• Advertisement

Transdev Melbourne News 2017

Melbourne / Victoria Transport Discussion

Moderator: MAN 16.242

Re: Transdev Melbourne News 2017

Postby scott » Tue Oct 31, 2017 10:21 am

Maybe he could meant the performance of said compressor fell off, but either way, it is just a case of poor maintenance, even more so if the compressor literally fell on the ground. Seems very poor, that it is happening after they got a kick up the bum from the authorities over the state of it's fleet.

It is a wonder the authorities have not considered cancelling their accreditation, which would effectively kill off their contract I would think.
scott
 
Posts: 1178
Joined: Tue Apr 13, 2004 5:18 pm
Location: Melbourne
Has thanked: 17 times
Been thanked: 51 times

Re: Transdev Melbourne News 2017

Postby krustyklo » Thu Nov 09, 2017 8:44 pm

With the messed up 901 this evening, saw this at Blackburn station:
small_911_route.jpg
small_911_route.jpg (129.01 KiB) Viewed 1885 times

Do Transdev have official shortworking route numbers that are different to the main route?
User avatar
krustyklo
 
Posts: 2557
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2004 10:12 am
Location: Bundoora, VIC
Has thanked: 176 times
Been thanked: 256 times

Re: Transdev Melbourne News 2017

Postby CAL » Thu Nov 09, 2017 11:53 pm

krustyklo wrote:Do Transdev have official shortworking route numbers that are different to the main route?

Route 911 was part of the scrapped 901 break up which was part of the Green Field changes. No idea why they have these programmed into the Destos. Can't even get the routes they run right yet have Ghost routes programmed.

Next we'll get an Adelaide style system with short workings. 901, 901B, 901D, 901G, 901K, 901P, X901R
CAL
 
Posts: 137
Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2007 5:55 am
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 17 times

Re: Transdev Melbourne News 2017

Postby Large Marge » Fri Nov 10, 2017 9:18 am

Could be a late / no available relief driver at the George St changeover point. Driver asked to terminate early and just programmes desto incorrectly.
User avatar
Large Marge
 
Posts: 11
Joined: Mon Jul 12, 2010 1:30 am
Location: Dandenong
Has thanked: 4 times
Been thanked: 2 times

Re: Transdev Melbourne News 2017

Postby krustyklo » Fri Nov 10, 2017 5:56 pm

Route 911 was part of the scrapped 901 break up which was part of the Green Field changes.

The problem with that theory is that the 911 never intended to go to The Pines - it was to go from Airport West to Broadmeadows along the current 901, then follow the current 901 from there to Templestowe, then along Porter and Anderson Sts to Templestowe shops, then follow the current 281 to Box Hill.

Could be a late / no available relief driver at the George St changeover point. Driver asked to terminate early and just programmes desto incorrectly.

Quite likely. How does the destination system work? If it is possible for drivers to program seperately the route number and destination, it is the most likely explanation. However, from what I've observed many systems seem to have a single number typed in that is coded to route and destination? If the former, the poor bugger won't make that mistake again given pretty much every person getting on at Blackburn asked whether it was a 901...
User avatar
krustyklo
 
Posts: 2557
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2004 10:12 am
Location: Bundoora, VIC
Has thanked: 176 times
Been thanked: 256 times

Re: Transdev Melbourne News 2017

Postby scott » Tue Nov 14, 2017 6:15 pm

Seen today was Scania L113CRB 323 running around Box Hill terminus with the rear door open, faulty interlock perhaps?

Should not of been in service with that issue.
scott
 
Posts: 1178
Joined: Tue Apr 13, 2004 5:18 pm
Location: Melbourne
Has thanked: 17 times
Been thanked: 51 times

Re: Transdev Melbourne News 2017

Postby Alstom 888M » Wed Nov 15, 2017 12:54 pm

krustyklo wrote:How does the destination system work? If it is possible for drivers to program seperately the route number and destination, it is the most likely explanation. However, from what I've observed many systems seem to have a single number typed in that is coded to route and destination?

It is not possible on that bus or any other bus currently in service with Transdev. Single number typed in is coded to route and destination.
All my posts on this board represents my personal views and opinions only. They may not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or values of those of my family, friends, colleagues, or employer.
User avatar
Alstom 888M
 
Posts: 361
Joined: Thu May 10, 2012 7:50 pm
Location: Out back of 'Straya
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 88 times

Re: Transdev Melbourne News 2017

Postby krustyklo » Wed Nov 15, 2017 7:05 pm

It is not possible on that bus or any other bus currently in service with Transdev. Single number typed in is coded to route and destination.

