Just saw 4401 and 4404 training. One on Bathurst and one on King.
|
|
|
AlbertHWagstaff
Senior Member
I can't remember if it was discussed here, but does anyone know when the previous spur track into Hillcrest was taken out? Some PCC cars were shipped out from there in 1996. I know it wasn't the same track that the CLRVs were delivered on, that one went up the west side of the Harvey Shops building.
smallspy
Senior Member
The switch was pulled shortly thereafter - I remember spotting and photographing the rail grinding train parked in behind the Inglis Building in 1997 or 1998, and the remains of the spur were quite overgrown and with no connection to CP main anymore.
Dan
Toronto, Ont.
crs1026
Superstar
By way of contrast....
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/repo...ers-belissima-train-division/article25075865/
It's certainly surprising how the same company can be so highly regarded, and how the same factory can successfully produce two other products (Rocket subway cars, and GO Bilevels) but get this product so wrong.
At this point, the cumulative difficulties and non-compliances are bigger than one can write off as a "stuff happens" matter. This is getting into big-ticket failure territory (for sake of argument, how does it compare in magnitude to the deficiencies that Amtrak encountered with the Accela?). But we don't want an outcome so severe that it serves us poorly. Losing BBD as a supplier, either because we write them off, or because they are penalised so harshly that they walk away, is lose-lose.
I don't know how much profit BBD expected to make on this order, or how much that translates into in earnings per share - but the right outcome would leave BBD not making much money on this order, and the shareholders knowing how much of a haircut that meant for them. That doesn't go unaddressed.
- Paul
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/repo...ers-belissima-train-division/article25075865/
It's certainly surprising how the same company can be so highly regarded, and how the same factory can successfully produce two other products (Rocket subway cars, and GO Bilevels) but get this product so wrong.
At this point, the cumulative difficulties and non-compliances are bigger than one can write off as a "stuff happens" matter. This is getting into big-ticket failure territory (for sake of argument, how does it compare in magnitude to the deficiencies that Amtrak encountered with the Accela?). But we don't want an outcome so severe that it serves us poorly. Losing BBD as a supplier, either because we write them off, or because they are penalised so harshly that they walk away, is lose-lose.
I don't know how much profit BBD expected to make on this order, or how much that translates into in earnings per share - but the right outcome would leave BBD not making much money on this order, and the shareholders knowing how much of a haircut that meant for them. That doesn't go unaddressed.
- Paul
TheTigerMaster
Superstar
Well haven't we already exercised our $50 Million penalty? That's a relatively small part of $1.25 Billion. They'd still make quite the profit even with that penalty. Can we impose any other penalties?
There is also whatever costs BBD will incur trying to get this thing back on schedule.
There is also whatever costs BBD will incur trying to get this thing back on schedule.
pstogios
Senior Member
Any word on 4409?
drum118
Superstar
TTC could back charge the cost of maintaining the fleet longer than plan cause by the delay; not allow BBD to bid on contracts for X years that have been around 5 years; any contracts beyond that X year time frame like the TR1; TTC could do all of it.
Metrolinx is very concern about this delay as well as it will effect their order. The Chair of Metrolinx asked the chair of TTC & CEO today if they did what he had requested before they went up to Thunder Bay and was told yes. They saw work taking place on their cars.
A new delivery schedule is due in July.
I don't expect to see 4409 until mid July
TheTigerMaster
Superstar
What the the Chair of Metrolinx ask of TTC Chair and CEO?
drum118
Superstar
I don't know what was request by the Chair to TTC, other than what was said today in a few words.
My feeling is the chair requested TTC to inquire what was going on with Metrolinx order and to see if any work has started on their cars for Kitchener due in 2016 and what is plan for the rest of their order. More was said off line after the meeting since it wasn't TTC position to state public what was going on with Metrolinx order in the first place.
As a note, the board is short 4 members since they haven't been appointed officially by the province yet.
the lemur
Senior Member
And it's not as if it's an entirely new product either - just a variant of a model from an existing product family that BBD has successfully built and implemented in many other places. Is it an issue with the plant in Mexico? Have there been problems with other stuff produced there?
http://www.bombardier.com/content/d...portation-SiteFactSheet-Sahagun-Mexico-en.pdf
JayBeeGooner
Active Member
Technically, the cars for Waterloo shouldn't suffer the same delays as the Toronto order?
The LRV's will technically be "off shelf"and designed for less demanding operating environments than Toronto's system.
The LRV's will technically be "off shelf"and designed for less demanding operating environments than Toronto's system.
drum118
Superstar
Minneapolis cars had a lot of problem and why they haven't got more orders for other new lines and extension. Some of those problematic problems still exist from information I have seen from someone who has first hand knowledge of the first cars in Minneapolis.
TTC said Mexico is having a hard time matching the European design specifications. Its 100% metric standards.
drum118
Superstar
Yes they will as they come from the same supplier as TTC parts. Most of KW parts and setup is the same as TTC and can be interchangeable. Different between KW & TTC is there are doors on both sides and cabs at both ends for KW as well 100% pans. Trucks are the same except the gauge. Lamination was another issue for TTC and if they are having, so would KW cars
Markster
Senior Member
Bombardier's issues are clearly severe quality control deficiencies in their LRV supply chain. The streetcars are special order, but they're not that special. If a Mexican parts factory can't cut the steel to the right dimensions, then that's a more fundamental issue.
Waterloo's LRT is not strictly safe, however it will certainly benefit from the TTC having put Bombardier through the wringer for quality control.
The "off-the-shelf"-yness is mostly useful when purchasing new vehicles, allowing you to shop around. For Waterloo's LRT, they could theoretically purchase Alstom vehicles next time. The TTC could shop around for more streetcars, but Bombardier will be the only facility in the world with the tooling ready to go.
TheTigerMaster
Superstar
When will the LFLRVs start panto operations?