TTC: Flexity Streetcars Testing & Delivery (Bombardier)

[AlvinofDiaspar]

Remember the expression "Pyrrhic Victory"? It is a victory at great cost. I like winning. But not at all cost and not always for the sake of principle. This is a case where I'll take 260 or however many streetcars we can bash city council into buying ahead of dying CLRVs and ALRVs. It is best to wish the current management of Bombardier all the best in their quest to set this right. Their livelihoods, and to a lesser - although still very important - extent so do ours as Canadians. There are simply not that many large Canadian industrial companies. We can use every one we get.

Kind of like streetcars. We can use every one we get.

I am weary of shying away from making sure responsible parties are held accountable in a manner that is proportional to the amount of impact their delays have caused - failure to do that certainly invites misbehaviour in the future (and they aren't stupid - they know just as well as you do that they can hold riders as hostages and use politics to pull strings).

AoD

 

[nfitz]

This kind of reflexive defense of piss-poor performance by BBD in inexplicably rampant on this board.

This inability to separate past events, to current conditions baffles me, and suggests strong bias, and the inability to do neutral research or carry out the scientific method.

Is it because they are ostensibly Canadian? I don’t care; get the job done according to the contract spec.

Absolutely not. It's because they are getting the job done, and according to spec.

The original contract had a peak delivery rate of 39 a year. They are currently close to 60 a year. It's not conceivable that any future vendor will come close to that, on such a small order.

Is it because they are in a competitive marketplace? I don’t care; get the job done according to the contract spec.

How about you take your imagination, and look at the actual results.

TTC can't even find the $300 or so million to get Bombardier to do these cars. Where are they going to find $500 or so million for someone else to do it?

BBD has massively failed on this contract ...

Actually they haven't. You have failed massively to comprehend the difference between political comments, TTC finger-pointing to dodge their own mistakes, and TTC trying to pretend the contract says a lot more than it says.

The contract requires 204 cars delivered by 2019. Even TTC has said when it really comes down to it, there isn't much more than that firmly written in the contract.

While it's possible they may miss it, that's hardly unusual from any manufacturer for this type of order (how many years has Alstom delayed the Montreal Metro cars by failing to deliver the operating software?)

...and they deserve to pay the price according to penalty provisions in the contract, and they deserve to pay the price by being withheld from participation in any future contract. Enough is enough.

Ban the only manufacturer of LRVs that are suited for TTC conditions, when they are churning out 60 vehicles a year, and instead start a process that might get us some more cars starting in the mid to late-2020s?

The lack of pragmatism here is shocking.

 

[Sandpit]

"Sometimes" is low balling it a bit.

EastYorkTTCFan said:

I think the biggest problem is that everyone who read news articles news or blogs thinks they are experts in everything. I know sometimes I pst things that are incorrect sometimes too. However, there are people that seem to thnk that every other comapy that bulds stretcars (LRVS or weaht ever yo want to call them) is perfect and won't ever have parts problems or workers go on strike. Don't forget way back when we only had two in servce 4400 and 4403 becuse they wer the only ones deliverd before the workers went on strike, oragainly it was suposed to be along drwn out one so the supliers stopped prduction on aprts and then everyone had to catch up. Then ther are the isudes they have been having in the palnt in mexic wherthe skilled welders are leaving for other jobs once they are tained by bombarider and they would have to satrt from sctarch. No Bombarier is making almost montly flights from Europe using the largest carg plane in the world to get parts for bothe the Ion/ Metrlnx vechels as well as the TTC nes, I haven't seen any other comapy doing that.

I think this is called "posting from a phone with autocorrect turned off".

 

[nfitz]

I think it would have been politically impossible to order the 60 car option from Bombardier, to much posturing against them because of the delays

Like the press isn't going to figure out how much the cost difference is. When the last of the 204 is delivered, when 60 later would have been delivered, and when the first of the 60 is delivered - if ever.

In related news, Bombardier & Alstom are giving out free trains to Montreal as a compensation for the late delivery of the first trains on order (despite having caught up with the delivery schedule since then)

I'm surprised they caught up. Cudos to Bombardier then. If you recall, Bombardier actually shut down production, because they were completely stymied by Alstom's failure to provide the operating software for the test trains that Bombardier had already delivered for testing. It would be interesting to see what's been said between the two of them, and who is footing most of the bill. We'll likely never know.

 

[nfitz]

I don’t read that person’s posts nor do I care at all what he has to say.

