|
Post by roadtrainer on Dec 2, 2008 19:39:07 GMT -8
With all this talk of the different kinds of rail-cars out on the lines, and i really don't know the difference between the cars. Can you guys come up with pictures like baseball cards and the rest of us will know what a P2000 is because of the fine work one of you guys did giving us a picture guide to go by. Sincerely the roadtrainer
|
|
|
Post by bobdavis on Dec 5, 2008 17:39:14 GMT -8
Today's Breda spotting: 717 and 718 in service at Sierra Madre Villa this morning. Note that 717 was the number of the "Red Car" in "Who Framed Roger Rabbit", and is the number of the operable "real life" PE Hollywood car at Orange Empire.
|
|
|
Post by James Fujita on Dec 13, 2008 22:30:53 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Dec 14, 2008 10:33:23 GMT -8
They are the best breed of LRVs, capable of reaching 75 MPH and carrying up to 657 passengers per three-car train -- fast and high-capacity. I'm very glad that the Expo Line will also use these LRVs. See the full specifications here. I believe the Italian specifications are the correct ones.
|
|
|
Post by James Fujita on Dec 14, 2008 12:36:24 GMT -8
They are the best breed of LRVs, capable of reaching 75 MPH and carrying up to 657 passengers per three-car train -- fast and high-capacity. I'm very glad that the Expo Line will also use these LRVs. See the full specifications here. I believe the Italian specifications are the correct ones. ah, sorry. don't take it too hard I haven't had the chance to ride them. I remember somebody complaining about some LRVs and I couldn't remember which trains they were. like Roadtrainer, I sometimes have a hard time keeping the names straight, so I thought the photos would help. I have to say, they looked good sitting there at Union Station.
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Dec 14, 2008 13:04:44 GMT -8
They are the best breed of LRVs, capable of reaching 75 MPH and carrying up to 657 passengers per three-car train -- fast and high-capacity. I'm very glad that the Expo Line will also use these LRVs. See the full specifications here. I believe the Italian specifications are the correct ones. ah, sorry. don't take it too hard I haven't had the chance to ride them. I remember somebody complaining about some LRVs and I couldn't remember which trains they were. like Roadtrainer, I sometimes have a hard time keeping the names straight, so I thought the photos would help. I have to say, they looked good sitting there at Union Station. Oh, no, actually I had overlooked "infamous." Perhaps they were referring to some other LRVs?
|
|
|
Post by bluelineshawn on Dec 14, 2008 17:53:41 GMT -8
No, people have complained about the Breda's not entering service until years after schedule and having reliability issues. I rode one (708?) a few weeks ago and they still seem to have some issues. They seem to have fixed the A/C problem although they are still a little loud. The train that I was on stalled twice at two different stations and actually rolled backwards a few feet. The T/O's seem to be struggling with mastering the controls. Each one that I've talked to was optimistic, but said that they are much more complicated than our other LRV's. Metro also seems to have issues with the gaps between cars and have tried a few different methods to prevent pax from falling between cars. Most of the cars have a rope/chain, but IIRC they are going to test some other devices. Plus Breda LRV's are infamous because of the many problems that they had in Boston and SF.
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Dec 14, 2008 21:24:35 GMT -8
Sounds like Italian engineering. High on performance and price, low on reliability.
|
|
|
Post by bobdavis on Dec 15, 2008 15:53:09 GMT -8
Reminds me of some of the stories my wife tells about her Fiat hatchback (which she owned long before I knew her). Wonderful car--when it ran..... After one failure too many, she dumped it and bought a Toyota and has been a Toyota partisan ever since. Wouldn't it be nice if we could get Toyota to build rail cars ?
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Dec 15, 2008 16:44:33 GMT -8
Toyota and its parts manufacturer NipponDenso are a remarkable engineering phenomenon but Toyota has even resisted building greener cars, let alone trains. Unfortunately they've become a corporation that gives no darn to what it does for people but only cares about how to maximize their profits in the most optimal way, like most big corporations. They would rather make an extra million dollar than help save the world.
|
|
|
Post by Tony Fernandez on Dec 15, 2008 20:05:32 GMT -8
^^Can't blame them for making things that people want.
