|
|
|
- Thread starter drum118
- Start date
APTA-2048
Senior Member
T3G
Senior Member
I know the technical reasons why they made the intermediate level like that, but if they turned the seats to face inward it would at least let you look around and people watch, rather than sitting forward and having walls on 3 sides of you.
81-717
Active Member
Will Line 2 Ever See Its Western Yard?
Updated April 24, 2025 at 11:30 pm: TTC responses to my questions have been added at the end of the article. One questions remains outstanding. Back in 2018, the City of Toronto bought the lands so…
stevemunro.ca
generalcanada
Senior Member
the golden rule on the internet. if an article is posing a question. the answer is a noWill Line 2 Ever See Its Western Yard?
Updated April 24, 2025 at 11:30 pm: TTC responses to my questions have been added at the end of the article. One questions remains outstanding. Back in 2018, the City of Toronto bought the lands so…
ShonTron
Moderator
RapidTransit
Active Member
I use to think TTC ordered buses based on the lowest bid. But the fact they got separate orders from Nova and NFI for 134 buses, obviously both orders didn't cost the exact same. Warranty is probably different, delivery time was different, parts are different, etc. So if it's not the lowest bid , how do they come to their decision?
Don't get me wrong, having two separate orders was great, maybe it helps with competition, and possibly doesn't hold them to one manufacturer in case something happens.
Have they ever done customer survey or drivers input? Obviously specifications play a role, and production capacity and time frame to complete the order, etc. Even though most bus orders are late these days. I would be curious to see a detailed process on how they go about procuring buses.
I find the ride quality on the Novas horrible. I can only imagine an operator driving that same bus for 8+ hours. So clearly drivers input is not part of the process. How times have I seen customers vent about the Novas, customer input is also not part of the process. Both stakeholders is a massive part of their core service, yet both appears to be ignored. If they're willing to pay big bucks for an EV bus, then the extra cost to make customers and drivers be comfortable shouldn't be up for debate.
Bring back rear windows. Great for visibility. It might be an extra cost, but they're getting EV anyways, which is an extra cost.
Im pretty sure years ago, before Leary TTC shed some light on they're procurement process. It would be interesting to see that again.
81-717
Active Member
Good thing the question is about the new MSF and not the NSTs then, lol
DSCToronto
Superstar
There is lots on Steve Munro's site about the TTCs evaluation of several possible e-buses (including Proterras, which never made it to a real order).
smallspy
Senior Member
The TTC has very, very seldom ordered buses based on the lowest-priced tender alone. They would generally select the lowest, most compliant bidder - which is why they received over 1000 Orion buses in the 2000s.
Then there was the over 1000 Nova buses that they received in the past 10 years - most of those tenders did not have Nova as the lowest bidder.
In the case of the hybrid and battery bus orders which have just wrapped up or are ramping up (respectively), the decision was made to split the deliveries between the two manufacturers in order to ensure that they could deliver within tight timelines. Those orders were also based on the feedback that they received during the 60 e-bus order and trial, which used three manufacturers (but not Nova). Also interestingly, it doesn't seem like the TTC has canvassed for feedback from other transit agencies operating battery buses, such as Brampton, York Region Transit and Winnipeg, to name but three.
The TTC has done customer surveys in the past but I honestly can't recall one focused on bus design/layout/comfort in almost 30 years. There is a lot of feedback from ACAT on a regular basis, but I don't know if they ask "randos" for their opinion as well. They do regularly solicit feedback from the operators, which is why they're on revision 3 or 4 of the operator's shields.
Dan
81-717
Active Member
I wonder if the same procurement strategy could work with the NSTs to ensure they could be delivered within tight timelines of 3 years (2030–2033 as currently anticipated) instead of the 6–7 years it took for both of the existing fleets to be delivered.
PL1
Senior Member
Normal service has been restored as of this morning rush hour.
RapidTransit
Active Member
Thank you for the feed back. For whatever reason I assumed it went to the lowest bidder. I thought the city had a mandate that any procurement went to the lowest bidder when possible.
Well if it's been 30+ years since they done any feedback from the public, maybe it's time to reconnect with their customers and their core service. Obviously we're not expecting a custom made bus, but something that customers would like to have that's also feasible and within the scope of what bus manufacturers offer.
Another shocker is TTC not sharing info with surrounding transit agencies on bus specs and information regarding the EV buses. That was such a big deal to study EV, and for TTC to bring about a report. Yet they didn't bother sharing info with surrounding agencies. I just assumed that's what TTC did, even if it were through APTA. I'm actually surprised of the lack of information sharing. I'm sure if they worked together, they could possibly even share specs and order parts in bigger bulk. Possibly saving money?
I'm actually surprised with the way TTC has gone about this.
I do recall under Howard Moscow, he wanted more front facing seats in the upper rear section. And with the 1st Gen Orion 7s they actually made it possible. But when TTC got the 2nd generation Orions, they got rid of all front facing seats and instead changed the layout to perimeter seating. So that's probably why I assumed TTC did some kind of out reach to get feed back from passengers. But based on the response, the request for front facing seats appear to be a one off request , and not something TTC has as part of their procurement process.
Well, I guess it makes sense why customers are disappointed with the layout and ride quality of these Novas. I guess to go even further back down the supply chain, the bus manufacturers should also be doing some kind of feed back or a partnership with a transit agency to improve their product for customers.
The barriers appears to be an after thought As a result of safety in the work place. And clearly something that wasn't much thought during the design phase. An actual ergonomic issue that should be addressed during the procurement process. Or design phase of a bus model.
Obviously feedback won't address every issue, but you would think something so basic would be a no brainer as part of the process.
TTC appears to be more focused on engineering side, than the actual customer experience. Both are important, but the goal should geared towards the customer comfort and ease of travel.
Either way, good insight.
Jonny5
Senior Member
Do people care anymore about windows? They are busy playing Jewel Drop Mega Bonus or they are on Facetime.
RapidTransit
Active Member
In streetcars I observe ppl looking out the back all the time. Many ppl do still look around at their surroundings.
In subways , I see ppl attempting to look through the cab doors on Line 1 and over the barriers on Line 2.
I was just using rear windows as an example for customer experience. The point was about how to better the customer ride and comfort where possible and feasible. Seating layout , operator ergonomics, ride quality , etc. And how TTC goes about incorporating customers feedback to how they procure buses.
I heard Mississauga specs their buses for rear windows as a customer benefit.
Last edited: