New Red and Orange Line Cars

[Arlington]

So... we're buying Chinese products unproven in America, instead of established workhorse models, because the company bought the State Government by promising some temporary jobs in Springfield?

Yes. A sad cost of political management, but unavoidable. PA, NY and MA are all big enough railcar buyers that each should have their own shop, particularly if the cars get made in-state-but-elsewhere (looking at you, Hornell, NY)

 

[The EGE]

CNR has a long list of outside-the-US systems.... Hong Kong, Sydney Cityrail, Rio de Janeiro (metro and commuter rail), Kiwirail, Tehran, Mecca, and a dozen Chinese systems. Sydney had mixed results at first but they seem to be fine in service. So no experience in the US or with the T, but internationally well-regarded.

So it's political bullshit for sure, but it's not an automatic fail like the Rotems.

 

[Equilibria]

Also, look at the price, the MBTA CIP was assuming $800 mil for the cars and the bid came in at $566.

Believe me, I noticed it. Buying cheap is not necessarily buying good.

 

[Semass]

I recall that Siemens did not put in a bid on this. Could the CNR trains have Siemens "guts"? I recall reading that somewhere. Having trains that are highly compatible with the new Blue Line fleet would be good. Those have seemed to be good units.

 

[Jahvon09]

It would be nice if the Red & Orange Line trains looked the same.

isn't this through a joint effort? That whoever is chosen to make the cars for the Red Line, the same style would be made for the orange Line AS WELL RIGHT?

 

[winstonoboogie]

It would be nice if the Red & Orange Line trains looked the same.

isn't this through a joint effort? That whoever is chosen to make the cars for the Red Line, the same style would be made for the orange Line AS WELL RIGHT?

It is one contract, 152 Orange Line cars and 74 Red Line cars with option to buy 58 more Red Line cars.

 

[F-Line to Dudley]

I recall that Siemens did not put in a bid on this. Could the CNR trains have Siemens "guts"? I recall reading that somewhere. Having trains that are highly compatible with the new Blue Line fleet would be good. Those have seemed to be good units.

"Guts" aren't a hell of a lot different between manufacturers when it comes to HRT. All of the systems one chooses are pretty much in use on some reliably performing make worldwide. The differences are more which combinations of systems you try to match up under the hood. What drove Siemens batty on the Blue Line cars was some of the T's specs on component selection they hadn't used before on previous product. The end result was good but Siemens chewed up a lot of sweat and money--money it, not the T, was contractually required to spend--meshing those components in design and testing. Not great bang-for-buck for them, so they said to hell with bidding on another round of T subway cars. Corporately their railcar biz seems to be in a very off-shelf and parts-modularity frame of mind, at least if you look at their LRT, EMU/DMU, and electric/diesel locomotive lineups. More single-agency makes like the Blue cars just ain't where they see their highest-margin profit center.

Yeah, the overcustomization fetish strikes again. It would not have been very difficult to stuff something off-shelf...-er into a Blue Line tincan (and no, the pantograph + third rail isn't a customization...they're exactly the same voltage and it's just wires to pipe power off the roof vs. wires to pipe power off the underside). But the T doesn't roll like that. It never rolls like that. And they're not the only transit agency that overcustomizes, has a mixed track record doing so, and is quite very comfortable sticking to that.

Isn't transit procurement bureaucracy grand? But it's important to distinguish that level of customization with something like the Breda experiment. HRT is pretty stodgy design...not a radically new carbody or even as much of a futuristic reach as the Red Line 01800's 20 years ago. Just get decent craftsmanship and don't fuck up the component meshing and it's hard to screw it up too badly. For that I don't worry about CNR. They've done metro systems before. This isn't virgin territory for them like making low-floor LRV's was for Breda or hiring competent assembly workers apparently is for Brokem.

CNR has a long list of outside-the-US systems.... Hong Kong, Sydney Cityrail, Rio de Janeiro (metro and commuter rail), Kiwirail, Tehran, Mecca, and a dozen Chinese systems. Sydney had mixed results at first but they seem to be fine in service. So no experience in the US or with the T, but internationally well-regarded.

So it's political bullshit for sure, but it's not an automatic fail like the Rotems.

