Tuscani01
Senior Member
I think eventually, more orders will simply lead to more plants. A delivery backlog would result in less bids for companies that cannot meet order requirements.
|
|
|
I think eventually, more orders will simply lead to more plants. A delivery backlog would result in less bids for companies that cannot meet order requirements.
TOareaFan
Superstar
Yes...if economics works....there would/should be more plants coming online but that is a long term solution and I am sure there is a magic number (measured in # of months, I guess) that the order backlog has to get to before that happens.
I know that in the aircraft industry a large order backlog is considered a good thing.
drum118
Superstar
The supplier for LA is building a plant there.
Backlog happens for many reason, but the lack of skill workers is one of the main reason.
The lack of space and taking on more projects also has an effect on delivery.
Sometime bidders don't know when delivery is to take place if the bid is delay in being awarded or change to the point bidders have to find work to keep their staff working with out loosing then to lay off.
Sometimes you think you lost the project to the point you accept another project only to find out months later you are now in line for that project.
Some company still go after projects knowing full well they don't have the capacity to keep out other bidders out of the market.
There is a cost of building more plants to meet X market demand, but what does it mean for then staying around when there is a down turn and is it worth the effect to build it in the first place.
Yes Thunder Bay will have more capacity come end of 2015 when the last of the new TR's are built to deal with more LRT cars, but what is the out look for the plant after the LRT's are built? GO is keeping the plant busy with more Bilevel cars, but who else is buying the same car these days as the big buyers have gone to off shore company's.
Given the free trade agreement these days, the 25% Canadian Rule is out the window to make it an equal bidding field.
At the end of the day, building more plants in Canada by one builder is not on the books.
Do you happen to know what the reasoning behind that was? Was it simple logistics (there was no plant further away that was able to produce them, or getting them shipped there would have been prohibitively expensive)? Was it a legislation reason ("Made in America" requirements)? Or was it made part of that specific contract that the vehicles must be manufactured in California? Just curious of the rationale behind it, because it makes a lot of sense to me.
dowlingm
Senior Member
The softening of the TB originated bilevel market is in part because of changing requirements (Metrolink wanted CEM cars and have been converting some legacy bilevels to bike cars). Buy America is obviously also a problem (which "free trade" doesn't seem to be ending any time soon). Some other bilevel customers like Rail Runner, FrontRunner, Music City Star haven't seen the kind of growth that would have them seeking more cars. It will be interesting to see what happens when GO seek to dispose of their oldest cars as to just what market there is for them.
ShonTron
Moderator
The newest cars purchased by the AMT, Bombardier multi-levels, are similar to the bi-levels, but with some important differences: they have both low and high-platform doors, required for the high platforms at Central Station. The brand new Mascouche Line, which is partially electrified, was the reason behind this last purchase, but they can be used on any corridor. They also replaced the old 1960s ex-GO single level cars. Last month, I rode the multi-level cars on the Vaudreuil-Hudson Line.
nfitz
Superstar
Where were they manufactured?
Platform 27
Active Member
La Pocatière, Quebec and their Buy America workaround plant just over the line in Plattsburgh, New York. The Multilevel is a fair bit shorter than the Bilevel and has an odd gabling of the roof which I think was prompted by some non-standard clearances somewhere.
I don't know if I agree with you, Mark. Metrolink demanded CEM after Chatsworth, and IIRC both Bombardier and Rotem bid (with Bombardier pitching more or less the same CEM-i-fied BiLevel concept that ended up launching with GO a few years later instead). Rotem came in low.
Since then, they've sold the same CEMified BiLevel that will launch on GO to Seattle's Sound Transit as well. They're also still steadily getting the nod from new commuter rail startups, like SunRail in Orlando, although it does seem the rush of new startups from the last decade has trailed off a bit.
ShonTron
Moderator
Since they were built for NJ Transit, I figure they were meant to clear the Hudson Tunnels and into New York Penn Station; Amtrak can not run Superliner equipment on the northeastern corridor for this reason (they are found almost exclusively on long-distance trains leading west and south from Chicago). AMT bought the same car models (I don't know the clearances in the Mount Royal tunnel, though I know GO bi-level equipment can enter Central Station); they also bought the same dual-mode locomotives as NJ Transit (which runs on overhead catenary and non-electrified lines, just like Montreal).
smallspy
Senior Member
The clearances through the Mount Royal tunnel are pretty close to those in the Hudson River tunnels - AMT had only a little bit of work to do to create enough clearance for their MultiLevel cars and ALP-45DPs.
But I don't know if the Bi-Levels will fit into Central Station. They are several inches higher than the locomotives that pull them, and may be too close to the catenary. Have you seen them in the station?
Dan
Toronto, Ont.
ShonTron
Moderator
I've seen a photo of chartered GO equipment at Central Station, but as I understand, some tracks are not electrified - I imagine that only those tracks could clear a bi-level car (the multi-levels must clear catenary for the Mascouche Line). After all, VIA's Park and Skyline cars can enter Central Station, but not on electrified tracks.
I could be mistaken, though.
Last edited:
smallspy
Senior Member
That doesn't make any sense - there are no low-level platforms at Central Station. There would be no way to board the equipment, unless it was coupled to something else that did have high-level doors. And then you get into the issue - not insurmountable, admittedly - with the different onboard voltage and electrical system of the GO cars.
And yes, the Park and Skyline cars can enter Central Station, and even under the wires, but they are also lower in overall height than the BiLevels.
Could you be thinking about the trainset lent to AMT following the highway overpass collapse in Laval? That trainset ran to Lucien l'Allier - which is all low-level platforms.
Dan
Toronto, Ont.
dowlingm
Senior Member
Dear Bombardier
Please ship 4405 so we can get back on topic. Clearly you guys need a reason to giddy up so here it is.
Love and kisses
Urban Toronto
Please ship 4405 so we can get back on topic. Clearly you guys need a reason to giddy up so here it is.
Love and kisses
Urban Toronto
TheTigerMaster
Superstar
Dear Urban Toronto,
Nahhhhh, we're cool.
XOXO,
Bombardier
Nahhhhh, we're cool.
XOXO,
Bombardier
dowlingm
Senior Member
Dammit.
I really thought that would work.
I really thought that would work.