Siemens Caltrans/IDOT Venture design, engineering, testing and delivery (2012-1Q 2024)

[A Voice]

With what rules are being changed in DC who knows what "might" happen to the 800k rule ??

What rule changes?

 

[Ryan]

You may have noticed that we have a new President, and he seems to be hell bent on making quite a few changes. Who knows what might be next?

 

[neroden]

As for the interesting Iran angle, pretty soon there may be no supplier available to buy equipment from Most European companies have some dealing with Iran, as do most Asian companies.

The potential issues over state sanctions refer to Siemens and not Nippon-Sharyo and the bi-level car order.

There is a great deal that isn't yet clear about this, and obviously the regulations may vary greatly from one state to another (I think at least Illinois, North Carolina, and California - probably others - all have something on the books). Just how long after a 'deal' would a particular company be ineligible for state business? What about existing contracts? At least EMD offers an alternative to the Charger locomotive.

Yeah, it's about time to revoke the stupid Iran restrictions. Nobody else in the world is interested in sanctioning Iran, so this just isolates the US and creates trouble for the US.

Iran's human rights record, stance toward Israel, and nuclear ambitions are hardly 'stupid' matters, and not to be taken lightly.

Yes, they are stupid matters to be taken lightly. Don't fall for the propaganda.

Israel has a worse human rights record than Iran (this is uncontested -- at least everyone in Iran is a citizen, whereas Israel has second-class "stateless persons"), it already *has* illegal nuclear weapons (this is uncontested), and its stance towards Iran is truly frightening. But we don't have sanctions against Israel, do we? No, we don't.

Mods: as an exception to my normal rules on moderation, do not delete this post unless you also delete the post to which it is responding. Thank you.

 

[PRR 60]

As for the interesting Iran angle, pretty soon there may be no supplier available to buy equipment from Most European companies have some dealing with Iran, as do most Asian companies.

The potential issues over state sanctions refer to Siemens and not Nippon-Sharyo and the bi-level car order.

There is a great deal that isn't yet clear about this, and obviously the regulations may vary greatly from one state to another (I think at least Illinois, North Carolina, and California - probably others - all have something on the books). Just how long after a 'deal' would a particular company be ineligible for state business? What about existing contracts? At least EMD offers an alternative to the Charger locomotive.

Yeah, it's about time to revoke the stupid Iran restrictions. Nobody else in the world is interested in sanctioning Iran, so this just isolates the US and creates trouble for the US.

Iran's human rights record, stance toward Israel, and nuclear ambitions are hardly 'stupid' matters, and not to be taken lightly.

Yes, they are stupid matters to be taken lightly. Don't fall for the propaganda.

Israel has a worse human rights record than Iran (this is uncontested -- at least everyone in Iran is a citizen, whereas Israel has second-class "stateless persons"), it already *has* illegal nuclear weapons (this is uncontested), and its stance towards Iran is truly frightening. But we don't have sanctions against Israel, do we? No, we don't.

Mods: as an exception to my normal rules on moderation, do not delete this post unless you also delete the post to which it is responding. Thank you.

I'll keep this as is, but recognize that you responded to an off-topic aspect of a post from nine days ago, referencing a non-rail issue that does not even apply to this order. If you or anyone wants to argue the relative human rights record of Iran, Israel, Iraq, Ireland, Iceland, or any other country starting with the letter "I," take it to random discussions. That forum was established for the purpose of providing an opportunity for members to vent about whatever subjects they want (with no personal attacks), while taking those sorts of discussions away from topics like this where they add nothing. People come here to find out what is going on with the bi-level car order, not for this stuff.

 

[jis]

You may have noticed that we have a new President, and he seems to be hell bent on making quite a few changes. Who knows what might be next?

While all that is true, I sill be very surprised if he delves into the FRA or FAA safety regulations. It has very little positives to boost his ego.

I am still of the opinion that he is not stupid (devious yes, but stupid probably not), but admittedly it is getting harder and harder to continue holding that opinion.

 

[9900]

Stick a fork in this project. It's done.

 

[CCC1007]

Stick a fork in this project. It's done.

Not till the contract is cancelled...

 

[Thirdrail7]

I wonder if this will diminish the likelihood of continued train service in some of the states.

 

[9900]

In the last 60 days we've learned:

-Nippon postponed the Final Design Review to a later date unknown.

-Nippon has layed off another 100 workers

-California no-showed at a National transportation Conference, citing on going "negotiations". Most likely to end the contract. California is fed up. They need cars NOW.

It's been almost a year and a half since the crush test failure. Almost zero progress has been made.

 

[A Voice]

In the last 60 days we've learned:

-Nippon postponed the Final Design Review to a later date unknown.

-Nippon has layed off another 100 workers

-California no-showed at a National transportation Conference, citing on going "negotiations". Most likely to end the contract. California is fed up. They need cars NOW.

It's been almost a year and a half since the crush test failure. Almost zero progress has been made.

Worst of all, perhaps, is the time lost that someone else could have been working on a new design. Right now, we're years away from anything (hence the 2020 rumors; Hope that's not optimistic...).

There are few if any good options, and not many sources at all, for spare cars around the nation which California (or anyone) could rebuild as an interim solution. Maybe a handful in the Amtrak wreck-repair line, and a motley assortment of museum pieces from various car brokers.