Yeah. "Buy America" assembly requirements and the "Buy [insert home state here]" lard that everyone these days is chucking on top of that is an overinflated bubble with transit procurements that's going to burst sooner or later from the inefficiencies it creates. There are no American rail vehicle makers except for the still- U.S.-dominated diesel locomotive market, so it takes some serious government pretzel logic to insist on assembly at a local factory when every complete component and hex bolt on the vehicle is made overseas and has to get floated across the ocean by ship for the technicality of being bolted together at "home". But everyone does it. Every agency is in an arms race to see who can be more "local" than thou. It's just one of those cases of government with two hands around its neck that you have to treat as the cost of doing business. That's not going to change until coast-to-coast the transit procurement needs have need to exponentially escalate further than Buy America red tape is going to get them.


And yes, it's not Brokem. That was a nice little bit of PR they did last week with their Springfield proposal and that YouTube tour, but there was no effing way they were getting this deal when the bi-level coach contractual nightmare ain't even laid to final rest yet given the just-beginning warranty mods. And they're not exactly in a position to be the low bidder with the gruesome bath they took on cost overruns and contractual penalties they had to eat alone as result of the rank incompetence of that Philly factory that did the T and SEPTA orders. It's to the point where if they were the low bid here the T would have to time-out and take a skeptical look at their books before accepting to make sure they're not overleveraging the health of their whole U.S. business unit on the bid.

 

[winstonoboogie]

Siemens has not bid on any U.S. heavy rail car order since the MBTA Blue line cars. They did not bid on Chicago, Washington, BART, or Miami orders that all took place after the Blue Line contract.

The biggest problems Siemens had with the Blue Line order was sub-contractors they (not the MBTA) chose creating problems for them. They chose GSI to build the trucks and had to redesign and switch to Kawasaki after GSI shut down. They subcontracted with TTA to assemble the cars in New York and had to switch to CAF as a subcontractor after TTA sold off their car rehab/assembly business to Bombardier and Bombardier wasn't interest in doing the work for Siemens.

Siemens will still provide propulsion systems for other builders of heavy rail cars as a subcontractor. Siemens is also doing pretty well building light-rail cars and passenger locomotives for the North American market.

 

[Jahvon09]

It is one contract, 152 Orange Line cars and 74 Red Line cars with option to buy 58 more Red Line cars.

Sort of like how the airlines do it.

Let's say that United Airlines decides that it wants to order about 25 747-8 Intercontinental jetliners. They put in the order with Boeing, but they want to reserve an extra 25 of the planes.

When the first order is fulfilled, then they can decide if they still want the extra 25 aircraft made & delivered to them.

 

[Jahvon09]

I recall that Siemens did not put in a bid on this. Could the CNR trains have Siemens "guts"? I recall reading that somewhere. Having trains that are highly compatible with the new Blue Line fleet would be good. Those have seemed to be good units.

The MBTA had issues with Siemens during the making of the new Blue Line cars.

Something about parts for them being on backorder, causing delays in on time deliveries of the new cars.

I wonder if THAT had anything to do with it.

 

[F-Line to Dudley]

The MBTA had issues with Siemens during the making of the new Blue Line cars.

Something about parts for them being on backorder, causing delays in on time deliveries of the new cars.

I wonder if THAT had anything to do with it.

Nah. Siemens didn't blow any key deadlines. It was white-knuckle at making the schedule and Siemens itself said "nuts to this!" afterwards about pursuing similar-type bids, but those cars were on-time and have worked great. Corporately, Siemens all about one-size-fits-all product like off-shelf LRV's and locomotives and making the components everyone else uses under their hoods. Taking specs from a single subway line and producing a car from it isn't where they see their profit centers. It's made them voluntarily hang back a bit from the HRT market because design-to-fit is pretty much the only way you can (within reason and without going pointlessly over-custom) sell HRT cars. They're generic tech, but they're not as universal as the Avanto lineup of trolleys that are currently almost identical across 8 different U.S. LRT systems. Everything except the paint jobs and seating configuration. I mean...where would you want to put maximize your profit margins if you were a rich enough conglomerate to be able to pick and choose?

Breda and Rotem...they got the lawyers sicked on them. Breda was a costly settlement after an initial suspension of the order. Rotem came within a whisker of losing hundreds of millions in contract penalties and getting hauled into court over the SEPTA and T contracts, and on both they had to eat a huge amount of sunk cost for these warranty mods that are still ongoing to keep the lawyers at bay. That half-joking post of mine a couple pages ago about "being late on the right things" being good business and "being late on the wrong" things getting you blackballed from the U.S. market for a decade...that's the difference. Siemens lived up to the contract. That's why if every option on is executed on the new Amtrak locomotive contracts currently underway the entire Amtrak nationwide fleet is going to get overturned to either a Siemens Sprinter (electric) or a Siemens Charger (diesel). They get through the easy ones and pain-in-the-ass ones fulfilling the contract without incident. Breda got the T's and MUNI's lawyers storming out of the doom bunker, and responded by going AWOL...they got shut out of the U.S. market for 10 years. Rotem is staring at a similar fate if they don't make amends in a huge way on their remaining slate of previously-inked U.S. procurements yet to be delivered. Bureaucrats don't like the lawyers getting involved; it affects their future private sector career options to have been involved in a high-profile legal action against the private sector. They have very long memories of those situations. The ones who fulfill the contract without incident...whatever troubles happened in the heat of the moment are water under the bridge and they get invited back to the bargaining table over and over.


