qjtransitmaster Posted November 7, 2011 Share #26 Posted November 7, 2011 That's about all they have going for them. There's less seating space because of the front wheel wells and less space in general because of the split-floor layout, which means that a 40' low floor bus actually has less de facto capacity than the high floor it replaces. I have no problem with having some of them in the fleet and I have no problem using them on low- to mid-ridership routes that tend to serve predominantly elderly areas. However, lines that tend to get crushloaded when run with high floors (Bx3, Bx28, Q44) shouldn't be run with low floors unless you're willing to cut the headways by something like 20%. too bad wheelchairs delay the lines and LF's are the solution. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoSpectacular Posted November 7, 2011 Share #27 Posted November 7, 2011 too bad wheelchairs delay the lines and LF's are the solution. Wheelchairs aren't as common, however Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qjtransitmaster Posted November 7, 2011 Share #28 Posted November 7, 2011 Wheelchairs aren't as common, however then in ur words a case by case basis. the lines that duplicate subways need to be 100% LF the ones that don't have disabled ridership bases won't need LFs as much and can HF or mid floor it. It's a route by route basis in a sense Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MHV9218 Posted November 7, 2011 Share #29 Posted November 7, 2011 Please, watch the Nazi Banksters Crimes Ripple Effect at http://jforjustice.co.uk/banksters Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
East New York Posted November 7, 2011 Share #30 Posted November 7, 2011 In regards to the high floor conversion thing...from what I was told there's a battery as thin as a pencil that can be placed on the low-floor part of the bus instead of the lead-acid/lithium-ion batteries on top of the bus, which as a result floorboards would have to be placed to make the floor as high as the rear section. Like I said that would have to be done by the vendor and not the MTA. Maybe I went a little off the wall saying it was possible, but when I thought about it and discussed it with a B/O out of Castleton he explained to me the situation with the thin battery and it seemed plausible to me. But the part I am not understanding is why Orion would waste money to do such a thing. The market for high floors is very limited. Go back to producing the Orion V as the flagship model; that bus made a great workhorse and I don't really know if the VII is really going to be able to live up to that level. Restyle the front based on the NG, and offer it in a 45' length in addition to the current 40' standard length. While that doesn't sound like too bad of an idea at all, the problem is this. Orion will never do it, and the engineered would be a nightmare. A one axle 45' bus will be not be easy to engineer at all. You have to worry about rear axle limit weight, and essentially re-engineer the middle section of the bus to make sure the structure can hold up to the weight of extra metal, seats, and other materials. That's the ONLY reason we never saw, and never will see a 45' RTS'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gtNovaBusRTS9369 Posted November 8, 2011 Share #31 Posted November 8, 2011 Something I was always wondering: Is there an official answer as to why is isn't there a high market for High Floor buses nowadays like there used to be?:confused: I already know that Orion & New Flyer aren't selling HF Buses for local transit applications in the future but I heard NABI was the latest to produce HF buses (don't know if they still do but I believe so). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoSpectacular Posted November 8, 2011 Share #32 Posted November 8, 2011 Low floors are only in demand for accessibility and convenience at the sacrifice of needed space and ride quality... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hawk Operator Posted November 8, 2011 Share #33 Posted November 8, 2011 This should be interesting:)I would start with the CNG OrionV design for 1,I would of never put them tanks on the top ,In any turn from that bus is a lean that is dangerous not to mention A mistake with clearance ....Boom get the picture.....let's hear from you:) Where would you put them? It is located on top for safety purposes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
