News   Jul 12, 2024
 1.3K     0 
News   Jul 12, 2024
 1K     1 
News   Jul 12, 2024
 383     0 

The Future of Bombardier

I said it before and I’ll say it again: buy below $2 a share sell above $2 a share. Rinse repeat until the company is broken-up. It’s a case study in business management and execution failure but the assets are back-stopped through government support. The above seems to be the approximate equilibrium point between forces
 
This maybe of some interest that I have received

There is a rumour going around in Vancouver that Translink were in talks with Alstom begging them to bid for the 200 car order to replace the MK.1 cars, but evidently they are not going to bid on them. Nor is Siemens which means that the proprietary and now called Movia Automatic Light Metro (MALM) cars are indeed proprietary after TransLink spent a great deal of time and money convincing everyone that they are not.

The rumour is that if Alsltom joined with bombardier for joint production, they would insist that MALM production would cease altogether as Vancouver is the only customer for the product.

There has been almost a 3 day media barrage saying how wonderful that 12 more cars have entered service on the Canada line, but the line cannot be expanded.

Presently the Canada Line operates a 3 minute peak hour service from Bridgeport Station to downtown Vancouver.

Canada Line Hype and Hoopla : Rail for the Valley
 
Surely the stars have aligned for the Trudeau government to provide significant funding for a further TTC streetcar order. It’s a Montreal company with a history of exerting enormous political influence in Ottawa. The Quebec government is quite public about its view of BBD as a national champion. And the Liberals won heavily in 416 last election, so they’ll want to be seen as rewarding that support. As an added bonus, it might actually make economic sense.
 
Surely the stars have aligned for the Trudeau government to provide significant funding for a further TTC streetcar order. It’s a Montreal company with a history of exerting enormous political influence in Ottawa. The Quebec government is quite public about its view of BBD as a national champion. And the Liberals won heavily in 416 last election, so they’ll want to be seen as rewarding that support. As an added bonus, it might actually make economic sense.

Honestly I wonder if there's a point when things break.

While the Liberals did provide some funding to Bombardier, it wasn't enough to save the CSeries program (without selling to Airbus), and the continued refusal of the Bombardier family to change its share system (which I think Ottawa requested) means that the perception is that things are hardly changing at the decision-making level. Hence- the continued retreat of Bombardier could be viewed as a given, not as a temporary set-back.

But of course, I think there's still an argument for government funding for more streetcars, mainly to target the GTA, Kingston and Thunder Bay, less so for the Quebec connections.
 
As a taxpayer, I dont even want 1 cent of my money going into that company. It's clear they just mismanage and hemorrhage out any funding that the government peddles over to them.

If they couldnt save the C-Series with the hundreds of millions that were given to them, then I dont trust them with anything else.
 

The author of that blog is adamantly anti-SkyTrain, pro-streetcar and LRT.
Take everything on that site with a grain of salt.
Ridership on the 10 year old line is about 150,000 per day and 21% of all YVR (airport) passengers take the Canada Line.

Translink thought that the size of the order might encourage some vendors to bid, as previous orders would have been too small. Probably not surprising that Alstrom and Siemens have not, because I don't think they manufacture linear motor trains.
Hitachi and Kawasaki Heavy Industries come to mind.

[Linear-Motor Subways] The Future of Urban Mass Transit

First Linear Motor-Driven Vehicles Go Online in China

Yokohama Loop Railway Orders 60 Linear Metro Cars

Toei Orders Linear-motor Subway Rolling Stock

Linear Metro Linear Metro Promotion Headquarters in Japan Subway Association Office

For the Canada Line, with the 12 new 2-car trains (adding to the existing 20 2-car trains), headway on the mainline will drop from about 3 min to 2.5 min. On the 2 branches (Richmond or Airport), the headway will be roughly double that. They are programmed to run on a schedule and inter-line accordingly, they don't run "as fast as they can", but do increase speed between stations in the event of delays.

Capacity can still be increased with more train purchases (down to 1.5min headway) as well as insertion of a short middle car that would require short extensions to the elevated stations (underground stations are already built to that length).
Seating could also be changed to be side-seating like Montreal's REM.

There's some info here:
 
Last edited:
This maybe of some interest that I have received

There is a rumour going around in Vancouver that Translink were in talks with Alstom begging them to bid for the 200 car order to replace the MK.1 cars, but evidently they are not going to bid on them. Nor is Siemens which means that the proprietary and now called Movia Automatic Light Metro (MALM) cars are indeed proprietary after TransLink spent a great deal of time and money convincing everyone that they are not.

The rumour is that if Alsltom joined with bombardier for joint production, they would insist that MALM production would cease altogether as Vancouver is the only customer for the product.