"Buy America" red tape isn't logical. Neither is "the right kind of late" vs. "the wrong kind of late". But transit procurements in the U.S. like to follow that form of functional dysfunction when they make big buys, so everyone plays by the same set of strange norms.

 

[winstonoboogie]

The MBTA had issues with Siemens during the making of the new Blue Line cars.

Something about parts for them being on backorder, causing delays in on time deliveries of the new cars.

I wonder if THAT had anything to do with it.

The MBTA Board of Directors approved the contract with Siemens for 94 Blue Line cars in October 2001 and the first cars didn't enter service until February 2008, over six years later, so yes you are correct there was a delay. As I mentioned in another post, Siemens intended to use GSI trucks supplied by Buckeye Steel Castings. But Buckeye declared bankruptcy in 2002 and Siemens had to redesign the truck and find another supplier (which turned out to be Kawasaki). That caused a major delay.

Siemens built the stainless-steel shells for the Blue Line cars at their plant in Austria, but had a contract with Transportation and Transit Associates in New York state to handle the final assembly of the cars in New York. But after the pilot cars had been assembled, and just as shell production in Austria was ramping up, TTA sold a big chunk of their business to Bombardier
http://www.railwaygazette.com/news/single-view/view/tta-offloads-plant-to-bombardier.html
and pulled out of the contract with Siemens. Siemens had to scramble to find another facility to complete the cars, and entered into a contract with CAF (the same company that is now building the Type 9 for the Green Line). This caused yet another delay. It was unfortunate circumstances, not anything the MBTA or Siemens did wrong, that resulted in the Blue Line cars being late, and they have performed well since delivery.

 

[Jahvon09]

Nah. Siemens didn't blow any key deadlines. It was white-knuckle at making the schedule and Siemens itself said "nuts to this!" afterwards about pursuing similar-type bids, but those cars were on-time and have worked great. Corporately, Siemens all about one-size-fits-all product like off-shelf LRV's and locomotives and making the components everyone else uses under their hoods. Taking specs from a single subway line and producing a car from it isn't where they see their profit centers. It's made them voluntarily hang back a bit from the HRT market because design-to-fit is pretty much the only way you can (within reason and without going pointlessly over-custom) sell HRT cars. They're generic tech, but they're not as universal as the Avanto lineup of trolleys that are currently almost identical across 8 different U.S. LRT systems. Everything except the paint jobs and seating configuration. I mean...where would you want to put maximize your profit margins if you were a rich enough conglomerate to be able to pick and choose?

Breda and Rotem...they got the lawyers sicked on them. Breda was a costly settlement after an initial suspension of the order. Rotem came within a whisker of losing hundreds of millions in contract penalties and getting hauled into court over the SEPTA and T contracts, and on both they had to eat a huge amount of sunk cost for these warranty mods that are still ongoing to keep the lawyers at bay. That half-joking post of mine a couple pages ago about "being late on the right things" being good business and "being late on the wrong" things getting you blackballed from the U.S. market for a decade...that's the difference. Siemens lived up to the contract. That's why if every option on is executed on the new Amtrak locomotive contracts currently underway the entire Amtrak nationwide fleet is going to get overturned to either a Siemens Sprinter (electric) or a Siemens Charger (diesel). They get through the easy ones and pain-in-the-ass ones fulfilling the contract without incident. Breda got the T's and MUNI's lawyers storming out of the doom bunker, and responded by going AWOL...they got shut out of the U.S. market for 10 years. Rotem is staring at a similar fate if they don't make amends in a huge way on their remaining slate of previously-inked U.S. procurements yet to be delivered. Bureaucrats don't like the lawyers getting involved; it affects their future private sector career options to have been involved in a high-profile legal action against the private sector. They have very long memories of those situations. The ones who fulfill the contract without incident...whatever troubles happened in the heat of the moment are water under the bridge and they get invited back to the bargaining table over and over.


