Admiral Beez
Superstar
Yes, Mr. Oblivious, it's a joke.
|
|
|
Amare
Senior Member
Trust me, the general public wouldnt be able to tell the difference nor would they really care. Many people in the general public thought that the H4/H5/H6/T1 were exactly the same and were just painted differently from the interior. The same can be said with the various buses the TTC has had in its fleet in the past 10 years.
smallspy
Senior Member
Where do you come up with this garbage?
That ramp is the exact same ramp as used on several thousand low-floor cars in Europe, many of them not even Bombardier products. And it may even have a bolt-in replacement from alternate suppliers as well.
Dan
Toronto, Ont.
MetroMan
Senior Member
Rather than propping up an incompetent company that is only around because of federal assistance, I'd like the the feds and the TTC to:
1. Redirect the $1B federal package towards tax incentives that encourage a proven transportation manufacturer to locate factories in Canada (preferably Thunder Bay to sustain those jobs).
2. Maintain the current order to keep cars coming but tender a new contract for the 60 additional cars (plus option of 200+ cars) to another manufacturer.
3. Sue the pants off Bombardier, forcing them to cancel the contract and allowing the supplier for the 60 cars to pick up the slack and deliver what's left of the Bombardier order.
Let Bombardier restructure themselves if they want to stay afloat. Taxpayers shouldn't have to prop up incompetence due to being held hostage to the jobs that Bombardier provides. Other companies can fill that role.
1. Redirect the $1B federal package towards tax incentives that encourage a proven transportation manufacturer to locate factories in Canada (preferably Thunder Bay to sustain those jobs).
2. Maintain the current order to keep cars coming but tender a new contract for the 60 additional cars (plus option of 200+ cars) to another manufacturer.
3. Sue the pants off Bombardier, forcing them to cancel the contract and allowing the supplier for the 60 cars to pick up the slack and deliver what's left of the Bombardier order.
Let Bombardier restructure themselves if they want to stay afloat. Taxpayers shouldn't have to prop up incompetence due to being held hostage to the jobs that Bombardier provides. Other companies can fill that role.
Last edited:
TOareaFan
Superstar
^ not sure I agree but it is an interesting idea....but if the job losses would likely be in Thunder Bay why the "preferably Quebec" part?
georgevicbell
Active Member
So, my question is where is the leadership.
Toronto is facing an existential threat to its streetcar system with the existing vehicles only having a short amount of time before they are useless, metrolinx is facing an existential threat to its own reason for existence and the lrt program in multiple cities if it ends up building new lines without vehicles.
So far we are suing for tens of millions of dollars. But that won't fix the existential threat to ttc and metrolinx.
BBD has shown an inability to lead, fix or even improve the current situation. Counting on them when they are likely to not break even on this contract and are facing pressures from all around (including the public) and the Feds does not make sense.
Ttc and metrolinx need to show that they have a plan. It needs to be specific and have cutoff/drop dead dates that are communicated to the public and bombardier.
If we are still seeing in the ttc ceo report 2 years from now that bombardier is still promising to ramp up production and Byford has met with the next Ceo to register his disappointment we can likely plan to start shutting down service to longbranch. In 4 years it's less service on spadina and in 6 years we can cut out king completely. I've been saying since the strike that we need a plan that includes a second supplier and potentially even a third if bbd goes belly up.
Metrolinx should likely find another supplier for the entire order, but even if they don't they should cut their risk by getting 1/3 of the current order from another supplier.
I think long term Ontario needs to move to a dual supplier by default for all transit vehicles - I'm thinking especially of the electric order for Go and any future subway orders.
The biggest joke would be if after all of this we don't have an option in place if bbd can't hit the contracted minimums for meantime to failure. If they don't make it and there is no option but to continue with the contract because there is no alternative then everyone at the ttc should be fired.
Toronto is facing an existential threat to its streetcar system with the existing vehicles only having a short amount of time before they are useless, metrolinx is facing an existential threat to its own reason for existence and the lrt program in multiple cities if it ends up building new lines without vehicles.
So far we are suing for tens of millions of dollars. But that won't fix the existential threat to ttc and metrolinx.
BBD has shown an inability to lead, fix or even improve the current situation. Counting on them when they are likely to not break even on this contract and are facing pressures from all around (including the public) and the Feds does not make sense.
Ttc and metrolinx need to show that they have a plan. It needs to be specific and have cutoff/drop dead dates that are communicated to the public and bombardier.
If we are still seeing in the ttc ceo report 2 years from now that bombardier is still promising to ramp up production and Byford has met with the next Ceo to register his disappointment we can likely plan to start shutting down service to longbranch. In 4 years it's less service on spadina and in 6 years we can cut out king completely. I've been saying since the strike that we need a plan that includes a second supplier and potentially even a third if bbd goes belly up.