Translink thought that the size of the order might encourage some vendors to bid, as previous orders would have been too small. Probably not surprising that Alstrom and Siemens have not, because I don't think they manufacture linear motor trains.
Hitachi and Kawasaki Heavy Industries come to mind.

This is interesting to hear that Vancouver tried different bidders. It's obviously notable here. We sort of had mixed signals with Line 3/SRT. One was basically a built-in mindset from the City/TTC for a couple decades that our only option was purchasing new Innovia (now Movia ALM according to Drum). The other being more recently from Schabas who's on the Province's payroll and argued that other manufacturers can be found. Failing both of those it was the costly rebuild for LRVs, or extending Line 2.

Naturally a different scenario in Vancouver since we had the freedom to shut Line 3 down for months/years to alter the line whereas Vancouver doesn't. But still surprised no takers from manufacturers since it would've been a sizable order. Was it the LIM that was the dealbreaker, or the smaller sizes of the trains?
 
The author of that blog is adamantly anti-SkyTrain, pro-streetcar and LRT.
Take everything on that site with a grain of salt.
Ridership on the 10 year old line is about 150,000 per day and 21% of all YVR (airport) passengers take the Canada Line.

Translink thought that the size of the order might encourage some vendors to bid, as previous orders would have been too small. Probably not surprising that Alstrom and Siemens have not, because I don't think they manufacture linear motor trains.
Hitachi and Kawasaki Heavy Industries come to mind.

[Linear-Motor Subways] The Future of Urban Mass Transit

First Linear Motor-Driven Vehicles Go Online in China

Yokohama Loop Railway Orders 60 Linear Metro Cars

Toei Orders Linear-motor Subway Rolling Stock

Linear Metro Linear Metro Promotion Headquarters in Japan Subway Association Office

For the Canada Line, with the 12 new 2-car trains (adding to the existing 20 2-car trains), headway on the mainline will drop from about 3 min to 2.5 min. On the 2 branches (Richmond or Airport), the headway will be roughly double that. They are programmed to run on a schedule and inter-line accordingly, they don't run "as fast as they can", but do increase speed between stations in the event of delays.

Capacity can still be increased with more train purchases (down to 1.5min headway) as well as insertion of a short middle car that would require short extensions to the elevated stations (underground stations are already built to that length).
Seating could also be changed to be side-seating like Montreal's REM.

There's some info here:
From my point of view, the system was built wrong and under size that will cost more to fix than what it cost to be built. Translink is like Toronto where subway subway is the right mode and not going with the right technology. Translink had the option to build a few LRT lines, but the powers to be didn't want it.

How long has Linear-Motor systems been around and how many are there?? TTC was forced to build the SRT to be a showcase to be sold world wide by the province and it fail like most things they had no right doing in the first place. Does Presto come to mind??

The system is a common complaint in Vancouver from all sides. The author is off base to a point.
 
This is interesting to hear that Vancouver tried different bidders. It's obviously notable here. We sort of had mixed signals with Line 3/SRT. One was basically a built-in mindset from the City/TTC for a couple decades that our only option was purchasing new Innovia (now Movia ALM according to Drum). The other being more recently from Schabas who's on the Province's payroll and argued that other manufacturers can be found. Failing both of those it was the costly rebuild for LRVs, or extending Line 2.

TransLink had to issue a report to specifically counter misinformation perpetuated by a Vancouver City Councillor and the likes of Rail for the Valley (about proprietary technology whether of Bombardier or SNC Lavalin (raised because of corruption charges).

i.e. counteracting letters to the editor of local newspapers like this:

This is the text of the TransLink Report to the Mayors' Council:

Public Meeting of the Mayors’ Council on Regional Transportation
REVISED AGENDA PACKAGE, April 25, 2019


PURPOSE:
The purpose of this report is to respond to the Mayors’ Council direction that TransLink staff report back
with information on SkyTrain technology and TransLink’s practices to ensure competitive procurement
processes.

BACKGROUND:
On February 15 the Mayors’ Council received a report on Rail to UBC and endorsed SkyTrain as the
technology basis to advance to the next stage of development for a rail project from Arbutus to UBC.
During discussion, comments were raised about SkyTrain technology and questions were asked about
whether SkyTrain is proprietary and how TransLink can increase competition for future SkyTrain
procurement efforts. A motion was passed requesting additional information in response to these
comments and questions.

This report provides a factual overview of the history, technology, procurement methods and market
competitiveness related to SkyTrain.