It's probably that kind of attitude that explains your ignorance on this issue. You, pstogios, just don't like it when someone points out just how wrong your are.

Putting aside your insult about ranting ...

There was no insult from TransitBart on your ranting. He simply called it ranting. An insult would be calling it infantile ranting. Ignorant ranting. Mindless ranting. Typical ranting ...

I am not proposing to cancel the contract. I am saying that TTC should recoup damages for that company’s piss-poor contract performance. We would supposedly get all the contracted streetcars plus a certain number more and/or a cash settlement to offset the additional expenses TTC has been forced to incur such as keeping old cars in service and supplanting streetcar lines with buses.

TTC has already sued Bombardier for the entire penalty clause in the contract.

And that company should be excluded from future contracts so as to not reward incompetence.

Perhaps you should stop riding TTC so as not to award incompetence. (which as silly as it sounds, is exactly the philosophy you are taking).

Or you would just let BBD deliver the cars whenever they feel like it and have TTC subsidize their incompetence by exerting funds to keep old cars in service? And hand them more contracts so we would risk being stuck in this position again in the future? How are customers on the 504 served by doing these things?

504? What about the 502, 506, and 506 customers, stuck on buses?

Of course all manufacturers can and do have problems but the BBD ones have gone on and on and on and they seem incapable of making a revised schedule that they can stick to for more than a month or so. Their problems do not only affect Toronto - look at New York and London. I am all in favour of supporting workers in Ontario (or Canada) but BBD have really blown away their reputation and I doubt they will get many more contracts from those they have deceived in the past. BBD is a real mess and that's not a cause for celebration.

No one is saying that BBD doesn't have issues. Though there's a lot of cherry picking going on. The other two operations at Thunder Bay are doing fine. GO Transit cars continually roll off the line, including new more complex equipment like the large batch of cab cars. The TR subway delivery went relatively smoothly - with TTC itself in no rush to complete the final deliveries at the end, with delay to both the TYSSE and the ATC which are necessary to utilize the final cars!

And these should be considered as part of both the next subway and streetcar orders when time isn't of the essence.

But stopping now, and looking for a different provider AFTER Bombardier has finally achieved and significantly surpassed the originally planned production rate isn't only locking the barn door after the horse has bolted. It's also putting a bullet in the head of the 5 horses still in the barn, to make sure they don't bolt either, and will still be in there when you need them alive to beat next week.

 

[smallspy]

Absolutely not. It's because they are getting the job done, and according to spec.

The original contract had a peak delivery rate of 39 a year. They are currently close to 60 a year. It's not conceivable that any future vendor will come close to that, on such a small order.

Actually....

The contract did lay out when deliveries were supposed to happen down to the number of cars delivered each month, and not just milestones such as the last car delivered. Bombardier has been in violation of that part of the contract since before the entry into service of the first two cars.

Dan
Toronto, Ont.

 

[nfitz]

The contract did lay out when deliveries were supposed to happen down to the number of cars delivered each month, and not just milestones such as the last car delivered. Bombardier has been in violation of that part of the contract since before the entry into service of the first two cars.

It did - but the penalties were trivial.

And that doesn't change what I said. Look at those dates. 36 most years, with a maximum of 39 in 2018 if I remember correctly. Which is far less than the current production rate.

There's absolutely no question that Bombardier botched things in the past. Which should have absolutely no bearing on the decision to add 60 more to the order, now that production has not only reached the maximum 39 units a year, but well exceeded it, now that the extra production line came online last year. Or two extra production lines, given the Metrolinx/Waterloo units are all now being done on yet another production line.

 

[crs1026]

It did - but the penalties were trivial.

There's the thing that needs to be fixed.

Nothing to stop TTC from telling the Bomb, we want to exercise the option....but with one change. You issue a week by week schedule, and you agree to bigger penalties if you fall behind. Schedule doesn't have to be demanding, but once it's agreed to, it's firm.

By big, I mean $1M-$2M per car for a lateness on each single delivery of over 14 days. Or something like that.

This should be take it or leave it, if the Bomb won't accept this change, then yes TTC should walk away.

- Paul

 

[nfitz]

There's the thing that needs to be fixed.

Fixed how - you can't change now. It's a contractual agreement that is negotiated. If you pushed (or wrote in the RFP) for higher penalties, it would increase the cost of the contract.

If you had 10 bidders, it might weed you those that can't actually deliver on time. But it's such a specialty product, with such difficult physical specs, that if you make the contracting too onerous (and TTC's reputation is anything from soft), you have zero bidders.

