s contract prior to this procurement process.

[Busjack]

18 minutes ago, jajuan said:

but they had to give CTA six free cars as compensation for late deliveries I believe it was.

No it wasn't, it was cashing in amenities that were optional in the contract.

 

19 minutes ago, jajuan said:

Plus didn't they have a secret deal with CTA which would in part have them place a maintenance facility here scuttled because of the secrecy behind it and because they would have done an end run around the bid process

Yep, or at least the potential secret deal was exposed. But Emanuel was sure itching to report that jobs had been brought to 63rd and Indiana.

[sw4400]

55 minutes ago, jajuan said:

I have to admit I find it quite ironic that Bombardier is causing the biggest stink here with the 7000s. Not only did they have to redo a good number of the cars they delivered soon after delivering them as , but they had to give CTA six free cars as compensation for late deliveries I believe it was. Plus didn't they have a secret deal with CTA which would in part have them place a maintenance facility here scuttled because of the secrecy behind it and because they would have done an end run around the bid process, something competing bus manufacturers successfully convinced the feds was the case in that failed deal with MAN, resulting in the 4400s being TMCs instead of additional Americanas. So for Bombardier to be main rail manufacturer making a protest in a way makes them looking like they're being a sore loser. After all had they got chosen this time, one of the other companies could just as easily have been protesting them since they did get the 5000s contract prior to this procurement process.

Well, I've heard in past posts that the CTA of that era earmarked the order of 4400's to be specifically for M.A.N only. How they did that, I don't know, especially if the 4400's were bought with State or Federal funding..... internet was pretty much in it's infancy then and Kevin was probably using a bookbag like I was then and chicagobus.org and chitransit.org were years from fruition.... anyone have specifics on how it was noted that the 4400's were geared for M.A.N before protests occurred, forcing CTA to go with TMC? How could one tell from the contract put out what manufacturer it was set for?

[Busjack]

52 minutes ago, sw4400 said:

Well, I've heard in past posts that the CTA of that era earmarked the order of 4400's to be specifically for M.A.N only. How they did that, I don't know, especially if the 4400's were bought with State or Federal funding..... internet was pretty much in it's infancy then and Kevin was probably using a bookbag like I was then and chicagobus.org and chitransit.org were years from fruition.... anyone have specifics on how it was noted that the 4400's were geared for M.A.N before protests occurred, forcing CTA to go with TMC? How could one tell from the contract put out what manufacturer it was set for?

There were Tribune news stories at the time (put up on services such as Nexis and AOL dialup) that there were various requirements such as heated floors, a back window, etc. that only matched the specs for a MAN (was supposed to be an upgrade from the 4000s*). As noted, the procurement got hung up by accessibility advocates (before the ADA of 1990 mandated it), and other manufacturers protesting to the FTA. FTA determined that the only legitimate requirement CTA eventually had was the lift at the front door. RTSs to that point only had lifts at the back door, but this resulted in TMC developing the RTS08. By this time, MAN had left the U.S. because its German components became too expensive. Andre has posted somewhere here that the RTS08 eventually did meet the original spec. They, of course, did not have air conditioning until it was put where the back window was, 10 years later.

If there would have been anything analogous today, it would have been if someone protested if Bombardier had obtained an award on the basis of the original spec that the 7000s had to be compatible with the 5000s. But that never got to an award.

 

*Update: I finally found one of Andre's web artifacts.The 4000s were type 792, and the proposed ones were type 892.

[nlewis7000]

gentlemen, is it possible that Bombardier is trying to recover money lost on the 5000 contract? look what happened to Boeing-Vertol after the 2400 series order. B-V tried to recover the money they lost on the 2400s.  when Budd won the 2600 contract, B-V left the rail car business.

[sw4400]

32 minutes ago, nlewis7000 said:

gentlemen, is it possible that Bombardier is trying to recover money lost on the 5000 contract? look what happened to Boeing-Vertol after the 2400 series order. B-V tried to recover the money they lost on the 2400s.  when Budd won the 2600 contract, B-V left the rail car business.

Lost money from the 5000-Series contract? I don't understand how money was lost.... I know there was some manufacturer defects, but the CTA didn't withhold money and paid Bombardier for the 706 originally on order. Bombardier added the 8 additional on their own I believe in part due to the defects and delays to appease them.

[Juniorz]

the additional cars (5707-5714) were due to a monetary credit due to extra parts assembled. Nothing more to it. Further more, anything involving the 5000 contract has nothing to do with the 7000 contract other than the manufacturer name, that is all.  

[Busjack]

14 hours ago, nlewis7000 said:

gentlemen, is it possible that Bombardier is trying to recover money lost on the 5000 contract? look what happened to Boeing-Vertol after the 2400 series order. B-V tried to recover the money they lost on the 2400s.  when Budd won the 2600 contract, B-V left the rail car business.

Let's see--the contract is rebid because the first set of bids is too high, your company gets addenda showing that 6 other companies were interested enough to attend pre-bid meetings, and you want to overbid?

That makes about as much sense as Chrysler advertising "FCA is losing money, so we offer 5% financing on a Chrysler 200 when everyone else offers 0% for 72 months."

Finally, you don't know if B-V bid or what they bid,  but (1) it was a helicopter company, (2) it quit assembling LRVs, too, and MBTA was dissatisfied with them, and (3) if in fact B-V and Bombardier did the same thing, you claim it had the same bad result.

Bombardier is not that irrational.

[BusHunter]

Hmm more possible issues for CTA to consider.

https://www.wbez.org/shows/wbez-news/problems-with-train-cars-in-singapore-raise-questions-for-cta/6edc5e69-7610-4565-ae27-d86309e8bbd0

[artthouwill]

11 hours ago, BusHunter said:

Hmm more possible issues for CTA to consider.

https://www.wbez.org/shows/wbez-news/problems-with-train-cars-in-singapore-raise-questions-for-cta/6edc5e69-7610-4565-ae27-d86309e8bbd0

The article doesn't say exactly where the Singapore cars were built,  but to CTA cars will be built here in Chicago.   Hopefully this will alleviate the cracked body problem as long as it isn't a design issue. 

[Busjack]

9 minutes ago, artthouwill said:

... as long as it isn't a design issue. 

...which also leaves an open question. Articles about the MBTA cars indicate that they are based on a couple of Chinese type cars,but CTA uses its own specs, and again, for whatever the aesthetic design slides are worth, the cars (except for the end caps) look like CTA  cars.

Also, remember that the front end brackets on the 5000s needed to be rewelded.

[Busjack]

Financial Times and The Middle Ground (from Singapore) have a more detailed description of the Singapore problem, and, yes, say the cars were shipped back to China.

From the Singapore article, looks like a Chinese metallurgy problem, again not much different than the problem with the Bombardier trucks.

[artthouwill]

3 hours ago, Busjack said:

Financial Times and The Middle Ground (from Singapore) have a more detailed description of the Singapore problem, and, yes, say the cars were shipped back to China.

From the Singapore article, looks like a Chinese metallurgy problem, again not much different than the problem with the Bombardier trucks.

Based on the Middle Ground article,  it looks like CSR will be reviewing the quality control with respect to their suppliers,  which was the same problem with the trucks on the 5000s.  I don't know if the same supplier is involved,  but surely someone is going to be the fall guy.

[BusHunter]

More #7000 thunder from Bombardier

http://www.chicagobusiness.com/article/20160926/BLOGS02/160929865/new-flap-arises-in-ctas-1-3-billion-l-rail-car-deal