"Buy America" red tape isn't logical. Neither is "the right kind of late" vs. "the wrong kind of late". But transit procurements in the U.S. like to follow that form of functional dysfunction when they make big buys, so everyone plays by the same set of strange norms.

The Breda Type 8 trolleys had presented problems of their own after the T had first gotten some of them.

They would derail off the tracks on turns, I think. The MBTA was about to file a lawsuit against them, weren't they?

Or was that because of the Type 6 trolleys - The Boeing / Vertol units? They presented problems as well. I think the same thing.

 

[Jahvon09]

The MBTA Board of Directors approved the contract with Siemens for 94 Blue Line cars in October 2001 and the first cars didn't enter service until February 2008, over six years later, so yes you are correct there was a delay. As I mentioned in another post, Siemens intended to use GSI trucks supplied by Buckeye Steel Castings. But Buckeye declared bankruptcy in 2002 and Siemens had to redesign the truck and find another supplier (which turned out to be Kawasaki). That caused a major delay.

Siemens built the stainless-steel shells for the Blue Line cars at their plant in Austria, but had a contract with Transportation and Transit Associates in New York state to handle the final assembly of the cars in New York. But after the pilot cars had been assembled, and just as shell production in Austria was ramping up, TTA sold a big chunk of their business to Bombardier
http://www.railwaygazette.com/news/single-view/view/tta-offloads-plant-to-bombardier.html
and pulled out of the contract with Siemens. Siemens had to scramble to find another facility to complete the cars, and entered into a contract with CAF (the same company that is now building the Type 9 for the Green Line). This caused yet another delay. It was unfortunate circumstances, not anything the MBTA or Siemens did wrong, that resulted in the Blue Line cars being late, and they have performed well since delivery.

I sure hope that this doesn't happen with the production of the new rail cars for the Red & Orange Lines!!

It is a long-awaited thing that commuters have long waited for! The older existing cars on both lines have served their purpose, but now it is time to get the ball rolling on this program so that commuters can at least know that the old cars are a little closer to being replaced than before.

 

[bobthebuilder]

Via uHub:

http://www.universalhub.com/2014/state-likely-go-cheapest-bidder-replace-orange-red

http://www.universalhub.com/files/newcars.pdf

 

[davem]

The T should have called up Siemens and asked what they needed to do to get them to make a standard heavy rail fleet (ie: produce the new OL and RL cars to the same specs as the BL fleet). The bidding process is bullshit when it leaves open the opportunity to get junk equipment we are stuck duct-taping together for the next 40 years, especially when a manufacturer just delivered excellent performing equipment. Even moreso when said manufacturer has an amazing track record both nationally and internationally in basically everything they do.

It's the T thinking short term. Yeah, they are saving a chunk of change right now by having a bidding process. BUT, even if these cars are flawless and run great right from the getgo (which I doubt), how much extra money is spent by not having a common parts pool? If they had gotten Siemens to agree to dust off the BL plans and reproduce them to OL and RL dimensions, we would have a 100% compatible heavy rail fleet (with the exception of the legacy RL cars). A single parts pool. A single training program for all the techs and operators. A single computer system to battle with if they upgrade signals. A single ATO system to program. For the next 30+ years. If a generations worth of cost savings, simplicity, and streamlining isn't enough to forgo the bidding process, I don't know what is.


TL;DR, they should have at least reached out to Siemens.

 

[Mongo]

They did reach out to Siemens when they asked for bids. Siemens wasn't interested.

The fact of the matter is that this company seems to make good metro cars now. And they want to do it for such a low cost, the state would be foolish to not take advantage of it.

 

[davem]

They did reach out to Siemens when they asked for bids. Siemens wasn't interested.

The fact of the matter is that this company seems to make good metro cars now. And they want to do it for such a low cost, the state would be foolish to not take advantage of it.

Sending them the RFP and doubling down to hammer out a contract that they don't want are two different things. "We want you to make these trains and aren't even talking to anyone else yet, so lets figure this out" =/= "see if you can be cheaper than all these other companies when you don't want to do this in the first place".

Not to be Debbie Downer here, but when is the last time buying something that's substantially cheaper than every comparable product worked out well for anyone? As my father always says, "if it seems too good to be true, it is." Or even better from a u-hub commenter: "The cheapest is seldom the least expensive".