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Dec 15, 2008 22:08:23 GMT -8
Actually it's more subtle than that. For example if they made Corolla slightly sportier, nobody would by a Lexus. Likewise, if they made Prius slightly better-performing, nobody would by a Camry. If they made their nonhybrid car-fleet energy efficient, nobody would buy a Prius. They do their best to employ every trick they can think of so that people will spend the most of their money for least of their benefit. That's how the big corporations are run.
In fact they have resisted the government's plans to increase the MPG for exactly the reasons above -- they would end up making less money, although helping the environment and people.
Another good example is Apple, for example coming up with a slightly better version of iPhone every year but still with many standard features missing, despite these features and technology being widely available on many other smartphones.
Just like the 2010 redesigned Prius won't have the plug-in technology, to be postponed to a one or two years later so that people will end up trading in their new Prius'es in merely two years.
|
|
|
Post by bobdavis on Dec 16, 2008 15:20:44 GMT -8
This is an old story that was even made into a movie: Back in the 40's Preston Tucker introduced the "Tucker" motorcar, which had a number of advanced features. Only about 50 were built, and there's still disagreement as to whether it was all a big fraud or Mr. Tucker was the victim of "dirty deeds" on the part of the existing car manufacturers. The charge that car builders "dole out" improvements, rather than build a perfect car all at once does have some truth behind it, on the other hand, many improvements have had to wait until technology catches up to concept, and until the improvements can be added at a reasonable price and with confidence in their reliability. One example is the all-steel body: up until the mid-30's even sedans had a "soft top"--the roof of the car was a rubberized fabric that had to be replaced from time to time. It took the steel industry a long time to develop steel sheets wide enough and flexible enough to be formed into solid car tops. (one manufacturer used the term "turret top", implying that their all-steel bodies were like part of an army tank or warship). Another is fuel injection: the old carburetor did the job, but it always represented a compromise, only providing an ideal fuel mixture at certain speeds. Mechanical fuel injection has always been part of the Diesel system, but was only used in expensive, high performance gas engines until the development of inexpensive, reliable electronics made electronic fuel injection, with its improvements in performance, fuel economy and pollution reduction. Another aspect of the gradual addition of improvements is indeed the concept of "planned obsolescence", making the customers dissatisfied with cars that are quite satisfactory. Someone once commented that GM would much rather sell cars than buses, because emotions play a large part in many automobile purchases, while motor coaches are bought by transit operators who have either stockholders or taxpayers breathing down their necks, "encouraging" them to get the most bus for the buck.
|
|
|
Post by wad on Dec 17, 2008 4:47:18 GMT -8
Someone once commented that GM would much rather sell cars than buses, because emotions play a large part in many automobile purchases, while motor coaches are bought by transit operators who have either stockholders or taxpayers breathing down their necks, "encouraging" them to get the most bus for the buck. GM got out of the bus business in the 1980s. It owns Detroit Diesel, which has the largest market share of engines for buses and other commercial vehicles. And, FWIW, GM was arguably the best transit bus builder in North America. The latter part of your sentence holds true, though, about getting the most for your buck. The best vehicles the Big Three build are their trucks, since fleet buyers pressure them into building a solid work vehicle.
|
|
|
Post by bobdavis on Dec 29, 2008 17:55:41 GMT -8
Latest Breda-spotting report: 722, 723 and an un-numbered unit were on the delivery track next to "Cornfield Park" this afternoon. The maintenance yard is filling up. 706 and 708 were the only units I saw in service.
|
|
|
Post by bluelineshawn on Jan 11, 2009 18:16:10 GMT -8
According to the January Operations Report there were 13 Bredas in service as of December. That's good to hear.
RTD has some youtube videos showing 3-car Breda trains on New Years Day.
|
|
|
Post by bobdavis on Jan 11, 2009 18:51:11 GMT -8
Thanks for the tip--I logged into YouTube (which I usually use for music videos) and found both Breda and Siemens 3-car trans. Since I didn't see or hear any reports of substation failures, I would guess that the old rumor that the Gold Line power system couldn't handle 3-car trains has been laid to rest.
|
|
|
Post by bluelineshawn on Mar 23, 2009 14:38:52 GMT -8
Hopefully the next railcar order is decided based on technical merits, but according to this article it may be based on politics. Villaraigosa seeks a second chance for rail car maker After MTA decided not to exercise its options, AnsaldoBreda began intense lobbying. By Maeve Reston March 23, 2009 Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa plans to ask the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority to take a second look at an Italian rail car manufacturer, despite warnings from the agency's top executives that the company's cars have significant design flaws.