Nothing to stop TTC from telling the Bomb, we want to exercise the option....but with one change. You issue a week by week schedule, and you agree to bigger penalties if you fall behind. Schedule doesn't have to be demanding, but once it's agreed to, it's firm.

Other than the deadline to do so with current pricing has passed - or will soon.

By big, I mean $1M-$2M per car for a lateness on each single delivery of over 14 days. Or something like that.

BBD bid about $5 million a car, with the next bidder being about $7.5 million a car. You do realize that with those kind of terms, the cost goes up. And TTC certainly can't impose it on the option at this stage, without getting a very large increase in cost per vehicle.

This should be take it or leave it, if the Bomb won't accept this change, then yes TTC should walk away.

And we shoot ourselves in the foot?

BBD only walks, if they are in better financial interest to not take the contract. If TTC will only offer them a contract that loses money, but is still a lot lower than what the are going to pay someone else, then they are fools.

 

[crs1026]

^ I guess it's a question of who we see as the organ grinder in this situation, and who is the monkey.

Can TTC go back and say, we want the same option but exactly one change, no price increase, everything as it is except the penalty clause? Of course they can. Does Bombardier have to accept that? Legally, no, but a negotiation is a negotiation. They do want the business, especially since their fixed costs are paid off already and any incremental order has an element of gravy to them. TTC may have more leverage than one might think.

TTC has to get out from the current sole source, don't-leave-us-because-no-one-else-will-marry-us position. In an ideal world that would happen once we have all the vehicles we need in the city, and we have a thirty year lifespan to address the unique points in our system. But maybe it's time to try other things. One would be to reprofile individual lines, cutting them off from the rest of the network to be sure but culling those 60 cars from the generic model to something more supply friendly. Cheap? Not in the short term. But better than handing Bombardier the whole thing on a cushion. The incremental $2.5M to buy another vendor's vehicle times 60 cars is $150m.... how much can we accomplish for that ? Would $2.5M per vehicle achieve a life extension for the least ratty remaining 60 CLRV's?

Or, just leave the buses on 505 or 506 until we have a solution.

- Paul

 

[bbdfollower]

... so anyone have the final Jan numbers? Anything shipped yet in Feb?

 

[Allandale25]

^ 4464 was spotted in Thunder Bay on January 27th. One of the Flexity Tracker twitter accounts mentioned they were told 4464 was on Queen Street today (likely testing)?

 

[crs1026]

^ 4464 was spotted in Thunder Bay on January 27th. One of the Flexity Tracker twitter accounts mentioned they were told 4464 was on Queen Street today (likely testing)?

It was spotted going thru Alliston late last week, so yes it's likely out there.

Edit: and now 4465 ready to ship.

- Paul

 

[Allandale25]

It was spotted going thru Alliston late last week, so yes it's likely out there.

Edit: and now 4465 ready to ship.

- Paul

Indeed

https://twitter.com/Deprio12/status/960631229652533248

 

[nfitz]

Can TTC go back and say, we want the same option but exactly one change, no price increase, everything as it is except the penalty clause? Of course they can. Does Bombardier have to accept that? Legally, no, but a negotiation is a negotiation. They do want the business, especially since their fixed costs are paid off already and any incremental order has an element of gravy to them. TTC may have more leverage than one might think.

Bombardier also has contracts with it's subcontractors, that would have option clauses.

The more time that passes, the more those contracts also expire, meaning Bombardier is also in a position.

Meanwhile Bombardier never budgeted this based on frame production in La Pocatière, and flying in cabs from Vienna. One would think, to get a better rate, that TTC would be looking at slower production. After all, it's not 60 new cars they need ASAP, it's about 30.

TTC has to get out from the current sole source, don't-leave-us-because-no-one-else-will-marry-us position.

The streetcar tender wasn't sole-source. There were multiple bids.

But maybe it's time to try other things. One would be to reprofile individual lines, cutting them off from the rest of the network to be sure but culling those 60 cars from the generic model to something more supply friendly. Cheap? Not in the short term. But better than handing Bombardier the whole thing on a cushion.

Good grief, you'd have major work to do.

St. Clair you could probably combine with a Jane LRT without much pain. But after that, and possibly Lakeshore West service, it get's very difficult.

Or, just leave the buses on 505 or 506 until we have a solution.

Neither 505 nor 506 have much difference between peak and off-peak requirements. The buses make far more sense on routes that have high rates of extra peak vehicles - like 501 and 504.