Metrolinx should likely find another supplier for the entire order, but even if they don't they should cut their risk by getting 1/3 of the current order from another supplier.
I think long term Ontario needs to move to a dual supplier by default for all transit vehicles - I'm thinking especially of the electric order for Go and any future subway orders.
The biggest joke would be if after all of this we don't have an option in place if bbd can't hit the contracted minimums for meantime to failure. If they don't make it and there is no option but to continue with the contract because there is no alternative then everyone at the ttc should be fired.
Admiral Beez
Superstar
It's important to recognize that Bombardier has zero in-house history of supplying streetcars for Toronto. How was the Thunder Bay plant re. delivery and quality of the CLRV and "ALRV, that predate Bombardier's acquisition in 1991?
Has the city considered changing the track network to eliminate the need for non-industry spec turning radii? The tracks are torn out and replaced every ten years or so - sounds like a good opportunity.
Has the city considered changing the track network to eliminate the need for non-industry spec turning radii? The tracks are torn out and replaced every ten years or so - sounds like a good opportunity.
Last edited:
EastYorkTTCFan
Senior Member
I thought there were problems with them early on too as they refurbished PCC cars to use in place of them on some routes. 604 harbourfront originally opened with only PCC and didn't have CLRVS for at least a couple of years.
nfitz
Superstar
The Harbourfront streetcar opened in 1990. CLRV deliveries were completed in 1981. ALRV deliveries were completed in 1989.
EastYorkTTCFan
Senior Member
true but it's first few years of existence it used only PCC cars
RapidTransit
New Member
What about leasing buses to replace streetcar routes like 502, 503, 508, 506 until enough LRVs are delivered. Buses aren't that bad. Apparently there's a lot of streetcar operators that are dual trained.
I'm sure TTC can sue the living daylights out of BBD, to point they will be out of business in one shot. The only thing stopping them are the politician, clearly. TTC is working within the parameters given by the politicians.
And as someone mentioned, the problem doesn't appear to be Thunder Bay, considering that GO and TTC subway cars are being delivered with no major problems.
I'm sure TTC can sue the living daylights out of BBD, to point they will be out of business in one shot. The only thing stopping them are the politician, clearly. TTC is working within the parameters given by the politicians.
And as someone mentioned, the problem doesn't appear to be Thunder Bay, considering that GO and TTC subway cars are being delivered with no major problems.
TOareaFan
Superstar
Would love to see what sort of financial analysis you did to be "sure" about this? What is the value of this contract? What would be/are the damages that the TTC has suffered worth in $? How do those damages compare to the equity/cash/liquidity of Bombardier? Come on, share it with the class....some here, it seems, would like nothing better than for BBD to be "out of business in one shot"
UD2
Active Member
Even if we ignored the provisions in the contract which limits fines to be paid by bombardier, I'm sure the TTC can only sue for the damages that they had incurred, which would be the extra costs in maintaining the current fleet of LRVs beyond their useful life. I doublt a couple of years of streetcar maintinence costs will bring down the third largest train maker, and fourth largest aircraft manufacture in the Western Hemisphere.
Even if it's possible, why would you want one of the largest Canadian corporations to go bankrupt? Would losing thousands of jobs across Ontario and Quebec be beneficial for Toronto? Or even you?
Even if it's possible, why would you want one of the largest Canadian corporations to go bankrupt? Would losing thousands of jobs across Ontario and Quebec be beneficial for Toronto? Or even you?
nfitz
Superstar
Of course they did - I remember riding it in 1990.
Nothing to do with reliability issues on the CLRV/ALRV though. Streetcar ridership was higher then, than it was when they got rid of them, so they still needed some PCCs. If I remember the news reports at the time, there was a desire to use the historical vehicles for tourist reasons.
Admiral Beez
Superstar
Speaking for myself, I don't want them to go bankrupt. But I want them to compete on Canadian municipal, provincial and federal funded globally-sourced tenders fairly and solely on the competitive qualities and value of their products and their abilities to meet their commitments. Giving them a leg up because they employ folks in Thunder Bay and elsewhere in Canada is a competitor-killer, and should not be taken into consideration when awarding the contract.
Even though our home industry is robust, TPS isn't forced to buy vehicles made in Canada https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toronto_Police_Service#Motor_vehicles
Here's Eurocopter Canada's plant in Fort Erie. But we don't force or fix contracts so that they'll win gov't contracts.
IMO, for the TTC procurement, all that should matter is whose offering the best product design, performance (however judged), value, delivery and service.