The Italian rail company, AnsaldoBreda Inc., has marshaled an intense lobbying effort over the last few months, striking alliances with people known to have the mayor's ear and offering to open a rail car manufacturing plant in an industrial stretch of downtown Los Angeles.
The company already holds a contract to provide cars to the MTA.
It began a new lobbying campaign in late January after MTA officials said they were not interested in exercising the company's options to build 100 additional light rail cars, in part because MTA officials say the delivery of 50 cars under AnsaldoBreda's current deal is three years behind schedule and the cars are too heavy.
AnsaldoBreda officials counter that they built the cars to the agency's specifications and the delay is caused by changes requested by MTA.
The agency's executive staff planned to allow AnsaldoBreda's options to build the cars -- a project that probably would have topped $300 million -- to expire March 31.
Villaraigosa, chairman of the MTA board, is expected to ask members either to exercise the options or agree to a two-month reprieve that would allow time to assess the company's performance and gauge the feasibility of their rail factory proposal.
"We are talking about creating thousands of high-paying jobs at a time when local residents need them the most," said Matt Szabo, Villaraigosa's spokesman.
"The mayor believes we need to explore every possible avenue to ensure that the Measure R [sales tax] investment yields maximum benefit for the L.A. economy."
In an interview last week, Roger Snoble, MTA chief executive, characterized the factory proposal as a late-breaking development after the agency decided to consider other rail companies.
With the passage of last year's Measure R, a half-cent sales tax for transit, the MTA needs to order at least 110 new light rail cars and refurbish 69 old cars.
The agency has told AnsaldoBreda it is welcome to compete against other companies for that business.
"The real question is: Are we going to get the original 50 cars?" Snoble said.
"All the commotion is over the future, and we tend to overlook the present. . . . Because of the difficulties we were having with Breda, my decision -- and this is my decision -- is that we should go out to bid," he said.
With little time before their options expire, AnsaldoBreda put further pressure on board members, including the mayor, by opening negotiations with the Community Redevelopment Authority about building an environmentally friendly manufacturing plant on a plot of more than 18 acres in an area that city officials hope to transform into a green manufacturing corridor.
The rail company, which would build the facility only if it gets the deal, has partnered with the green building company Shangri-La Construction.
That company's founder is Stephen Bing, who contributed $100,000 to the mayor's 2007 campaign committee to elect three school board members and gave $50,000 to the mayor-backed solar initiative known as Measure B, which was defeated by voters earlier this month.
In recent interviews, a number of MTA board members and their deputies said they were still vetting AnsaldoBreda's performance under its current $159-million contract.
"The issue comes down to dependability," said Mike Antonovich, an MTA board member and Los Angeles County supervisor, adding that the agency could get the best value by allowing other companies to compete.
MTA board member John Fasana said MTA staff had made a compelling case about the delays and other technical issues. "We need a good product and we need it on a timely basis."
Of chief concern for several board members is that the systems in the AnsaldoBreda cars are incompatible with those already in the Metro fleet made by two other companies, Siemens and Sumitomo.
AnsaldoBreda officials say that they could fix that problem but that an MTA official waived the compatibility requirement after the company said it would have to simplify the technology in its cars to allow the different manufacturers' systems to communicate.
Snoble and other MTA officials also are concerned about the narrowness of the seats in the cars, the vehicles' reliability and their weight.
Although AnsaldoBreda officials say MTA is using a flawed formula to calculate weight, an MTA consultant found that when empty, the cars were 6,000 pounds heavier than specified in the contract, meaning that they consume more energy.
Another top issue for some MTA board members is the delays: Metro officials say that they had to put pressure on the company to get enough vehicles in time for the Eastside extension of the Gold Line and that the 50th AnsaldoBreda car was to have been delivered by June 2007 but won't arrive until July 2010.