engineerboy6561 Posted November 8, 2011 Share #34 Posted November 8, 2011 While that doesn't sound like too bad of an idea at all, the problem is this. Orion will never do it, and the engineered would be a nightmare. A one axle 45' bus will be not be easy to engineer at all. You have to worry about rear axle limit weight, and essentially re-engineer the middle section of the bus to make sure the structure can hold up to the weight of extra metal, seats, and other materials. That's the ONLY reason we never saw, and never will see a 45' RTS'. I understand what you mean, and I can see why that would be a problem for MTS given that the RTS is all-steel by definition. What I'm curious about is this: NABI has released a single-axle 45' bus (the Metro 45C, known colloquially as the CompoBus because of the lightweight composite materials used in its construction. Perhaps the design I posted the picture of might work if you went with a lighter composite for the frame and most of the bus's structure, and then used the thinner lithium-polymer batteries that LRG described to reduce the overall weight of the bus. As an engineer, if a bus company were to submit a design proposition for you based around the concepts I described, to what degree would you consider it feasible and why? I'm not questioning your judgement, but given that you have hands-on experience in the field of bus design and engineering and I'm really curious about what goes into designing a bus I figured it would be a good idea to take my questions on the matter to you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
East New York Posted November 8, 2011 Share #35 Posted November 8, 2011 Something I was always wondering: Is there an official answer as to why is isn't there a high market for High Floor buses nowadays like there used to be?:confused: I already know that Orion & New Flyer aren't selling HF Buses for local transit applications in the future but I heard NABI was the latest to produce HF buses (don't know if they still do but I believe so). Accessibility. Where would you put them? It is located on top for safety purposes. You can put them underfloor on the High Floors just as Nova did on the RTS, and New Flyer on the C40HF. I understand what you mean, and I can see why that would be a problem for MTS given that the RTS is all-steel by definition. What I'm curious about is this: NABI has released a single-axle 45' bus (the Metro 45C, known colloquially as the CompoBus because of the lightweight composite materials used in its construction. Perhaps the design I posted the picture of might work if you went with a lighter composite for the frame and most of the bus's structure, and then used the thinner lithium-polymer batteries that LRG described to reduce the overall weight of the bus. As an engineer, if a bus company were to submit a design proposition for you based around the concepts I described, to what degree would you consider it feasible and why? I'm not questioning your judgement, but given that you have hands-on experience in the field of bus design and engineering and I'm really curious about what goes into designing a bus I figured it would be a good idea to take my questions on the matter to you. What you and LRG have here is a concept for a bad ass bus. I absolutely love the NABI 45C, but the cost of the bus is very high. Think of it like it, its a great concept that has potential, but you have to have a base for it and justify the cost. A 45C is $600k. Add in those batteries, with a lighter design, we get some excellent gas mileage, but at a cost of about $760k easy. You can get an artic for that price. Let Boeing sell 1,000 787's and the costs of composites will start to come down. Then it might be viable for NABI. But anyone else trying to enter that arena would have a very difficult time selling buses just as NABI is now. What you have is The Bill of Materials. That's the cost of building the bus. If I build 400 buses, my BOM is low. But if I only built 50 buses, and its a composite structure with new battey technology, engineering, and testing needed. My costs are going to be through the roof, and could easily hit $800k. At this time, the customer could have bought diesel hybrid articulated coaches and made out better. Now we get into the winter. Light weight buses are great for areas that don't get snow. You put those things in Chicago, Detroit, New York, or anywhere else that gets significant amounts of snow, you will definitely have handling issues in the winter. So you have to make sure the weight and balance on this thing just right also. So in short, it is a great idea, its just that not many can afford it right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
engineerboy6561 Posted November 8, 2011 Share #36 Posted November 8, 2011 What you and LRG have here is a concept for a bad ass bus. I absolutely love the NABI 45C, but the cost of the bus is very high. Think of it like it, its a great concept that has potential, but you have to have a base for it and justify the cost. A 45C is $600k. Add in those batteries, with a lighter design, we get some excellent gas mileage, but at a cost of about $760k easy. You can get an artic for that price. Let Boeing sell 1,000 787's and the costs of composites will start to come down. Then it might be viable for NABI. But anyone else trying to enter that arena would have a very difficult time selling buses just as NABI is now. What you have is The Bill of Materials. That's the cost of building the bus. If I build 400 buses, my BOM is low. But if I only built 50 buses, and its a