BusTalk Forum Index BusTalk
A Community Discussing Buses and Bus Operations Worldwide!
 
 BusTalk MainBusTalk Main FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups BusTalk GalleriesBusTalk Galleries   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

On Flx 870's and Leyland Double Deckers

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    BusTalk Forum Index -> New York City Buses
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Q65A



Age: 66
Joined: 17 Apr 2007
Posts: 1764
Location: Central NJ

PostPosted: Sat May 19, 2007 1:12 pm    Post subject: On Flx 870's and Leyland Double Deckers Reply with quote

I found this article while checking out a topic at www.nycsubway.org:

It wasn't just the R-46s that were cracking up. In 1979 and 1980, the TA took possession of 637 new Grumman Flxible Model 870 buses. On November 19th, 1980, they were ordered off the streets because cracks had been discovered in 39 bus frames during routine inspections. At the time, these buses represented about 14% of the City's bus fleet.39 Many of these buses hadn't seen 3 months of service. Many of the buses returned to service, but were again removed from service around December 13th. The TA also decided to dissolve an agreement for 570 additional Model 870s. Initially, Grumman rejected the ideas that the cracks were a design defect, but as the number of cracked frames increased, Grumman agreed to pay for repairs. The TA wasn't certain that the buses could be repaired. On December 8th, 1980, the TA told Grumman to stop producing the last 200 buses in the initial 837-bus contract. The following day, the TA stopped paying Grumman for the current contract, and took steps to dissolve a $65 million follow-up order. Up to this time, the TA still owed Grumman $46 million on an $89 million contract. Grumman countered that the TA breached its contract with them by withholding payment. In March of 1981, after several corrections to the Model 870s were made, they returned to service. Even so, the Model 870s would be grounded and partially replaced by mothballed buses that were due for scrapping, but these mothballed buses were far from meeting service requirements. Waits for buses in all five boroughs skyrocketed.

The TA was forced by federal law to accept the lowest bid for the bus contract, but because of the defects, they wanted to give the contract to General Motors (for the RTS-I). However, that same law prohibited the TA from just walking away from the contract. If Grumman were unwilling to give the contract to GM, the TA would have to prove that the buses were poorly built and unsafe. If the TA succeeded in doing that, Grumman Flxible would be barred from bidding for any future bus contracts in the US.

Meanwhile, where would all the extra buses needed for daily service come from? A Christmas present from Washington, DC -- that's where! A caravan of 105 creaking old buses leased from WMATA would meander its way to New York City, with a National Guard escort, leaving Washington at 10:40am on December 27th, 1980.40 The convoy was accompanied by extra mechanics, tow trucks, tools and truckloads of spare parts. It was hoped that the cost of the WMATA buses would be recovered from Grumman Flxible. Much of this convoy was recently returned from a stint in Philadelphia, where officials indicated that numerous breakdowns occurred. Nearly 150 MTA employees were flown to Washington, then bused to WMATA's New Carrollton and Landover, MD shops to pick up the buses. The first WMATA bus to debut on a revenue run in New York City ran on the M106 crosstown run down 42nd Street heading east from 12th Avenue.

Staten Island express bus service was supplemented by approximately 100 MC8s leased from Greyhound.

The MTA was considering paying Grumman the money outstanding on its contract in return for Grumman to make all necessary repairs to the 637 buses and not produce the remaining 200 buses in the contract. The TA would give the remaining bus contract to GM. Efforts to complete this agreement were fought by the City's Comptroller, Harrison J. Goldin.

230 Grumman Model 870s were also removed from the streets of Los Angeles due to the same defect. In December of 1980, the Chicago Transit Authority grounded 205 Grumman Flxibles. Houston grounded over 300 of their Grummans, too. While Grumman and Rockwell were incapable of manufacturing sturdy subway and bus equipment, they were able to manufacture satisfactory components for the space program!41

And why were there only two bus manufacturers in 1980, Flxible and GM? In 1971, the Federal government mandated an "ideal" bus design called "Transbus" which was very lightweight, contained sealed windows, air conditioning, a small engine and low ground clearance. The parts would be interchangeable and easily repairable. Three manufacturers built prototypes of the bus, then indicated they would never build another. The federal government, realizing that their good intentions for an ideal bus would never see the light of day, accepted the Model 870 and the RTS-I as compromises. The Feds left it up to the manufacturers to choose the materials they would use to meet the Transbus requirements. The materials Flxible chose could not stand up to the punishing streets of New York City. In order for cities to obtain 80% in federal Urban Mass Transportation Administration (UMTA) grants, they were forced to purchase either the Model 870 or the RTS -- any other bus would not be federally funded. When GM and Flxible bid for the MTA's bus contract, Flxible was the lower bidder, and the MTA was mandated by law to accept the lowest bid. The MTA never liked the Model 870, but Flxible was no longer manufacturing the old style buses that the MTA was used to.42

In 1982, the MTA was exploring the purchase of new buses from the Hino Company of Japan and Renault of France. The contract would be for 325 buses per year for 5 years.

On February 7th, 1984, David Gunn, on his 5th day as the TA president, ordered all of the Model 870s grounded after one of them, an express bus from Brooklyn, burst into flames while it was being driven back to a garage in Manhattan.43 They never returned to service again. The MTA tried to sell the buses while they were in storage at the Brooklyn Army Terminal. As of 1985, there were no buyers. The TA sued Grumman for $324 million in damages citing fraud; Grumman countersued for $1 billion citing poor maintenance as the reason for the Flxible's failures. The MTA had to repay the federal government the funding it provided - $56 million -- by July 1st, 1984 because the federal UMTA wanted the MTA to put the buses back in service. Grumman later agreed to buy the buses back, refurbished them a bit and then resold the buses at bargain prices. New Jersey Transit bought 120 of them and recognizing a great deal, bought 500 more of them. Queen City Metro (Cincinnati) also bought some and some also went to Puerto Rico. The 620 buses that went to NJ Transit performed very well and the last of them were retired in 2000.


Despite the problems, New York City Transit has retained one Grumman Model 870 bus for the historical collection. Shown here is number 236 at the 2000 Transit Museum Bus Fest. Photo by Sid Keyles.
The A-frame problem was traced to poor engineering by Rohr, Flxible's previous parent before Grumman. The bus was not subjected to the proper testing to see if the design would hold up, and when Grumman purchased Flxible, they thought the 870 design was good to go and began building the bus immediately. By all indications, Grumman Flxible solved the A-frame problem and these buses went on to run for years in a number of cities, but the 870 had become a political liability in New York City after 1980. The 1984 fire that engulfed the 870 on 57th Street and resulted in Gunn removing the entire fleet from service was not due to any Flxible design defect, but was caused by poor TA maintenance practices. The bus was missing a rear shock absorber that caused another part to rub against a wiring harness; this shorted out the wiring harness and ignited the blaze.44

This wasn't the end though. In the late 1970s, the MTA purchased a number of new double-decker buses to run down 5th Avenue. Someone forgot to measure the clearance from overhead traffic lights. The buses didn't stay there for long. They ended their runs on the M4 and M5 bus routes.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    BusTalk Forum Index -> New York City Buses All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You can attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group