Company officials say the cars were delayed because the MTA did not have enough space to store them -- which Snoble disputes -- and because the agency requested changes, including adding a black box in each car.
"They provide the design and we build what they ask for," said AnsaldoBreda lobbyist Chris Lehane, who is also a Democratic political consultant.
Lehane said agency officials publicly praised AnsaldoBreda when the cars were first delivered and when seeking state funds for the cars in 2006.
"We are more than happy to make any changes with regard to the seats, the weight issues and other issues . . . at cost to AnsaldoBreda," Lehane said.
AnsaldoBreda President Giancarlo Fantappie said the company told MTA that if it got a 100-car contract but did not build a factory in Los Angeles, it would "lose the contract entirely and pay a penalty" to be set by the agency.
AnsaldoBreda has strong support from the Los Angeles County Federation of Labor because it has promised to use union labor to build its proposed $70-million facility on the old Crown Coach site and allow rail workers at the new plant to unionize.
Maria Elena Durazo, the federation's executive secretary-treasurer and a longtime Villaraigosa confidant, sent a letter to Snoble, copied to board members, urging the agency not to allow "this big opportunity to be squandered."
"It would really kick off this whole concept of green jobs and middle-class jobs and a clean tech corridor," Durazo said.
A number of officials familiar with the proposal have expressed skepticism about AnsaldoBreda's contentions that the facility would create thousands of jobs.
A Los Angeles County Economic Development Corp. study, commissioned by the federation, found that if the company manufactured 75 cars and refurbished 36 cars annually -- which would be determined by its ability to win major contracts -- it would employ 535 workers full time in Los Angeles County.
If the company moved its corporate headquarters to the site, as it has offered to do, it would employ 126 more people full time, according to the study.
In the United States, AnsaldoBreda has active contracts with Los Angeles and with Buffalo, N.Y., where it is refurbishing some of that city's rail cars, Lehane said.
He said the company would compete for the proposed high-speed train linking Northern and Southern California, a commuter train line in Honolulu and future rail expansions in other cities.
maeve.reston@latimes.com
|
|
|
Post by metroman on Mar 23, 2009 17:36:16 GMT -8
Thanks for the post Shawn, I missed today's paper.
"The real question is: Are we going to get the original 50 cars?" Snoble said.
"All the commotion is over the future, and we tend to overlook the present. . . . Because of the difficulties we were having with Breda, my decision -- and this is my decision -- is that we should go out to bid," he said.
An interesting statement, considering 726 was recently delivered. Now 24 more cars to go...
|
|
|
Post by wad on Mar 25, 2009 3:59:44 GMT -8
The bids should go out for tendering again. Not only that, Breda must be frozen out of the process.
We really need a court case out of this whole mess. On the one hand, you have Metro, which is notoriously awful at major capital procurement. Every rail contract has had problems ... even Siemens, which has a normally stellar reputation. On the other hand, you have AnsaloBreda, which is a notoriously bad builder.
I don't know who is right. But if I were AB, I'd back away while there's still a chance. It is dealing with the agency that was able to kill off what was then the best-selling bus in the U.S.!
I also don't like this job-dangling business, and while it seems like very progressive packaging (green-collar jobs! union labor! industrial revitalization!), factories set up for the paramount purpose of job creation tend to be disjointed propositions economically. Read Jane Jacobs' "Cities and the Wealth of Nations" and the chapter on transplanted economies to understand why.
|
|
|
Post by Jason Saunders on Mar 25, 2009 8:45:19 GMT -8
Is this a correct summary of what is wrong with the cars? (as gleamed from this thread)
- The cars stall unexpectedly - The air conditioners do not work - The gap between cars is to wide. - They are heavier then specification. (thus requiring more energy to move) - They have not met project delivery dates.
I wonder what the circumstances are. Are there reasonable reasons for these problems? Are these problems common? Are they relatively easy to fix? At whose expense to fix the problems? What has been AB's attitude.?
