[Steve X]

When everyone can only keep artics are 12 years, there’s no magic that can allow them to mysteriously keep them running for 18 years. It’s no surprise to anyone that they are near the end of life.

 

[smallspy]

Wouldn’t NYC’s MTA require stainless steel on their buses? I know their climate might be different there. And as for Orion, they never offered any Artic models when they existed. Although I would assume had they did. TTC would’ve been the only customer. Although I do believe it was the III failures that made Orion hesitant to offer any Artics.

MTA uses different specs in their tenders. They have required stainless steel frames in the past, but they have also required that any bus meets a certain threshold of longevity at the Altoona "shaker" testing.

Orion late it its life almost offered bids on a North American-ized Mercedes Citaro articulated bus. They imported one to North America for testing and some demo.

I do recall that MiWay and YRT D40LFs outlived the first TTC Orion VIIs in the last couple of years. With 7400-7881 being built with DDEC S50 EGRs while theirs had Cummins engines. In fact YRT’s D40LFs from 2005-06 outlived the TTC VIIs from 2006-07 to this day. Not sure if both MiWay and YRT D40LFs were built with carbon steel?

The buses of most transit agencies - especially the suburban ones - do not see the same utilization rate that the TTC's buses do. The TTC's would have had far higher mileage and operating hours, even though they were forced to be pulled from service by the Ministry of the Environment.

New Flyer has only offered a partially stainless steel frame, and as a higher-cost option. I don't know of any of the suburban agencies who have bought that option.

One thing I found interesting was the RTS buses TTC got in the 1998 was built in New Mexico, despite Orion being made in Ontario and Nova actually having a plant in Quebec. Not sure how TTC got around that.

Simple - no Federal or Provincial monies were used in that purchase, only Municipal. That's why they could order what they wanted.

I am not privy to the exact details on what they did to the Novas, but the 12 year lifespan has been a plan for a while, so it would not surprise me if they only did a light refurbishment on them. Why dump all that money on them if they're going to go away in a few years' time?

The work they did on the Orion VIIs was in itself pretty light - the average bus was in and out of the workshops in about 8 days, compared to the GM rebuilds in the 2000s that took about 6 weeks per bus.

That's a function of how the buses are built - both in the sense of how well, and in the sense of how easy or hard they are to take apart.

Modern buses are built in a very modular manner, and have multiple sub-assemblies that can be removed and replaced in one fell swoop. Front axle, rear axle, engine cradle, etc. On top of that, the TTC has streamlined the process enough that they have spare sub-assemblies ready to go - a bus that comes in for rebuild has its old sub-assemblies removed and sent out for rework and new set get installed right away, or after a very short delay. As well, panels are designed to come off quickly and easily to allow access to the frame other components hidden in the walls.

The New Looks, on the other hand, had some sub-assemblies for the axles. But the bodies were all fabricated from rivetted steel and aluminum, and so all of the rivets needed to be removed in order to access the frame components for inspection or replacement. And those frame components were made of stamped steel, like a car, so there was less bulk for tinworm to attack. It was just a far, far more laborious job.

For the record, regardless of how long it takes, if a bus goes in for a "full rebuild" it is getting a full rebuild. Frames are inspected and components replaced. Axles, suspension and motors are replaced. A/C replaced. It's a very thorough job.

When everyone can only keep artics are 12 years, there’s no magic that can allow them to mysteriously keep them running for 18 years. It’s no surprise to anyone that they are near the end of life.

It's not that there's no magic - an articulated bus is just another type of bus, all of the components on it can be replaced including the joint.

It's just that on an artic because of the additional costs required to keep them on the road, the scales get weighted more towards a shorter lifespan.

Dan

 

[Bordercollie]

Orion II is a small bus to begin with, so it's no different than working on a smaller vehicle. Technically all engine compartments are cramped.

In 1998 TTC could have ordered Nova Classics instead of RTS, I believe production might have ended a year prior , but if TTC ordered Classics I'm sure Nova would have honored the request.

But If I recall , Gunn wanted RTS because of his experience in NYC. Despite them being made in the US.

