WislaHD
Superstar
Fool me thrice, call for Trudeau to bail them out.
|
|
|
Admiral Beez
Superstar
This begs the question, why didn't we just buy off the shelf units for this project? Then we wouldn't need a prototype for testing, instead we'd simply buy whatever was in Bombardier's catalogue. Are Toronto's needs (as opposed to "wants") so different than the rest of Bombardier's customers?
crs1026
Superstar
The car design is generic, but there are always small details that will vary from buyer to buyer. Nothing is "off the shelf" when you have different shops doing the work for the first time, either. Any production run will stop after the first couple of units and verify that everything is working OK.
For that matter, the PCC car was an "off the shelf" design - but look at how many different variations Toronto ended up with. And lots of things had to be tweaked when they bought batches from other operators, even though those cars had been in service successfully for years.
- Paul
andrewpmk
Senior Member
Time to exclude Bombardier from the big electric GO train contract that will be awarded in a few years. At the very least, Metrolinx needs to get rid of any "Canadian content" restrictions so that foreign companies are on a level playing field.
The last thing we need is Bombardier delaying GO electrification as well.
andrewpmk
Senior Member
I wonder what the terms of the contract are. If Bombardier's contract for light rail vehicles for Metrolinx or streetcars for the TTC gets delayed more than X months, does Metrolinx or the TTC have the right to cancel it? Maybe we will end up with Siemens or Alstom LRVs on Eglinton.
ADRM
Senior Member
Good question though, as always, the cancelling of contracts needs to take into account the implications that may have on overall timeline—it's always possible that cancellation winds up delaying the process even more than Bombardier's tardiness would/will.
AlvinofDiaspar
Moderator
Most likely - but if you don't go through with cancellation or have clauses in the contract that provide hefty penalties, you are basically sending out a message that as an organization you are willing to bend even if deadlines are not met. It does not inspire compliance.
AoD
nfitz
Superstar
Given it took 9 years from the start of the tender process, to the first production vehicle, and even the worst-case scenario doesn't foresee another 9 years (2025) for completion of the contract - then I'd think that not only is it possible that cancellation will end up delaying the process - it's highly probable.
And that ignores the likely much higher cost!
Perhaps the best thing TTC could do is issue a tender for 60 additional vehicles, with an option for 200 more. While Metrolinx issues a tender for Hamilton vehicles, with an option on many more. TTC has until delivery of the 60th car to decide whether to take out another option; and that's over a year away currently.
And that ignores the likely much higher cost!
Perhaps the best thing TTC could do is issue a tender for 60 additional vehicles, with an option for 200 more. While Metrolinx issues a tender for Hamilton vehicles, with an option on many more. TTC has until delivery of the 60th car to decide whether to take out another option; and that's over a year away currently.
ADRM
Senior Member
For sure. Riffing off that, were financial penalties corresponding to supplier-led delays ever discussed in relation to this project?
hawc
Senior Member
And then who do you go to?
AlvinofDiaspar
Moderator
Ideally you shouldn't have to wait 9 years to come to that conclusion - there should be early "trip points" in the process whereby failures would lead to termination of contract.
AoD
AlvinofDiaspar
Moderator
Their competitor? I know, it's not as ideal as one makes it to be, but clearly neither is the current arrangement, where the city is being played like a violin.
AoD
hawc
Senior Member
Yes, but isn't that at the heart of the problem. They're really the only game in town. We can all say, pull the contract. Cancel the contract. Fine. But then who gets it? And would those delays in finding and re-awarding take even longer. That's the grown-up table conversation that really needs to be figured out. Whining about how Bombardier dropped the ball is a no brainer. But how do you fix it? Siemens? Who? Otherwise at this point it's just pointless whining. Getting madder and madder at Bombardier does nothing.
Admiral Beez
Superstar
That can get expensive.
http://business.financialpost.com/n...eful-tube-project-nothing-short-of-a-disaster
To paraphrase from above....
In 2011 Bombardier’s transportation division awarded a contract to London UK's signalling system. Bombardier's bid said would complete it by 2018 for 354 million pounds. Once Bombardier's screw ups were apparent, the was cancelled in 2013, costing the city 85 million pounds, or 25% of the contract cost. The contract was then awarded to Thales SA, but will five years late and cost 886 million pounds more than originally planned!
The moral of the story? Don't be blinded by a low ball bid from Bombardier, instead choose the better supplier at the onset, thus avoiding most delays and cost overruns, and pay a fair price at the beginning.
Zach6668
Active Member
I don't know why everyone seems to think we were "blinded" by a low-ball bid from Bombardier, and that we should have known they'd screw it up. They've been mostly painlessly producing our transit vehicles at that factory for decades, how could we have possibly had anything but similar expectations, even with the lowest price bid?
I'm as disappointed as the next guy with Bombardier's performance here, but I think there's some revisionist history happening.
And that's not necessarily directed at Admiral Beez above, his post just reminded me of what I'm seeing all over social media, etc.
I'm as disappointed as the next guy with Bombardier's performance here, but I think there's some revisionist history happening.
And that's not necessarily directed at Admiral Beez above, his post just reminded me of what I'm seeing all over social media, etc.