Linto63 wrote: ↑Thu May 05, 2022 9:09 am Transit Systems is a business and makes its purchasing decisions based on facts, not emotion or sentiment.

That's increasingly the problem with nearly all companies in the last 40 years. Bean counters get too much consideration, and not the end user.

Merc1107 wrote: ↑So how does fleet procurement work in NSW? You have the approved bus list - does the operator have to bear the full cost of procurement or does the Government offer some incentive for it?

The operator chooses from the list, the government purchases (or rather holds the lease with the financer) and then leases them to the operator. As to whether the operator can claim the leasing costs in full, or has a budget in which to work with, I'm not sure. Other factors such as energy consumption and maintenance that are within an operator's control are factors it would look into when making purchasing decisions.

This looks like my old SLWB Toyota blind van https://www.busnews.com.au/industry-new ... nd%20Perth.

boronia wrote: ↑Thu May 05, 2022 9:02 am I wonder if this is part of the plan:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5r-yN8SugWM

It will save the expense of having New Years Eve fireworks by rolling the two events into one.

Linto63 wrote: ↑Thu May 05, 2022 9:09 am How could Transit Systems have bought something that didn't exist? Maybe the Element is the Rolls-Royce of EV buses, but that will come at a price. Transit Systems is a business and makes its purchasing decisions based on facts, not emotion or sentiment.

The cost of the Element is only about 10-15% more than the Chinese buses I understand, but is built for about twice the service life. As TfNSW is buying the buses and the government now has a policy of buying local, I'm sure the extra upfront cost is factored into the budget. I agree that we can't fault them for buying the only buses available on the local market at the time, before Australian buses became available - and we're still waiting for the Bustech as well as Ebusco if the latter venture comes to fruition. I think it's likely that Chinese buses will be phased out anyway because of their short service life by our expectations. The better Volvo BZL chassis that is gaining traction in WA and Victoria is a Swedish product, but better than buying from China at least.

There is an Element demo running in Melbourne (Sunbury) now and another in Brisbane. Artic and double deck versions are in the offing, awaiting some decision from TfNSW whether they will allow artics again.

Linto63 wrote: ↑Thu May 05, 2022 9:49 am

Merc1107 wrote: ↑So how does fleet procurement work in NSW? You have the approved bus list - does the operator have to bear the full cost of procurement or does the Government offer some incentive for it?

The operator chooses from the list, the government purchases (or rather holds the lease with the financer) and then leases them to the operator. As to whether the operator can claim the leasing costs in full, or has a budget in which to work with, I'm not sure. Other factors such as energy consumption and maintenance that are within an operator's control are factors it would look into when making purchasing decisions.

Gratifying to know they're still essentially government buses and on that basis, government buses have expanded.
I now realise why alternatives to the Bentley of cordless trolleys, the Element are chosen as these contractors operate on an extremely tight profit margin, largely the government's doing with the conditions they impose.
These contractors show skill in being able to meet their contractual obligations and still achieve a return.

Swift wrote: ↑...these contractors operate on an extremely tight profit margin, largely the government's doing with the conditions they impose.

The profit margin is set by the industry and how tightly it us prepared to bid. Can't be that bad, as the same parties return to bid when contracts are up for renewal.

Linto63 wrote: ↑Thu May 05, 2022 11:55 am

Swift wrote: ↑...these contractors operate on an extremely tight profit margin, largely the government's doing with the conditions they impose.

The profit margin is set by the industry and how tightly it us prepared to bid. Can't be that bad, as the same parties return to bid when contracts are up for renewal.

The ultimate question is whether the retendering effort is priced the same, or repriced to something more sustainable after
initially running the contract at a razor thin margin or even a loss to get a foot in the door.

Merc1107 wrote: ↑Thu May 05, 2022 12:23 pm
The ultimate question is whether the retendering effort is priced the same, or repriced to something more sustainable after
initially running the contract at a razor thin margin or even a loss to get a foot in the door.

In a conversation with somebody working for one of those operators about four years ago, he told me that the typical margin at the time was about 3%. Most of them bid to keep a profile in the game. In the regions formerly operated by the government, the depots and fleets are typically leased unless the operator has some fleet and depots of their own prior to getting the contract. Since then, some operators are running both their own traditional region and an additional former government region (e.g. TSA, Busways,Transdev).