It's been so many years. But I was under the assumption that the province encouraged Orion because they had owned them. But if I recall , Orion was sold when Mike Harris came in. So maybe there wasn't a strict policy with the new administration. Or when TTC ordered the RTS , they had enough funds without needing money from the province?

Classic with a 50 series?

MTA uses different specs in their tenders. They have required stainless steel frames in the past, but they have also required that any bus meets a certain threshold of longevity at the Altoona "shaker" testing.

Orion late it its life almost offered bids on a North American-ized Mercedes Citaro articulated bus. They imported one to North America for testing and some demo.


The buses of most transit agencies - especially the suburban ones - do not see the same utilization rate that the TTC's buses do. The TTC's would have had far higher mileage and operating hours, even though they were forced to be pulled from service by the Ministry of the Environment.

New Flyer has only offered a partially stainless steel frame, and as a higher-cost option. I don't know of any of the suburban agencies who have bought that option.


Simple - no Federal or Provincial monies were used in that purchase, only Municipal. That's why they could order what they wanted.


That's a function of how the buses are built - both in the sense of how well, and in the sense of how easy or hard they are to take apart.

Modern buses are built in a very modular manner, and have multiple sub-assemblies that can be removed and replaced in one fell swoop. Front axle, rear axle, engine cradle, etc. On top of that, the TTC has streamlined the process enough that they have spare sub-assemblies ready to go - a bus that comes in for rebuild has its old sub-assemblies removed and sent out for rework and new set get installed right away, or after a very short delay. As well, panels are designed to come off quickly and easily to allow access to the frame other components hidden in the walls.

The New Looks, on the other hand, had some sub-assemblies for the axles. But the bodies were all fabricated from rivetted steel and aluminum, and so all of the rivets needed to be removed in order to access the frame components for inspection or replacement. And those frame components were made of stamped steel, like a car, so there was less bulk for tinworm to attack. It was just a far, far more laborious job.

For the record, regardless of how long it takes, if a bus goes in for a "full rebuild" it is getting a full rebuild. Frames are inspected and components replaced. Axles, suspension and motors are replaced. A/C replaced. It's a very thorough job.


It's not that there's no magic - an articulated bus is just another type of bus, all of the components on it can be replaced including the joint.

It's just that on an artic because of the additional costs required to keep them on the road, the scales get weighted more towards a shorter lifespan.

Dan

How did they add Power Steering to the Fishbowls during rebuild? Did they add a power steering hose from the back of the bus all the way to the steering wheel?

 

[MiExpress]

Wouldn’t NYC’s MTA require stainless steel on their buses? I know their climate might be different there. And as for Orion, they never offered any Artic models when they existed. Although I would assume had they did. TTC would’ve been the only customer. Although I do believe it was the III failures that made Orion hesitant to offer any Artics.

I do recall that MiWay and YRT D40LFs outlived the first TTC Orion VIIs in the last couple of years. With 7400-7881 being built with DDEC S50 EGRs while theirs had Cummins engines. In fact YRT’s D40LFs from 2005-06 outlived the TTC VIIs from 2006-07 to this day. Not sure if both MiWay and YRT D40LFs were built with carbon steel?

A good amount of MiWay D40LF's did last upwards of 18-20 years but it was out of sheer necessity. In order to get that life span most of them had 3 rounds of major structural work to deal with corrosion and other frame failures, as well as multiple engine/transmission replacements.

New Flyer has only offered a partially stainless steel frame, and as a higher-cost option. I don't know of any of the suburban agencies who have bought that option.

Starting with the 2014 model year, the Xcelsior was standardized with the partial stainless steel frame design (lower frame rails and wheel wells constructed of stainless steel and the rest mild steel), and within the last year or two has switched to a fully stainless steel frame on the Xcelsior. However it is ferritic stainless steel and not 304 grade as seen on Orion VIIs and Nova LFS.