As I thought, so the destination and 911 route must be preprogrammed into the destination computer. even allowing for mistyping...
User avatar
krustyklo
 
Posts: 2557
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2004 10:12 am
Location: Bundoora, VIC
Has thanked: 176 times
Been thanked: 256 times

Re: Transdev Melbourne News 2017

Postby funbus » Thu Nov 16, 2017 12:57 pm

"Its only a bus if it smells like diesel!" Electric buses might aswell be trams!!**
User avatar
funbus
 
Posts: 613
Joined: Wed Jul 08, 2009 9:29 am
Has thanked: 47 times
Been thanked: 32 times
Favourite Vehicle: man sl200 mkI

Re: Transdev Melbourne News 2017

Postby funbus » Thu Nov 16, 2017 1:04 pm

"Its only a bus if it smells like diesel!" Electric buses might aswell be trams!!**
User avatar
funbus
 
Posts: 613
Joined: Wed Jul 08, 2009 9:29 am
Has thanked: 47 times
Been thanked: 32 times
Favourite Vehicle: man sl200 mkI

Re: Transdev Melbourne News 2017

Postby pakenhamtrain » Thu Nov 16, 2017 3:43 pm

https://twitter.com/mbann_au/status/930948770824519681
642 has had an issue this morning. The front fell off.
Insert 200 characters as signature
User avatar
pakenhamtrain
 
Posts: 536
Joined: Tue Jan 29, 2008 10:43 am
Location: Narre Warren
Has thanked: 10 times
Been thanked: 38 times

Re: Transdev Melbourne News 2017

Postby BluDART » Thu Nov 16, 2017 11:03 pm

After a least 2-3 weeks without needing to borrow buses from other operators, Transdev called in Dysons today to loan a bus for a PM peak hour service with Dyson's bus 282(Volgren CR227L, Scania L94UB) operating a route 305 to The Pines.
BluDART
 
Posts: 225
Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2011 1:56 pm
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 21 times

Re: Transdev Melbourne News 2017

Postby HaticePTV » Sat Nov 18, 2017 7:57 pm

BluDART wrote:After a least 2-3 weeks without needing to borrow buses from other operators, Transdev called in Dysons today to loan a bus for a PM peak hour service with Dyson's bus 282(Volgren CR227L, Scania L94UB) operating a route 305 to The Pines.


Was definitely not "a" bus rather 13 buses :shock:
HaticePTV
 
Posts: 17
Joined: Mon May 15, 2017 9:56 am
Location: Melbourne
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 1 time
Favourite Vehicle: CR228L Scania K230UB

Re: Transdev Melbourne News 2017

Postby scott » Tue Nov 21, 2017 8:41 am

There must be another crisis at Transdev as I saw a number of Ventura L113CRL's around Doncaster yesterday, and a Kastoria? 0405 AT Box Hill this morning.

The B7RLE is was on yesterday afternoon decided to die heading towards Blackburn (dash messages pointed to the transmission), thankfully another 901 arrived soon after. Aircon was rubbish too.

Action must be taken, and must be taken soon, passengers are getting increasingly disgruntled.
scott
 
Posts: 1178
Joined: Tue Apr 13, 2004 5:18 pm
Location: Melbourne
Has thanked: 17 times
Been thanked: 51 times

Re: Transdev Melbourne News 2017

Postby burrumbus » Tue Nov 21, 2017 3:27 pm

Yes ,Crisis volume 2.I understand at least 13 buses are currently off the road,due to further inspections by TSV.I think triggered by the issue with 642.Totally agree with Scott's last sentence.
burrumbus
 
Posts: 1458
Joined: Fri Apr 29, 2011 10:12 pm
Has thanked: 760 times
Been thanked: 320 times

Re: Transdev Melbourne News 2017

Postby krustyklo » Tue Nov 21, 2017 7:50 pm

Explains why I was on a Ventura bus yesterday on an afternoon peak route 295, and why I saw a Dysons bus on a route 207 this morning turning into Manningham Rd from Doncaster Rd. I just assumed it was the hot weather combined with Transdev's maintenance standards causing the usual rash of overheating buses. But the 642 issue is probably more likely...