I really, really hope I'm proven wrong, but history is pretty hard to go against. The Rotems are a disaster, and everyone knew they would be. Counter that with the BL order and the new HSPs, both also challenging orders with lots of new tech and designs. The difference? Siemens and MPI know their shit, know how to work in the states, and know what will and won't fly. Rotem was fine and made a quality product on their home turf, but didn't translate at ALL stateside. How is this going to be any different? Why the T wants to be the guinea pig for every foreign company wanting to breach the market is unbeknownst to me.



If it wasn't for the retarded buy USA/MA clause, I wouldn't be as worried. If we were buying cars built in the same factory that has been producing these trains for 50 years and got shipped over, I'd have some confidence. But besides the fact that we AREN'T buying USA/MA really (because the real money is in the R&D and manufacturing, not a handful of temporary workers putting together puzzle pieces), its adding a MASSIVE extra layer for failure and fuckups.

It's why you don't buy a Volkswagen that doesn't have a WVW vin. Made in Wolfsburg = guaranteed quality. Made in Mexico or Brazil... you're rolling the dice.



Edit:
Just because I'm getting more and more heated thinking about this, we would likely be getting the cars a year or two sooner if they were being built overseas at an existing facility with already trained workers. Instead we have to wait for them to build the building, hire and train the workers, and then deal with the month or two of screwups that happen in ANY new facility, from fast food to formula one cars.

 

[JeffDowntown]

Remember, this is CNR's foot hold into the US market.

They are not bidding low because they are inherently cheaper (or lower quality). They are bidding low to get their first US reference order. The difference they are eating is viewed as marketing cost.

 

[Mongo]

Risk mitigation provisions in the contract:

The MBTA recognizes that the new Orange and Red Line vehicles represent CNR’s first experience providing heavy rail vehicles to the North American market. As such, the Authority has negotiated a number of contract provisions designed to mitigate risk, highlights of which are discussed below.

The RFP requires that the Offeror provide a performance guaranty in the form of an Irrevocable Stand-By Letter of Credit equal to the amount of 30% of the base price plus the options executed. The MBTA has requested that CNR MA increase the Letter of Credit by an additional $100 million with a modified amortization schedule.

Additionally, CNR MA will provide at its expense a Cultural Liaison who will be present at all meetings to act as a technical interpreter for the duration of the contract term.

The RFP requires Bi-weekly Project Team meetings, in which the Offeror and the Authority will employ a cooperative partnering approach to facilitate agreement on all aspects of the work, including both technical and commercial issues. CNR MA has also agreed to a project management and decision-making approach, which provides for executive/senior level engagement from the outset and a tiered project management framework that clarifies decision-making responsibilities at each level, including timely identification and resolution of issues.

1. Quarterly Reports to the MassDOT/MBTA Board of Directors re: project progress.
2. Semi-annual Executive/Senior CNR Management and MBTA Management Meetings, for the purpose of providing an update and status as to the progress of the work and a report on any material matters involving scope, budget and timing.
3. Quarterly Meetings with Senior Management, for the purpose of providing an update regarding the progress of the work and any material matters involving scope, budget and timing. In the event that any mission critical items remain unresolved at the Project Director level, it will be addressed at the Quarterly Senior Management Meeting.
4. Monthly Project Director Meetings, in which the Project Directors shall have the authority necessary to regularly resolve the matters presented by the Project Team.

CNR MA has also agreed to establish a project office within the Orange or Red Line service area with sufficient space to accommodate both CNR MA and MBTA project staff. This project office will be equipped with WebX or similar web-based conferencing capability and a CADD design review station. Further, CNR MA will provide office space and access for the Authority Project Team so that they may integrate and work with the personnel located at applicable CNR facilities, including the Changchun, China facility.

The RFP requires that the Offeror submit a Critical Path Method (“CPM”) Master Project Schedule within 30 days after the issuance of a Notice to Proceed. CNR MA has further agreed that the CPM shall also include all details concerning major subsystem suppliers as well as activities regarding Massachusetts Final Assembly mobilization. It is understood and agreed that the CPM shall act as a project management tool and that any information contained in the CPM does not act as an amendment or modification to the contractual delivery schedule. CNR MA shall, at the Authority’s request, provide a remediation plan to compensate for delays in the schedule. Additionally, contract terms have been strengthened so that the Authority can take legal action to address schedule slippage.

The RFP requires that the Offeror identify major subcontractors within 90 days after the Notice to Proceed. CNR MA has further agreed that each major subcontractor be required to certify in writing its understanding of the full contractual technical provisions, and that such certification be delivered to the Authority together with each Purchase Order. Additionally, the Authority shall identify in writing those major subcontractors required to be present at the line-by-line review meeting, as well