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 

[CT] CT Transit - New Britain (NBT) fleet update

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    BusTalk Forum Index -> Surface Transit - Eastern United States
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Bill D




Joined: 17 Apr 2007
Posts: 332
Location: Waterbury, CT

PostPosted: Wed Feb 13, 2008 10:08 am    Post subject: [CT] CT Transit - New Britain (NBT) fleet update Reply with quote

I had the opportunity to visit New Britain Transportation yesterday. Their RTS fleet is down to 11 vehicles. One bus (B136) has already been scrapped because of accident damage, and three others have been removed from service because of rotted bulkheads. The remaining RTS fllet is being supplemented with MCI Classic 9158 and D40HF's 9402 - 9405. Below are some pictures from yesterday.

Bill

Dattco operated RTS C150 and 2 "B" series buses on Bank Street, New Britain.



D40HF 9404 on Bank Street, New Britain.



MCI Classic 9158 on Bank Street, New Britain.



RTS A135 at NBT garage.



D40HF 9403 at NBT garage.



Retired RTS buses B142, B143 and B149 at NBT garage.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
RailBus63
Moderator



Joined: 16 Apr 2007
Posts: 1063

PostPosted: Wed Feb 13, 2008 12:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks for the update, Bill. Does CDOT have any plans to purchase new vehicles to replace the RTS's?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Mr. Linsky
BusTalk's Offical Welcoming Committee



Joined: 16 Apr 2007
Posts: 5071
Location: BRENTWOOD, CA. - WOODMERE, N.Y.

PostPosted: Thu Feb 14, 2008 12:37 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Bill,

Interesting that you note that some New Britain Transportation RTS's are down because of rotted bulkheads.

As you can see below, this is not the first such utterance concerning this problem that is obviously still manifesting itself!

Mr. 'L'


Found something very interesting in what’s left of my law library last night entitled ‘Green Bus Lines, Inc. v General Motors Corporation’ with original filing dated in early 1988 (this time frame becomes an important factor as we shall see later).

The suit alleges that in April of 1979 the plaintiff (Green Bus Lines) entered into an agreement to purchase 15 buses from the defendant (General Motors Corporation), and that such agreement provided that the equipment be manufactured in accordance in with ‘standard General Motors specifications’.

Sometime in early 1988 the plaintiff allegedly discovered that the engine support bulkheads were made of carbon steel which had corroded and had to be replaced.

A further complaint was served alleging fraudulent inducement to contract. The basis for this article being that in order to induce the plaintiff to purchase the buses the defendant falsely represented that the specifications called for them to be built with anti corrosive stainless steel engine support bulkheads which would last through the useful lives of the vehicles. This same complaint alleged that such specification was clearly spelled out in the original agreement.

In an April 1989 decision, the Supreme Court found that while the defendant did fraudulently induce entry into a contract when it had no intention of abiding by the agreed terms, it dismissed the case as being barred by the Statute of Limitations applicable to contract actions.

The records indicate that Green Line did take delivery of 15 RTS II T8H-203’s numbered 1001 to 1015 (ser# 0938 to 0952) in October of 1979 and it is likely that these are the buses that were in question because of the usual six months of lead time between order and delivery.

Those same records also show a delivery of 15 GMD T8H-5307A’s (# 350 to 364) from Canada in the same time frame but the suit mentions no Canadian connection.

It would seem to the writer that this problem would have been universal among early RTS operators in the northeast where corrosive agents in the removal of ice and snow were more prevalent but no such general outcry ala the ‘870’ affair was ever heard!

In fact, you would have to think that there would have been a class action against GM in this regard.

It’s too bad that the Statute of Limitations played a role here because it was long after its limits that the fraud was found.

BTW; the case for the plaintiff was litigated by ‘Cooper and Cooper’ of New Rochelle, NY (obviously Burton and company)

Mr. Linsky – Green Bus Lines, Inc., Jamaica, NY
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bill D




Joined: 17 Apr 2007
Posts: 332
Location: Waterbury, CT

PostPosted: Thu Feb 14, 2008 5:38 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Jim,

The current plan is to not replace the RTS's until 2010. Funding that would have been used this year or next is being designated for expansion of bus services. New Britain is slated to receive at least a couple of new vehicles, with service from New Britain to Southington, and extending the route from Bristol into Terryville proposed. At my operation (Northeast), the only new vehicle in th works at this time is a 20 passenger body on chassis type bus for weekend flex service in Meriden. It is also proposed to establish evening service in Waterbury with no additional vehicles.

The main difference between our RTS fleet and New Britain's is mileage. Our buses have an average of 300,000 miles at this time, while the New Britain fleet is well over 400,000 miles, with some approaching the half million mile mark. Also, their vehicles are stored outside, which doesn't help matters. I'm sure that you will see more transfers of reserve buses to New Britain over the next two years, or until their fleet is replaced. In our case, the RTS's should last, but the addition mileage of evening service could pose a challenge.

Mr. Linsky, the rotting bulkheads are not a surprise, as I was told by the Nova service rep back when the buses were a year or two old that this would happen. We have tried to extend the life of ours by periodically steam cleaning the build up of sand and salt that accumulates on the bulkheads, as well as undercoating them. This has slowed down the deterioration, but eventually time and rust will catch up with ours as well.

Bill
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
RailBus63
Moderator



Joined: 16 Apr 2007
Posts: 1063

PostPosted: Thu Feb 14, 2008 9:40 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Bill D wrote:
Jim,

The current plan is to not replace the RTS's until 2010. Funding that would have been used this year or next is being designated for expansion of bus services. New Britain is slated to receive at least a couple of new vehicles, with service from New Britain to Southington, and extending the route from Bristol into Terryville proposed. At my operation (Northeast), the only new vehicle in th works at this time is a 20 passenger body on chassis type bus for weekend flex service in Meriden. It is also proposed to establish evening service in Waterbury with no additional vehicles.


I guess we'll be seeing those Nova Classics show up in New Britain or Waterbury before they're done. I need to visit your system one of these days while the RTS's are still going strong.

Quote:
Mr. Linsky, the rotting bulkheads are not a surprise, as I was told by the Nova service rep back when the buses were a year or two old that this would happen. We have tried to extend the life of ours by periodically steam cleaning the build up of sand and salt that accumulates on the bulkheads, as well as undercoating them. This has slowed down the deterioration, but eventually time and rust will catch up with ours as well.


Bulkhead issues have affected American transit buses for many years, going back to at least the New Look days. Cracked bulkheads sidelined many Flxible and GM fishbowls in Boston. I believe the MBTA standardized on the RTS coach in part because those buses had fewer bulkhead issues than the older buses.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    BusTalk Forum Index -> Surface Transit - Eastern United States 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