Really I would need to know the answer to these questions before I would consider the deal.
|
|
|
Post by kenalpern on Mar 25, 2009 10:24:45 GMT -8
After reading Tim Rutten's editorial in the Times today, I'm convinced that Ansaldobreda are a consummate group of pathologic liars and we should just...GO WITH SNOBLE'S RECOMMENDATION TO OPEN THE BIDDING TO ALL BIDDERS!
|
|
|
Post by wad on Mar 27, 2009 4:20:52 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by damiengoodmon on Mar 27, 2009 6:11:54 GMT -8
Charlie Brown = MTA Lucy = Ansaldobreda Football = Factory
|
|
|
Post by lastraphanger on Mar 28, 2009 16:36:35 GMT -8
the breda cars are a failure this is well known by now
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on May 1, 2009 22:08:52 GMT -8
They have started designing and building LRVs in Istanbul, Turkey, for the rail-transit system there. They say they can cut both the initial and maintenance costs by 50%.
Why not do the same thing in US? The failing auto industry can readily start with it.
|
|
|
Post by bobdavis on May 2, 2009 21:08:43 GMT -8
Although some of us would think it "poetic justice" if GM went into the LRV business, I don't think it's really their area of expertise. Designing automobiles that keep their appeal just long enough for the new car buyer to get tired of them and then get traded down the "food chain" until they wind up as "transportation cars" does not translate well into building rail cars that are expected to run reliably for 20 or 25 years. As I recall, GM is no longer in the bus business, and buses are a lot closer to rail cars as far as manufacturing is concerned.
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on May 2, 2009 23:49:07 GMT -8
Although some of us would think it "poetic justice" if GM went into the LRV business, I don't think it's really their area of expertise. Designing automobiles that keep their appeal just long enough for the new car buyer to get tired of them and then get traded down the "food chain" until they wind up as "transportation cars" does not translate well into building rail cars that are expected to run reliably for 20 or 25 years. As I recall, GM is no longer in the bus business, and buses are a lot closer to rail cars as far as manufacturing is concerned. I didn't explain this very well. What happened in Turkey is the MTA equivalent of Istanbul starting a division to design and build LRVs from complete scratch. They gathered young engineers and got help from the universities and Turkish Science Foundation and managed to produce a high-quality prototype. Their next goal is to start mass production and then later enter the world market and later start building HRVs and HSRVs. Here is the link but unfortunately it's only in Turkish. So, getting the car companies into helping make something like this would be even simpler than achieving it from scratch as in Istanbul.
|
|
|
Post by wad on May 4, 2009 3:53:54 GMT -8
Although some of us would think it "poetic justice" if GM went into the LRV business, I don't think it's really their area of expertise. Designing automobiles that keep their appeal just long enough for the new car buyer to get tired of them and then get traded down the "food chain" until they wind up as "transportation cars" does not translate well into building rail cars that are expected to run reliably for 20 or 25 years. As I recall, GM is no longer in the bus business, and buses are a lot closer to rail cars as far as manufacturing is concerned. GM got out of the bus business in the mid-1980s. Its last design, the RTS, has a legacy of four different builders (GM, TMC, NovaBus and Millennium). Can GM simply jump into the transit manufacturing game? Easier said than done. Much of the bus and rail vehicle manufacturing know-how is often governments and builders working hand-in-glove. The U.S. has fallen far behind in bus design. The leading equipment makers are Canadian (New Flyer and Orion) and Hungarian (North American (!) Bus Industries). As for rail, the dominant players are German (Siemens), Japanese (Nippon Sharyo, Kinki Sharyo) and Canadian (Bombardier). There are a few dominant players, and the buyers for transit agencies tend to be of one mind, so advertising and marketing would not help as with cars. It also does not mean that even the physical plants can be retooled to producing a different kind of vehicle. Maybe the plants are too small or large. Maybe retrofitting an old plant is expensive. Plus, manufacturing is designed to be less reliant on human labor in number and skill -- so these would produce fewer jobs than the shuttered auto plants they are meant to replace, and the jobs that are produce are "deskilled" (more consistent and less reliant on a worker's unique talents).
|
|
|
Post by bobdavis on May 15, 2009 21:44:12 GMT -8
Rode the Gold Line Thursday, at least three of the trains were Bredas. I guess they're finally ready for prime time.
|
|