 

[Blackwolf]

Don't count out the resources of California in this adventure. A contract pull-out is very possible at this point, but not certain. And California could use the funds returned from the contract with N-S to negotiate a no-bid agreement with a company like Alstrom to produce more Surfliners. Its an off-the-shelf design at this point. Heck, I could see California leasing the remaining sidelined fleet of Metrolink's Bombardier cars to jump-start things. They'd interlink with the Comet fleet at that point and resolve the trap issue there, since they could place Comet cars in with Bombardier cars and not worry about ADA issues any more. Only thing additional they'd need is more Cabbages. Not impossible.

At this point, I'd say anything is possible. But one thing is certain, California needs (and WILL get) more cars. The midwest needs more cars too, but they're in a much weaker negotiating position.

 

[seat38a]

Don't count out the resources of California in this adventure. A contract pull-out is very possible at this point, but not certain. And California could use the funds returned from the contract with N-S to negotiate a no-bid agreement with a company like Alstrom to produce more Surfliners. Its an off-the-shelf design at this point. Heck, I could see California leasing the remaining sidelined fleet of Metrolink's Bombardier cars to jump-start things. They'd interlink with the Comet fleet at that point and resolve the trap issue there, since they could place Comet cars in with Bombardier cars and not worry about ADA issues any more. Only thing additional they'd need is more Cabbages. Not impossible.

At this point, I'd say anything is possible. But one thing is certain, California needs (and WILL get) more cars. The midwest needs more cars too, but they're in a much weaker negotiating position.

Yup, I've been saying that the States should have stuck with the Surfliner design instead of trying to reinvent the wheel. The California Cars were not so great, but as far as I know, the Surfliner cars addressed all those issues and have had no issues that I know of. If anything, the midwest should piggyback off any California order for Surfliner cars and be done with it.

 

[afigg]

The NGEC executive committee posted draft minutes for a January 31, 2017 meeting. While there is positive news on the Charger locomotives, there is zilch on the N-S bi-levels. The minutes say only:

Bi-Level procurement updates are tabled until new information is available and appropriate to share.

A news or information blackout typically does not result in good news later.

 

[keelhauled]

The NGEC executive committee posted draft minutes for a January 31, 2017 meeting. While there is positive news on the Charger locomotives, there is zilch on the N-S bi-levels. The minutes say only:

Bi-Level procurement updates are tabled until new information is available and appropriate to share.

A news or information blackout typically does not result in good news later.

For curious people, the full minutes can be found here.

 

[west point]

If California finally has to cancel the order the financial implications could be big. If CA cancellers the possibility of Chapter 11 bankruptcy is highly possible. That would mean little or no return of funds from NS. Then it would be up to CA to recover money from any performance bond ( if there is one ) that is in the contract. Then there are the question of damages.

 

[9900]

Mark yer calendars!

Feb. 24, 2107: Washington D.C.

NGEC Annual meeting. Gonna be interesting.

 

[Metra Electric Rider]

I hope that NS doesn't go belly up because they are a regional employer here.

 

[Blackwolf]

Question regarding original bidders. Did Seimens place a bid on this order, or did they sit this one out? Could have implications should N-S go belly-up and a rapid rebid is required.

 

[jis]

I could be wrong but AFAIR Siemens did not bid on this.

 

[west point]

I could be wrong but AFAIR Siemens did not bid on this.

Maybe Siemens did not like or even thought the 20,000 # reduction impossible without very expensive materials ?

 

[WoodyinNYC]

Mark yer calendars!

Feb. 24, 2107: Washington D.C.

NGEC Annual meeting. Gonna be interesting.

I think you must mean that the cars from Nippon-Sharyo will be delivered in 2107. But the meeting is in 2017.

Srsly, any news, or did the meeting disappoint like the builder?

 

[A Voice]

Mark yer calendars!

Feb. 24, 2107: Washington D.C.

NGEC Annual meeting. Gonna be interesting.

I think you must mean that the cars from Nippon-Sharyo will be delivered in 2107. But the meeting is in 2017.

Srsly, any news, or did the meeting disappoint like the builder?

From the most recent report on the website, they state Caltrans is "working out some contract issues" with Nippon-Sharyo and there is expected to be nothing to report for some time. So they removed the item from their (bi-weekly?) meeting agendas.

What I'm wondering about is why no (draft) minutes from the annual meeting have been posted; It's been a month. Shouldn't there have also been one or more meetings this month?

 

[jis]

That would usually be indicative of something serious brewing. So we will just have to wait and see.

 

[Steve4031]

Really, it's been a big problem for quite sometime. Quite honestly I can't see this even going through to completion. Wish it was possible to get rid of Nippon Sharyo and get the Siemens bright line equipment. At least that's going to run some day.

 

[A Voice]

Minutes from the NGEC annual meeting and the March 14th monthly meeting have finally (today or within the past few days, at most) appeared on the AASHTO website. Concerning questions over the Nippon-Sharyo car procurement, the response was somewhat obscure:

One question was asked – “What is the status of the Bi-Level Cars procurement?”


The response from the Chair was that the NGEC’s role is to address proposed changes to the control documents for each of our specifications. Since currently there is only one vehicle requesting changes that is the only one on the agenda today, and that is the only one we will be addressing.

I'm not sure exactly how that qualifies as an answer (even if technically correct) to the question asked, certainly it tells us nothing. In fairness, a final answer probably does not yet exist; Still it it a pertinent question if the bi-level order is salvageable and if that is the objective of reported "negotiations". And from the monthly report:

The subcommittee continues to review relevant Bi-Level Specification changes that may pertain to the Single Level Specification Revision A, and will revise as appropriate through the DCR process.