composite structure with new battey technology, engineering, and testing needed. My costs are going to be through the roof, and could easily hit $800k. At this time, the customer could have bought diesel hybrid articulated coaches and made out better. Now we get into the winter. Light weight buses are great for areas that don't get snow. You put those things in Chicago, Detroit, New York, or anywhere else that gets significant amounts of snow, you will definitely have handling issues in the winter. So you have to make sure the weight and balance on this thing just right also. So in short, it is a great idea, its just that not many can afford it right now. That makes a lot of sense, especially as far as costs are concerned. While we're on the topic of winter handling, though, would moving the batteries under the floor slightly toward the front of the bus help with winter handling and other situations in which you need heavy weight for good traction? Also, you mentioned in one of your earlier posts that the 2006 MTS RTS got about 6 mpg on straight diesel and all-stainless construction. What do you think those numbers would look like on composite-based hybrid, or is there no way to tell without more precise info? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
East New York Posted November 9, 2011 Share #37 Posted November 9, 2011 That makes a lot of sense, especially as far as costs are concerned. While we're on the topic of winter handling, though, would moving the batteries under the floor slightly toward the front of the bus help with winter handling and other situations in which you need heavy weight for good traction? Also, you mentioned in one of your earlier posts that the 2006 MTS RTS got about 6 mpg on straight diesel and all-stainless construction. What do you think those numbers would look like on composite-based hybrid, or is there no way to tell without more precise info? I wouldn't put the batteries underfloor. The reason being, you have to make sure they are readily accessible to the mechanics. This would also mean the floor structure would likely have to be redesigned as well to ensure they have the proper access panels in the floor. And there isn't much floor on a LF to start putting stuff under there. Yet, it is possible. I would leave components like batteries on the roof, and make sure much of the weight is distributed towards the front of the bus similar to the Xcelsior, and 45C's current designs. There is no real or precise way to estimate what the mpg would be on a composite based hybrid. It also depends on other things like the types of composites that are used, what model hybrid system, and what engine is installed. Based off the NABI design, I would estimate the bus should at least be able to get 10-13 mpg in order to justify the $800k+ cost. The only problem is you won't get many agencies to buy it at all. Thus leaving the cost too high, and not justifiable. They would be better of getting standard buses. I estimate the RTS hybrid to get at least 8-10 mpg which is better than most buses which ALL weigh less might I add. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
engineerboy6561 Posted November 9, 2011 Share #38 Posted November 9, 2011 I estimate the RTS hybrid to get at least 8-10 mpg which is better than most buses which ALL weigh less might I add. OK, that's flat-out awesome; that's better than some SUVs get. Incidentally, how is MTS getting such a high fuel efficiency from such a heavy bus? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KNIGHTRIDER3:16 Posted November 9, 2011 Author Share #39 Posted November 9, 2011 too bad wheelchairs delay the lines and LF's are the solution. I still have A 2-3 minute wheelchair operation going for me....I get in and get out for LOCAL but that RECON lift for the MCI's are a different story ,However I'm not rusty with that as well. hmm yeah KR why do you hate LF's so much they board wheelchair ppl much faster than high floors I never said I hate LF's...I like xcelsiors and Nova's and they are??? But I am for HF buses and the kneeler was meant for just that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
East New York Posted November 9, 2011 Share #40 Posted November 9, 2011 OK, that's flat-out awesome; that's better than some SUVs get. Incidentally, how is MTS getting such a high fuel efficiency from such a heavy bus? For one, the bus isn't a box! lol Beyond that, I can't really speak on it, but it has a lot to do with that Cat/ZF combo as well. One of the reasons the MTS customers love their buses is because of the fuel economy. I don't think anyone was expecting 6mpg out of an RTS. The fuel economy on the low floor is going to be something to watch out for! I still have A 2-3 minute wheelchair operation going for me....I get in and get out for LOCAL but that RECON lift for the MCI's are a different story ,However I'm not rusty with that as well. I never said I hate LF's...I like xcelsiors and Nova's and they are??? But I am for HF buses and the kneeler was meant for just that. This is a major reason the 1 door and 2 RTS Express has gotten so much press. The front door lift speeds things up, and the driver doesn't have to exit the bus or the seat to operate the lift. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