Action must be taken, and must be taken soon, passengers are getting increasingly disgruntled.


Never mind the disgruntled passengers (nobody has shown a lot of interest in them for the last couple of years in regard to graffiti strewn buses, kicking passengers off overheating buses in summer, and the thankfully past stage of abusing fare evaders to no effect other than holding the bus up for fare paying passengers and creating an awkward environment), the fact so many buses were taken off the road for safety issues should have been the last straw. Yet seemingly nothing was done. The MMBF contract that applies to Transdev includes conditions such as:

17. Asset Maintenance
17.1 Primary Asset maintenance obligation
The Franchisee must:
(a) maintain the Assets so that they are always in a condition which enables the Franchisee to comply with:
(i) its obligations under the Transaction Documents;
(ii) all applicable Laws and Authorisations; and
(iii) all regulatory and mandatory standards, codes and other requirements imposed by Law and all standards, codes and other requirements with which a prudent, efficient and experienced Bus operator exercising due care, skill and diligence would comply, having regard to the nature of the Assets;
(b) maintain the Assets in the condition necessary for them to be used safely for their intended purpose;
(c) preserve the Assets in a functional state which is fit for their intended purpose;
(d) ensure that the Assets are always in a condition which enables the Franchisee to comply with the requirements of its Accreditation;
(e) maintain the Assets in accordance with Best Industry Practice;
(f) without limiting clauses 17.1(a) to 17.1(e), maintain the Primary Assets in accordance with the Asset Management Plan and the Technical Maintenance Schedules; and
(g) without limiting clauses 17.1(a) to 17.1(f), only use the Contract Buses for purposes permitted under this document and maintain them in accordance with the applicable Technical Maintenance Schedules and in the same condition in which they were obtained or acquired (fair wear and tear from usage excepted).

Given the current situation, the recent issues uncovered by TSV suggest a breach of b and c, and likely d and e. However, there is no obvious recourse for breaking this part of the contract.

However, section 29.2 of the contract lists the triggers for immediate termination of the contract, which include:
(m) the Franchisee or a Franchisee's Associate has acted with gross neglect and the conduct is likely to have a material adverse effect on Bus Operations;

I don't know what the threshold of gross neglect includes, but certainly one could claim there has been a material adverse effect on operations given the rash of cancellations. No wonder Transdev are forking out cash to other operators to cover services, this would be a clause that puts them at significant risk of termination depending on how badly services are materially adversely affected.

I can't immediately find the section which talks about what happens with non-compliance with the Bus Safety Act 2009, but I would expect the consequences to be comparable to termination if the law has been broken. The Bus Safety Act 2009 seems to have some relevant clauses which Transdev could be at risk of breaching, notably:
Part 3 - Bus Safety Duties
15 Duty of operator
(1) An operator of a bus service must, so far as is reasonably practicable, ensure the safety of the bus service.
Penalty: In the case of a natural person, 1800 penalty units;
In the case of a body corporate, 9000 penalty units.


However, the PTV might wish to be careful as following straight after:
16 Duty of procurer
(1) A procurer of a bus service must, so far as is reasonably practicable, ensure the safety of the bus service.
Penalty: In the case of a natural person, 1800 penalty units;
In the case of a body corporate, 9000 penalty units.


The clarifications around procurers of bus services are defined as:
procurer means a person who charters a bus service or otherwise engages with an operator for the purposes of using the bus service, whether or not the provision of the bus service is on a commercial basis;

although from section 16 as above:
(3) A person is not a procurer of a bus service only because the person provides funding to the operator of the bus service.

IANAL but I suspect the PTV is likely a procurer of services from Transdev by virtue of procuring and specifying services through the MMBF contract.

Getting back to the longsuffering passengers, the final quote I will include from the MMBF contract should get an ironic giggle:
13.1 Contract Buses
(a) The Franchisee must ensure that all New Buses comply with the Vehicle Specification.
(b) The Franchisee must:
(i) ensure that the Contract Buses meet the standards for condition and presentation of the Contract Buses set out in the Service Specifications and the Asset Management Plan;
(ii) monitor and respond promptly to matters which could create a negative impression of, or impact the long term value of, the Contract Buses; and
(iii) ensure that it has in place a system for logging reports of non compliance with this clause that:
(A) enables Staff and the general public to report non compliance; and
(B) measures its rectification efforts.