1whoknows wrote: ↑Fri Apr 29, 2022 6:32 am The Skybus Tas unit pictures further up the thread is one of two Bustech bodied BYDs for the Hobart airport service. They were not yet in service over the recent long weekend as still awaiting some regulatory sign offs. For Tony there are no interior steps but the floor is slighty ramped towards the rear. If there was a rear door a step might be required. Usual airporter layout with 35 seats and luggage racks on the near side. The units were viewed on the recent TCBS tour but pics embargoed until after the official launch.

Not sure how good your eyes are these days, but they have three steps to rear inside the vehicle.

Merc1107 wrote:The ultimate question is whether the retendering effort is priced the same, or repriced to something more sustainable after
initially running the contract at a razor thin margin or even a loss to get a foot in the door.

If an operator has a contract that is on too thin a margin or loss making, then it will redress when it next tenders. There may be cases where a bidder is prepared to bid low to get market share, but it's not a sustainable long term. There are usually break clauses or options to extend, if an operator is racking up losses it will exit the contract asap, or as happened in Victoria with National Express, hand back the keys and forfeit its performance bond.

Noel wrote: ↑Thu May 05, 2022 12:52 pm
Not sure how good your eyes are these days, but they have three steps to rear inside the vehicle.

If one's eyesight isn't so good, then it's possible to locate the stairs by tripping over them/ falling down them!

Are you referring to the XDi / VST in general or the Hobart electric Skybus specifically?

Swift wrote: ↑Thu May 05, 2022 11:40 am Gratifying to know they're still essentially government buses and on that basis, government buses have expanded.
I now realise why alternatives to the Bentley of cordless trolleys, the Element are chosen as these contractors operate on an extremely tight profit margin, largely the government's doing with the conditions they impose.
These contractors show skill in being able to meet their contractual obligations and still achieve a return.

Long term service contracts normally have "rise and fall" clauses which allow the contractor to be compensated for variations in costs which are beyond its direct control eg. wages, fuel costs, even specified material supplies. As these electric buses are being mandated by the government, any increase in supply costs should be adjusted for in the payments.

tonyp wrote: ↑Thu May 05, 2022 2:05 pm If one's eyesight isn't so good, then it's possible to locate the stairs by tripping over them/ falling down them!

Are you referring to the XDi / VST in general or the Hobart electric Skybus specifically?

Specifically to the Skybus deliveries in Hobart.

Noel wrote: ↑Thu May 05, 2022 7:03 pm
Specifically to the Skybus deliveries in Hobart.

Thank you. None of us, except presumably a select few, have had an inside view of them, so we have no idea what they're like inside.

Fuel cell electric bus built by ARCC to be trialled by Red Bus on the Central Coast later this year.

Article on the H2 bus
https://thedriven.io/2022/05/25/hydroge ... ent-trial/

Until battery technology (specifically the downtime associated with recharging, and any range issues, real or imagined) improves, and the electric grid is in a position to support thousands of buses recharging for several hours every day, hydrogen may well prove to be a useful solution with refuelling times allegedly comparable with diesel or CNG buses. That is particularly important when many depots are already running short on space, and buying extra buses to accommodate the slow-rechargers could be ... problematic, particularly in context of our cities slowing inching towards public transport being available 24/7.

Over a decade ago there were global trials of H2 buses from Mercedes-Benz and MAN (fuel cell and internal-combustion), of which Perth took part with fuel-cell Citaros (real ones whose configuration would hopefully impress tonyp!). Yet it seems information on the success or failures of these trials are a closely-guarded secret. I've heard rumours the Perth trial was successful enough to earn itself an extension, but then hit a stone wall when a Liberal government took power and stopped the CNG / alternative fuels drive of the previous Labor government.

The refuelling is definitely quicker, and it's much lighter than CNG

There are however a few issues with Hydrogen.
1. Inefficiency versus Battery. Takes about 3x the amount of Electricity vs a battery bus (noting there are some less green sources of Hydrogen)
2. Density. About 4x less dense than CNG so you need a much bigger tank (and thus possibly stepped rear or lose a row)
3. Boom risk. Hydrogen tends to go ... So you need a protected tank
4. Network. Need to setup plants, depots, tankers etc. Most of the distribution for electricity is already there.

But there are some scenario where it's likely to win out. Particularly shipping, long distance rail and possibly long distance transport including buses.