compobus fan Posted November 9, 2011 Share #41 Posted November 9, 2011 I would simply add that even though the Metro45C might cost around 700k, it is also a 20 year bus, not 10-14 like all else except the RTS of course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blitz Posted November 9, 2011 Share #42 Posted November 9, 2011 I would simply add that even though the Metro45C might cost around 700k, it is also a 20 year bus, not 10-14 like all else except the RTS of course. I don't believe that they have been making that bus for 20 years so there's no way to tell. Really, anything made with glue and something else other than steel is eventually going to wiggle its self apart... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
East New York Posted November 10, 2011 Share #43 Posted November 10, 2011 I would simply add that even though the Metro45C might cost around 700k, it is also a 20 year bus, not 10-14 like all else except the RTS of course. I actually have a great plan that would bring the cost of the bus down to about $550, but NABI would have to pay me for that bit of info! Lord knows I do too much work for free these days! Lol Really, anything made with glue and something else other than steel is eventually going to wiggle its self apart... That's not necessarily true. Composites are made of a resin that is lighter than steel, but much much stronger. The bus body is stamped out in one piece, similar to how the Boeing 787 is constructed. Then the structural members are pretty much bonded, and fastened together. Composite construction has been proven on the Boeing 777 which entered revenue service more than 15 years ago. To date, it is the most reliable plane that has ever been built. The initial cost of the plane has now justified the components, and the 787 is the first widebody commercial aircraft to have its fuselage built of 100% composites. The cost is significantly high, but the fuel economy and lower maintenance costs have made it the fastest selling plane in world history. If NABI had me on their team, the 45c would be the way to go. They just need to refine a few things, and completely overhaul their marketing team. The 45c is my favorite NABI product. I've never been a fan of most of the other models, but this one is nice. I was praying it would be at APTA this year, but it wasn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R42 M Train Posted November 10, 2011 Share #44 Posted November 10, 2011 I would make it so everything has a Detroit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blitz Posted November 10, 2011 Share #45 Posted November 10, 2011 I would make it so everything has a Detroit. No need to spend money on extra equipment that can only be useful in snowy conditions...the medium duty snow chains and the tow truck is good enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
East New York Posted November 10, 2011 Share #46 Posted November 10, 2011 I'll take a Detroit-Allison-GMC New Look please! Lol I like snow! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BZGuy Posted November 10, 2011 Share #47 Posted November 10, 2011 I would change it so you can kneel an MCI without having pop the E-brake. I know one MTA Bus depot has bypassed the relay but I'm not gonna put their name out there. I still have A 2-3 minute wheelchair operation going for me....I get in and get out for LOCAL but that RECON lift for the MCI's are a different story ,However I'm not rusty with that as well That RINCON lift is a joke. They are all different from year to year....I would rip those suckers out and find another lift company. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Broadway Local Posted November 13, 2011 Share #48 Posted November 13, 2011 Orion 7 NG Hybrid with Allison Ep40 Hybridrive Transmission System Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
East New York Posted November 13, 2011 Share #49 Posted November 13, 2011 Orion 7 NG Hybrid with Allison Ep40 Hybridrive Transmission System That's already available. And it's the H 40 EP now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KNIGHTRIDER3:16 Posted November 14, 2011 Author Share #50 Posted November 14, 2011 No need to spend money on extra equipment that can only be useful in snowy conditions...the medium duty snow chains and the tow truck is good enough. yeah right by the time y'all get to me with that Tow I'll be dead and Chains chains you say ....I still haven't seen chains on ALL I'll repeat that ALL BUSES ,In a snow storm.I've been stuck ,I've been patient but the response time absolutely SUCKS. And now they make you take public back soooo yeah DETROITS still are a important factor to ponder on. With all due respect Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.