The Service Specifications referred to in (b)(i) are clearly not set to a particularly high standard...
User avatar
krustyklo
 
Posts: 2557
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2004 10:12 am
Location: Bundoora, VIC
Has thanked: 176 times
Been thanked: 256 times

Re: Transdev Melbourne News 2017

Postby burrumbus » Tue Nov 21, 2017 7:50 pm

Further information suggests some 30-40 buses are now off the road.
burrumbus
 
Posts: 1458
Joined: Fri Apr 29, 2011 10:12 pm
Has thanked: 760 times
Been thanked: 320 times

Re: Transdev Melbourne News 2017

Postby philm » Tue Nov 21, 2017 8:49 pm

Another Dysons bus spotted operating the 284/285 routes this afternoon.
User avatar
philm
 
Posts: 110
Joined: Fri Sep 19, 2014 12:44 pm
Location: Somewhere over the rainbow
Has thanked: 47 times
Been thanked: 15 times
Favourite Vehicle: A-class tram

Re: Transdev Melbourne News 2017

Postby scott » Wed Nov 22, 2017 8:46 am

Taking an old line from Bob Hawke regarding what passengers may be saying "You're not getting much better, are you."

Looking at the contract excerpts that Krustyklo posted above, it is fairly clear that those contract terms are being breached, yet our useless government are doing stuff all.

If I was in charge, I would wield the axe, and get CDC,Dysons,Ventura and Crown (for Manningham Mover and school runs) and others in to provide a caretaker service for an interim period until they sort it out, and maybe carve up the routes,fleets,depots and staff to to each of the above operators (possibly not Crown as I don't think they will return to route service on a full time basis). Not sure how it would all work out, and there may be flaws in that plan, but it could have the potential to make our bus network great again.
scott
 
Posts: 1178
Joined: Tue Apr 13, 2004 5:18 pm
Location: Melbourne
Has thanked: 17 times
Been thanked: 51 times

Re: Transdev Melbourne News 2017

Postby krustyklo » Wed Nov 22, 2017 6:28 pm

Dysons 284 operated the route 279 I was on this afternoon, and I also saw a couple of Ventura buses go past whilst waiting at the stop next to the depot, as well as 36 operating a route 270 towards Box Hill around 5.30pm. If it wasn't so hot, I'd have waited to see what the 5.40pm and 5.50pm on route 270 towards Mitcham from near Blackburn High were as the PTV app showed them as times instead of minutes, suggesting non-Transdev buses.

If I was in charge, I would wield the axe, and get CDC,Dysons,Ventura and Crown (for Manningham Mover and school runs) and others in to provide a caretaker service for an interim period until they sort it out, and maybe carve up the routes,fleets,depots and staff to to each of the above operators (possibly not Crown as I don't think they will return to route service on a full time basis).

The PTV are in a position to provide a caretaker ("step in") until things are sorted out according to section 28 of the contract (I won't post here as it's probably a bit long but you can look it up yourself on the Tenders Victoria website - https://www.tenders.vic.gov.au/tenders/contract/download.do?id=20105&docIndex=1). Whilst it may be politically problematic, I suspect that given the contract was let by the previous Liberal government it may be expedient to be the good cop for another 6 months to give Transdev time to get their crap together (and seem fair and trying to do the right thing by giving them the opportunity to improve) whilst collecting evidence of breaches, then if they still can't manage to provide safe and reliable services - boot them just before the next election is called blaming the Liberal government that gave the contract to them. Shows Labor as being decisive, shows Liberals as being poor managers of public services putting the cheapest tender before passenger safety, makes many people suddenly very happy that their local bus service may improve under a Labor government (or not suddenly likely to deteriorate under a Liberal government), and deals finally with the problem of Transdev not doing what they promised whilst giving them enough rope to hang themselves by being the good guys whilst they keep getting done over for safety breaches. The Libs don't have a strong comeback because Transdev are being booted over not providing a safe service and Labor congratulate themselves for being too clever by half and winning votes in the process. Cynical, moi?
In reality, I hope Transdev get their crap together quickly because all I really want as a passenger is a safe and reliable bus service without bits falling off buses and air conditioning that works reliably in summer and buses not being cancelled, and I don't really care whose sticker is on the PTV livery if that is achieved. Yet, Transdev's track record doesn't fill me with hope that they are the chosen ones to achieve this...
User avatar
krustyklo
 