DISCUSSION:

SkyTrain launched in 1986 for Expo ’86
“SkyTrain” is the brand name used for grade-separated automated rail rapid transit in Metro Vancouver
and includes the Expo, Millennium, and Canada lines. When SkyTrain was launched in 1986 for Expo, it
was one of the world’s first driverless, automated rapid transit systems. Since that time, our automated
SkyTrain system has served the region well, with 79 kilometres of track, 53 stations, and a record 160
million boardings in 2018.

Driverless, automated vehicles are the new norm for rapid transit
SkyTrain was one of only three automated systems in 1986 but now there are more than 65 fully
automated lines in 42 cities worldwide that account for 1,052 kilometres in operation. In addition, major
systems, including the Metro in Paris and Underground in London, are upgrading their busiest lines to be
automated and driverless. Being an early adopter of this technology has paid off in several ways.

First, automation is economical. Without the need to staff trains over the past 30 years, the region has
invested additional resources into the maintenance and expansion of the system. Second, driverless
technology promotes rail safety because it reduces the potential for human error. Third, automation
increases capacity because trains can run more frequently than conventional rapid transit, which allows
the system to move more people, more quickly.

SkyTrain is a brand name, not a technology—there are multiple technologies working together to
make the system work

Statements made that SkyTrain is “proprietary” to SNC Lavalin and Bombardier (or any other specific
manufacturer) are false. SkyTrain is the brand name associated with grade-separated automated rail rapid
transit in Metro Vancouver.

The technology underlying SkyTrain consists of trains powered by a linear induction motor (LIM) and
controlled by a communications-based train control (CBTC) system. Neither LIM nor CBTC are proprietary.
The SkyTrain technology combining LIM and CBTC was conceived in the 1970s as the Intermediate
Capacity Transit System (ICTS) by the Urban Transportation Development Corporation (UTDC), an Ontario
Crown Corporation. UTDC was subsequently privatized and sold to Bombardier in 1991, however
Bombardier does not hold patents that would prevent other suppliers from bidding on any of SkyTrain’s
key equipment or components.

The multiple technologies and components working together to make SkyTrain function—power,
communications equipment, trains, guideway structure and rail—could each be supplied by several
different companies.

Automated control system
The automated control system technology at the heart of making SkyTrain driverless and automated is
called Communications-Based Train Control (CBTC). The specific CBTC system used by SkyTrain is known
as SelTrac and was originally developed by Standard Elektrik Lorenz. It was subsequently sold to Alcatel
and is currently owned, maintained and updated by Thales Rail Signaling Solutions. It is not a requirement
that SkyTrain use the SelTrac system. There are several manufacturers with systems that can deliver CBTC
of similar size and complexity. However, changing the automated control system would be a multilayered
task and complexities exist in upgrading the existing 79 kilometres of SkyTrain or transitioning from one
major control system to another.

LIM propulsion vehicles
The Expo and Millennium lines run on conventional metal rails and use power from a third rail.
The trains are powered by a linear induction motor (LIM), and use a fourth induction rail placed between the running
rails to propel the vehicle. LIM propulsion was originally chosen when SkyTrain technology was conceived
in the 1970s because of its superior performance on steep grades and in snowy and icy conditions, as well
as its reduced operating and maintenance costs. Linear induction motors capable of powering transit
systems are not proprietary. Multiple suppliers can provide vehicles that use linear induction motor
technology. While theoretically SkyTrain can be converted to run using conventional rotary motors, this
fundamental change would practically require significant technologically conversion resources.

The original fleet of LIM vehicles were supplied by Urban Transportation Development Corporation.
Subsequent vehicle procurements were open to competition, but only Bombardier Transportation
provided proposals.

Follow-up with other potential suppliers found that the region’s orders for additional
new cars were too small for them to submit proposals.

SNC-Lavalin has led or been on the team for previous construction and engineering services to build
SkyTrain, but has no proprietary role in its function or delivery

Procurement for engineering and construction services are made on a project-by-project basis. Past
procurement efforts for delivering large SkyTrain expansion projects have been led by the provincial
government, with the exception of Canada Line. The firm SNC-Lavalin has either led, co-led, or was on a
team that was awarded past contracts to deliver guideway structure and rail engineering/construction for
SkyTrain. However, SNC-Lavalin holds no proprietary technology related to SkyTrain. In addition, SkyTrain
does not require SNC-Lavalin to build future extensions. Most major construction and engineering firms
could assemble teams to deliver the infrastructure for SkyTrain. Below is a history of past major
infrastructure procurement efforts and SNC-Lavalin’s involvement:

