Toronto Crosstown LRT | ?m | ?s | Metrolinx | Arcadis

[AlvinofDiaspar]

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.

It's not the only instance - also recall the mess that is the Union Station signalling contract (or the TTC Line 1 project). Having said that, I don't think the city got any option of not going for the low ball bid so long as it is deemed compliant. We all know the moral of that particular story.

AoD

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

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.

But sticking with them will almost surely ensure that they are the only game in town. You are dealing with a bit of a chicken and the egg here.

AoD

 

[hawc]

But sticking with them will almost surely ensure that they are the only game in town. You are dealing with a bit of a chicken and the egg here.

Absolutely don't think you should stick with them. But what's your solution other than moaning about the problem. Who do you suggest we go with instead? That's the big boy question. Who do you go to? Throw out some names.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

Absolutely don't think you should stick with them. But what's your solution other than moaning about the problem. Who do you suggest we go with instead? That's the big boy question. Who do you go to? Throw out some names.

1. CLRV rebuild - which you sort of have to do now anyways because of the delays - buys time with a degraded level of service.
2. Reopen the contract - Siemens? Alstom? Surely BBD isn't the only game around. No one is suggesting that the process is painless, convenient or even cheap, but to not do it is borderline unconscionable.

AoD

 

[hawc]

Reopen the contract - Siemens? Alstom? Surely BBD isn't the only game around.

Not to press the point, but yeah who else is there?

It really is just Bombardier or Siemens.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

Not to press the point, but yeah who else is there?

It really is just Bombardier or Siemens.

Then perhaps Siemens it should be?

AoD

 

[ADRM]

Not to press the point, but yeah who else is there?

It really is just Bombardier or Siemens.

Yeah, and I think more to the point, the question isn't really "what is the list of potential suppliers in a carte blanche environment?" as "is it actually possible for a supplier other than the one originally selected for this project to complete the project given the technical specifications and other factors?" Even if the answer to the feasibility question is yes, you're then confronted with the financial and timeline realities that could arise from such an about-face.

Maybe there's a better way to manage the tender/RFQ process at the outset of such a project, but I'm skeptical that there's really a more cost- and/or time-efficient way to approach projects this far down the line (thinking of Eglinton LRT and new streetcars, specifically)—I think we go to battle with the supplier army we have, at this point.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

Maybe there's a better way to manage the tender/RFQ process at the outset of such a project, but I'm skeptical that there's really a more cost- and/or time-efficient way to approach projects this far down the line (thinking of Eglinton LRT and new streetcars, specifically)—I think we go to battle with the supplier army we have, at this point.

Said supplier just screwed their customer over for the last four years with nonsense about accelerated schedules when it was all a blantant lie - to think that they are reliable or worthy at this point is probably patently unwise - and rest assured, I wouldn't trust them not to cut and run if they couldn't make a profit out of it by the end of it all.

AoD

 

[ADRM]

Said supplier just screwed their customer over for the last four years with nonsense about accelerated schedules when it was all a blantant lie - to think that they are reliable or worthy at this point is probably patently unwise - and rest assured, I wouldn't trust them not to cut and run if they couldn't make a profit out of it by the end of it all.

AoD

I don't disagree with anything you just said, but it doesn't change the fact that we may be stuck with them for projects currently under construction.

 

[Admiral Beez]

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?

But not under this ownership, and not with outsourcing to Mexico. You can't refer to decades of factory performance when the new owners have only been there since 1992.

AIUI, with the exception of the TR subways (delivered 2 years late) and <20 Flexity streetcars, Bombardier hasn't made anything for the TTC.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

But not under this ownership, and not with outsourcing to Mexico. You can't refer to decades of factory performance when the new owners have only been there since 1992.

AIUI, with the exception of the TR subways (delivered 2 years late) and <20 Flexity streetcars, Bombardier hasn't made anything for the TTC.

Just a slight quibble - T1 were also by BBD.

AoD

 

[TheTigerMaster]

Eglinton Station bus terminal this afternoon

 

[Palma]

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.

that's why the TTC should have cancelled a long tiem ago with all these delays and Metrolinx seeing that should have done the same. A resident brought it up at a community meeting about the LRT for crosstown and the issues with the TTC and Bombardier and it was dismissed - that Metrolinx had a handle on it

 

[jcam]

Then perhaps Siemens it should be?

AoD

Siemens' bid for the TTC contract came in 50% more than Bombardier...mostly because of sinking the cost of an assembly plant to meet the Canadian content requirement.

So if you decided to cancel and retender now, your all-in cost will look like:
Bombardier price + 50% + escalation + duress premium + CLRV repair to cover even longer procurement + cancellation costs.

Then there's the fact that the maintenance agreements for ION and Crosstown are likely predicated on the Bombardier technology, those consortiums can likely charge major change orders if Metrolinx swaps the equipment they're running (for program redevelopment, maintenance subcontract renegotiations, and possibly maintenance facility redesign).

There's no other party in town. Options:
- if you're keeping the Canadian content, you re-negotiate liquidated damages on the options and hope them using Quebec capacity will be sufficient
- if you relax the Canadian content and allow Bombardier to use global production capacity (including European sites that manufacture Flexity Freedom's cousins)
- if you relax the Canadian content, you MIGHT entice global players at a similar price point, but you still have all the sunk costs and some premiums as noted above.

 

[nfitz]

But not under this ownership, and not with outsourcing to Mexico. You can't refer to decades of factory performance when the new owners have only been there since 1992.

Given that the big piece of this week's announcement was replacing the Mexican frame assembly with Canadian, doesn't that mean at least there's a chance of decent performance in the future? The process of using both La Pocatière and Thunder Bay worked well enough for Bombardier for the T1 and TR cars.

AIUI, with the exception of the TR subways (delivered 2 years late),

Where do you get 2 years late from? The original 39 trainsets were to be delivered by end of 2012. Trainset 39 arrived in July 2013. That's 6 months, not 2 years. Since that initial ramp-up, deliveries have been regular - and TTC has delayed the schedule themselves, with modifications and further additions (knowing there was no urgency after the first 60 sets were delivered).

Bombardier hasn't made anything for the TTC.

Other than every subway car TTC operates?