 

[smallspy]

Starting with the 2014 model year, the Xcelsior was standardized with the partial stainless steel frame design (lower frame rails and wheel wells constructed of stainless steel and the rest mild steel), and within the last year or two has switched to a fully stainless steel frame on the Xcelsior. However it is ferritic stainless steel and not 304 grade as seen on Orion VIIs and Nova LFS.

Ahh, I was not aware that New Flyer made those changes. Thanks for that.

Dan

 

[RapidTransit]

Classic with a 50 series?

Yup, after 1995, S50s were available for the Classic. A few Quebec agencies and in the US have Classics with S50. Some even have CAT engine.

Personally a Classic with a S50 ain't the same. But I'm weird like that. I prefer the 6v92TA.

I believe the last year of the 6v92 was 1998. And possibly marine application till the early 2000s.

 

[RapidTransit]

V

Didn’t NYC MTA had problems with Artics before? It wasn’t until 1996 that they got their first D60HFs basically high floor Artics with wheelchair lifts. Although I wonder what made the MTA to buy D60HFs in the first place? Considered they never had the Ikarus buses or the MAN buses at the time.

I'm sure they did they're own compressive study and test. A lot of transit agencies have their own engineering department.

Im not too familiar with NYC, but from my understanding, the buses they has the biggest issues with were the Grumman 870. But a lot of what they've ordered have lasted a long time.

Same NYC was getting C40LF even after production ended in 2010. So it helps they've gone with proven models. The D60HF was 6 years old in production by the time NYC got them, so NFI had time to work out some weak points.

Ans transit agencies are always in communication with each other sharing info.

 

[Toffy]

When everyone can only keep artics are 12 years, there’s no magic that can allow them to mysteriously keep them running for 18 years. It’s no surprise to anyone that they are near the end of life.

There are countless examples of articulated buses in North America that are well over 12 years old and still in service. Calgary has a fleet of 60+ D60LFRs from 2007 to 2009 that are still in service, New York and Montreal have Nova LFSAs from 2009-2010 still in service, Ottawa has D60LFs from 2008 still in service and the list goes on.

You are right though about there being no magic to keep artics running to 18 years. Instead real tried and true solutions are applied that help keep any piece of equipment going and articulated buses are no different. Simply put you fiix what's broke.

To that end and to steer this conversation back on topic, while the TTC's budget did make reference to the retirement of the 2013-2014 Nova LFSA fleet, those plans are clearly changing to a degree. Since the end of November the TTC has awarded 3 contracts for the supply of various parts to make repairs to the articulated joints on the Nova Artics. One contract for the supply of 55 replacement articulated joint structures, more specifically the front section which connects the front section of the bus to the slewing ring (main bearing) of the joint. Two other contracts for a total of 70 replacement hydraulic dampening cylinders.

A fourth tender closes this Friday and titled: REQUEST FOR BIDS FOR THE SUPPLY OF HUBNER PARTS FOR TTC'S NOVA ARTIC PROJECT This tender is for a further 50 articulated joint structures, again the front section, which theoretically puts the total at 105 buses that they plan on repairing.

A fifth tender was released last Friday for even more parts for articulated joints on the Nova LFSAs. This one for the supply of a wide range of parts for the articulated joints with the supply to start this year and extending out to 2028.

 

[81-717]

Personally a Classic with a S50 ain't the same.

Yeah, I can't imagine it either, almost the same thing as a Fishbowl with an S50 (I'll see myself out now, lol).

And, to add, if I were superstitious, I would say that every confident assertion you make that the T1 replacement will go off without a hitch and be completed on time and the H5s will be avenged is tempting fate to make the replacement contract into an unmitigated disaster.

Funny, I feel the same about your confident assertion (and secret wish) that the new trains will be delayed to oblivion and the T1s will be around forever, adding insult to injury to the H5s. At least I hope this situation would be a far greater disaster than if the new trains get here ASAP even with teething pains.

But no, there's no reason why they'd be an unmitigated disaster in 2030, when the TRs weren't, despite being delivered in the same timeframe.

 

[Bordercollie]

Yup, after 1995, S50s were available for the Classic. A few Quebec agencies and in the US have Classics with S50. Some even have CAT engine.