Expo Line. Procurement was led by the Province and was delivered by the Urban
Transportation Development Corporation (UTDC), an Ontario Crown Corporation. Pacific
Liaicon and Associates Inc. (which became a Division of SNC-Lavalin as part of a merger in
2001) was part of this team and performed design management for the Expo Line.
Millennium Line. Procurement for construction and engineering was led by the Province
through a provincial agency called RTP 2000. The consortium that delivered the project
included the firms ND Lea, SNC-Lavalin, and Stantec.
Evergreen Extension of the Millennium Line. Procurement for construction and engineering
was led by the Province. A team led by SNC-Lavalin was selected from three qualified
proponents.
Canada Line. Procurement for construction and engineering services was led through Canada
Line Rapid Transit Inc. (formerly RAVCO), a wholly-owned subsidiary of TransLink. During
procurement and construction, Canada Line Rapid Transit Inc. was governed by a Board of
Directors composed of representatives appointed by various funding agencies. A consortium
led by SNC-Lavalin and Serco was selected from three qualified proponents to design, build,
finance, operate and maintain the Canada Line for a 30-year period.
 
Last edited:
continued...

TransLink’s Strategic Sourcing Department leads procurement to ensure open and fair competition
within national and international trade rules

TransLink uses an open and transparent procurement process and is dedicated to increasing competition
and getting the best value for money. The Strategic Sourcing and Contract Management department at
TransLink handles all capital and operational procurement requirements for projects delivered by
TransLink (and in some instances, leading collaborative procurements together with other public sector
agencies) and must follow provincial, federal, and international laws governing procurement. Additionally,
TransLink abides by all relevant trade agreements, including the Comprehensive Economic and Trade
Agreement (CETA), which specifically prohibits preferential treatment for local/national suppliers.

TransLink procurement efforts must also adhere to any additional rules set as a condition of funding by
funding partners.

Multiple tools and methods are used to increase competition. Annual supplier forums, market sounding
events and industry presentation events are held to connect suppliers with internal needs and generate
greater interest in TransLink projects. TransLink recently upgraded our procurement software to Ariba
Discovery, which we can use to reach a wide group of local, national and international suppliers. Ariba
Discovery has a positive impact on competition, price, quality, and exposure to “best in class” products
and services. TransLink also has checks and balances in place to regularly gauge competition and
fairness—the procurement team monitors the projects with advice and assistance from project boards,
steering committees, and legal counsel.

TransLink is beginning the procurement process for its largest order of SkyTrain vehicles
The next procurement of SkyTrain vehicles is funded in the Mayors’ Plan for at least 203 cars. The size of
this order is more than three times bigger than any previous SkyTrain car order procured by TransLink,
and therefore is expected to attract increased interest. The procurement strategy is to ensure
competitiveness, and has included ongoing market sounding, an open Request for Information (RFI), and
an upcoming open Request for Proposals (RFP). In response to the RFI, multiple responses and expressions
of interest were received.

Efforts will continue to be made to broaden the potential pool of proponents.

and subsequent news story:

SkyTrain technologies, engineering not proprietary: TransLink report

and another preceding the report:

Vancouver's SkyTrain technology is not proprietary, says Bombardier
 
Last edited:
Should Bombardier build more streetcars for Toronto? Here's why one TTC board member says no

Board meets Monday to discuss $4.6B in spending priorities, including new vehicles

Emmett Shane · Posted: Jan 26, 2020 5:00 AM ET


At this point, it's just pointless to order something else. They should exercise any options left and buy whatever additional cars they need. Next fleet order blacklist Bombardier from bidding.
 
At this point, it's just pointless to order something else. They should exercise any options left and buy whatever additional cars they need. Next fleet order blacklist Bombardier from bidding.
Option was cancel years ago, so TTC will have to pay the current going rate that could be higher than other suppliers.

Given the fact the City/TTC only wants to pay 1/3 of the cost and the rest by Ford and Ottawa as well Ford no fan of Streetcars, when do you think the province will fund its 1/3 of the cost. Don't know what the out come was at TTC meeting on these cars on Monday.

Did Ford come to the rescue of Thunder Bay by ordering more cars to keep workers working like he did for 36 GO coaches???? That saying something then as well now.

Bottom line, time to go to the market for 60 or 100 with more options as TTC is going to need more cars in 2030 than what plan now. Early 2040 will be time to replace the current fleet and that needs to be phase in over 5 year cycle.
 
They've got the tooling and line all set up. And the TTC has now got a workforce skilled in maintaining and operating those. It's pointless to order something else. I hope this is a rational and not an emotional decision. Order a 100 more and keep them employed for another 2-3 years. That's in the province's best interest as well.

More broadly I do worry about sustaining support for transit funding in the province, when we don't buy from Ontario made vehicles and benefit communities throughout the province. This current situation we have creates pressure for provincial and federal funding for transit, not because of Toronto, but Thunder Bay!
 

Back
Top