Of course battery swap could also become a thing.

moa999 wrote: ↑Wed May 25, 2022 9:08 pm 3. Boom risk. Hydrogen tends to go ... So you need a protected tank

At least compared with the Hindenburg (or even some CNG buses in S.E. Asia in the not-so-distant past), we're not dealing with a balloon full of gas anymore. As far as I know, there have been relatively few incidents where the tanks of CNG buses failed catastrophically - a handful in Brisbane, but seemingly nowhere else. So while the concern is valid - with so much safety valving, and the tanks being built to withstand decades of repeated pressure cycling, I wonder if a tank of Hydrogen wouldn't be safer than the relatively flimsy petrol tanks most of us have in the back of our cars in the event of an accident? Take this (rather dated) snippet, for example (the top search result for "petrol vs dynamite explosion"):

Purdue News wrote:One gallon of gasoline can vaporize and fill a 250-gallon fuel tank with explosive vapor; that single gallon of gasoline has the explosive energy of 83 sticks of dynamite.

I'm also not sure what can be done about a battery that suffers an internal short and enters a runaway state - at that point, it seems like the only thing to do is get the Marshmallows out. From memory, a Lithium fire cannot be put out with water; in fact it might even make it worse?

moa999 wrote: ↑Wed May 25, 2022 9:08 pm 4. Network. Need to setup plants, depots, tankers etc. Most of the distribution for electricity is already there.

Manufacturing and distribution is definitely a big issue relative to electricity. Mind you, it seems a few states are putting the money into establishing Green Hydrogen. I'm not sure how other cities overseas have dealt with the supply issues, both in the past for trials like the MAN/Mercedes-Benz initiative, or more recently.

Don't forget that Perth did get to demonstrate another non-diesel bus from Mercedes called the NEBUS or (No Emissions bus) which was a fuel cell electric bus all the way back in 2000, also was LHD of which you wouldn't see many if any LHD buses in Australia. There isn't too much you can dig up on this but I'm wondering if perhaps like what would later come of TP's 3 Ecobuses whether it may have been ahead of it's time or a sign of what was (at the time) to potentially come & 20 years later here we are... sorta.

CNG still of course won various state operators hearts until about 2011-2012 when AFAIK the last orders were made for CNG fueled buses (TransPerth or STA Sydney may have been the last of the two) what of course came between after was diesel or very very early Hybrid models but even the Hybrids haven't proved successful (not with the major operators like Transperth & At the time STA). Brisbane City Council is the only major big operator I'm aware of that still has their original B5LH, everyone else has since moved on from theirs.

ScaniaGrenda wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 3:28 pm Don't forget that Perth did get to demonstrate another non-diesel bus from Mercedes called the NEBUS or (No Emissions bus) which was a fuel cell electric bus all the way back in 2000, also was LHD of which you wouldn't see many if any LHD buses in Australia. There isn't too much you can dig up on this but I'm wondering if perhaps like what would later come of TP's 3 Ecobuses whether it may have been ahead of it's time or a sign of what was (at the time) to potentially come & 20 years later here we are... sorta.

Being LHD I don't think it was anything more than a show and tell session; the story goes a very lucky handful of drivers were privileged enough to get a drive during its visit to Perth and that was it.

The later Citaros spent about three years in service.

There is further detail on the ARCC bus on their website:

https://www.arccaus.com.au/

There's an article you can enlarge to the extent that you can just read it if you have 20/20 vision and a scrolling set of photos on the home page that scroll so fast that, again, you have to be quick with your eyes.

Between these two resources I can deduce that, as expected, there's a standard single design that can either have batteries or fuel cells on the roof. The motor and other components are from the US company Dana and there's an aluminium chassis and body for light weight. Anachronistically, the motor and diff are located centrally rather than offset to the side, which dates it back about 30 years in terms of best practice modern citybus design. However, I think Bustech is doing the same, so they're not alone on the local scene. As a result naturally, there's a high floor at the back of the bus. Custom Denning is still the only one with an up to date design (alongside the Brisbane Hess, I should say), plus the Volvo BZL in second place as it doesn't quite get the low floor all the way to the back but near enough.

The people running ARCC were responsible for developing the Gemilang BYD electric bus that has now been around since the Blue Emu and later Transit Systems - another outdated design with a high floor at the back. At least the ARCC bus doesn't source its equipment in China, which is a positive step, and the aluminium construction sounds positive weight-wise.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5r-yN8S ... annel=VIXX
Very eye opening and alarming video here.

GriffinRoads1 wrote:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5r-yN8S ... annel=VIXX
Very eye opening and alarming video here.

No injuries thankfully and having the batteries on the roof probably helped in that regard. Le Monde has more info.

https://www.lemonde.fr/en/france/articl ... 956_7.html

Trying to contain so much energy capacity in limited volume.
Mobile phone batteries shoot out fire in spectacular fashion too, if you breach them.
https://youtu.be/AAZ62tUtc0w