Personally a Classic with a S50 ain't the same. But I'm weird like that. I prefer the 6v92TA.

I believe the last year of the 6v92 was 1998. And possibly marine application till the early 2000s.

They are slow as molasses without a better engine. You have to build up speed to make it up the hill.

 

[Bordercollie]

There are countless examples of articulated buses in North America that are well over 12 years old and still in service. Calgary has a fleet of 60+ D60LFRs from 2007 to 2009 that are still in service, New York and Montreal have Nova LFSAs from 2009-2010 still in service, Ottawa has D60LFs from 2008 still in service and the list goes on.

You are right though about there being no magic to keep artics running to 18 years. Instead real tried and true solutions are applied that help keep any piece of equipment going and articulated buses are no different. Simply put you fiix what's broke.

To that end and to steer this conversation back on topic, while the TTC's budget did make reference to the retirement of the 2013-2014 Nova LFSA fleet, those plans are clearly changing to a degree. Since the end of November the TTC has awarded 3 contracts for the supply of various parts to make repairs to the articulated joints on the Nova Artics. One contract for the supply of 55 replacement articulated joint structures, more specifically the front section which connects the front section of the bus to the slewing ring (main bearing) of the joint. Two other contracts for a total of 70 replacement hydraulic dampening cylinders.

A fourth tender closes this Friday and titled: REQUEST FOR BIDS FOR THE SUPPLY OF HUBNER PARTS FOR TTC'S NOVA ARTIC PROJECT This tender is for a further 50 articulated joint structures, again the front section, which theoretically puts the total at 105 buses that they plan on repairing.

A fifth tender was released last Friday for even more parts for articulated joints on the Nova LFSAs. This one for the supply of a wide range of parts for the articulated joints with the supply to start this year and extending out to 2028.

There are some units that feel like the joint will come apart when going over big bumps.

 

[RapidTransit]

They are slow as molasses without a better engine. You have to build up speed to make it up the hill.

The 6v92 from what I recall were powerful engines. The previous 6v71 were slower.

The later S50s in the 7400 had a slow start up, but once they got up to speed they can go. It was usually always the initial start up. The 7000s and 7300s had S50 engines and they were fast buses.

Detroit added the EGR and some engine defect with the 7400 as a result of EPA regulations.

 

[Bordercollie]

The 6v92 from what I recall were powerful engines. The previous 6v71 were slower.

The later S50s in the 7400 had a slow start up, but once they got up to speed they can go. It was usually always the initial start up. The 7000s and 7300s had S50 engines and they were fast buses.

Detroit added the EGR and some engine defect with the 7400 as a result of EPA regulations.

For whatever reason the EGR units smoked more the the PRE EGR units.

Also the Orion VII'S were stainless steelt frames making them heavier which could be why they felt slower than the Orion V's.

We never had any buses with 6v92.

The D40 90's were very fast but the engine literally shook the bus to pieces. They always had problems with the rear suspension bottoming out.

 

[CMQSD402F9011]

For whatever reason the EGR units smoked more the the PRE EGR units.

Also the Orion VII'S were stainless steelt frames making them heavier which could be why they felt slower than the Orion V's.

We never had any buses with 6v92.

The D40 90's were very fast but the engine literally shook the bus to pieces. They always had problems with the rear suspension bottoming out.

And unfortunately the TTC 7400-7881 series broke down a lot due to the S50 EGR engines being one of them I heard.

TTC did get buses with the 6V92TA which were the 1991 Orion Vs

Had the TTC D40-90s been built with DDEC 6V92TAs(?) wouldn’t they last long to like 2010-11?

 

[Bordercollie]

And unfortunately the TTC 7400-7881 series broke down a lot due to the S50 EGR engines being one of them I heard.

TTC did get buses with the 6V92TA which were the 1991 Orion Vs

Had the TTC D40-90s been built with DDEC 6V92TAs(?) wouldn’t they last long to like 2010-11?

Oh right. Those were rockets too.

But the D40 90's had other issues too. And the TTC was warned that the engines were too powerful.

Why wasn't 6V92 an option for the new flyer?