Posts: 2557
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2004 10:12 am
Location: Bundoora, VIC
Has thanked: 176 times
Been thanked: 256 times

Re: Transdev Melbourne News 2017

Postby burrumbus » Wed Nov 22, 2017 8:21 pm

I think the central issue is very simply the low tender price that Transdev used to win the contract.It just doesn't provide enough revenue to operate the contract properly.The only major ways to cut costs to remain operating are to cut maintainence and cleaning and to fiddle with drivers shifts and conditions.Both have been employed.Given the revenue figure is fixed there is little prospect of Transdev improving their practices,unless given a cash injection by their French masters.Highly unlikely there.The costs associated with crisis 1 and 2 have probably blown out any potential profits over the contract.
Given the current issues come just weeks after crisis 1 ,that really prooves nothing has changed.I would tend to favour krustyklo's view of the Labor goverment coming down hard on Transdev just before the next election.Cynical in the extreme,leaving the poor suffering punters to put up with a sub standard service.
burrumbus
 
Posts: 1458
Joined: Fri Apr 29, 2011 10:12 pm
Has thanked: 760 times
Been thanked: 320 times

Re: Transdev Melbourne News 2017

Postby scott » Thu Nov 23, 2017 8:37 am

Two Dyson's buses were noted this morning at Box Hill, one of them being 702. Was laying over, so not sure exactly what route.
scott
 
Posts: 1178
Joined: Tue Apr 13, 2004 5:18 pm
Location: Melbourne
Has thanked: 17 times
Been thanked: 51 times

Re: Transdev Melbourne News 2017

Postby scott » Thu Nov 23, 2017 5:16 pm

Saw a TSV inspector at Box Hill today at around 2:15-2:30pm checking out a Designline MAN. Must not like what he saw as it dumped it's 271 passengers and desto changed to Not In Service, then seen leaving the terminal.
scott
 
Posts: 1178
Joined: Tue Apr 13, 2004 5:18 pm
Location: Melbourne
Has thanked: 17 times
Been thanked: 51 times

Re: Transdev Melbourne News 2017

Postby paulgersche » Thu Nov 23, 2017 7:57 pm

scott wrote:Two Dyson's buses were noted this morning at Box Hill, one of them being 702. Was laying over, so not sure exactly what route.


At about 2:30 pm, 702 was operating a Greensborough service from BH, with properly programmed desto.

Paul
paulgersche
 
Posts: 152
Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2008 8:54 am
Has thanked: 37 times
Been thanked: 19 times

Re: Transdev Melbourne News 2017

Postby krustyklo » Thu Nov 23, 2017 8:54 pm

Given the revenue figure is fixed there is little prospect of Transdev improving their practices,unless given a cash injection by their French masters.

Actually, although many of the payments they receive are fixed (eg, fuel, depot leases), there is a variable incentive scheme based on increase / decrease in passenger numbers from a baseline at the start of their contract. Given their passenger numbers have actually gone down (if I understand correctly), they would be losing income on this measure.

In fact, given the unlikelihood of a cash injection, it may well be the local business vehicle used to keep the business seperate from the owners runs out of cash and merely forfeits their bond in return for being rid of the mess. In the case of a loss making business (and I agree their initial tender was probably too low but some of that may have been made up from changes in scope, eg, extra payments for reinstating the 303 when it had been culled in the July 2014 changes; being compensated for their work on the Greenfields timetable and the loss of income from cost savings relating to not being able to implement it), it may actually be smarter for them to be rid of it unless the loss of face and unlikelihood of winning any tenders in Victoria again in the near future is considered too high a loss of potential income in comparison. TBH, I doubt it is likely to be a big enough reason not to walk out given how few contracts we really have - Metro, Yarra, potentially Vline in the future (albeit unlikely for political reasons), MMBF and small clutches of new routes that would each be too small to be a big deal. Hence Transdev walking out is a real potential option.
User avatar
krustyklo
 
Posts: 2557
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2004 10:12 am
Location: Bundoora, VIC
Has thanked: 176 times
Been thanked: 256 times

PreviousNext


  • Advertisement

Return to Discussion - Melbourne / VIC

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 24 guests