So far, I’ve never seen that issue raised.

L

If you can get a DVD of it mailed to the Bike Oven i would be happy to digitize it, break it up into sections, and post the whole thing online free of charge.

Mail it to:
Bike Oven
c/o Vladimir
3706 N. Figueroa St.
Los Angeles, CA 90065

IC4 supplier spreading chaos on railways throughout the world

The Italian togproducent Ansadobreda designed to deliver 83 IC4 trains in October 2012,
is notorious for error-filled trains to be delivered several years late.

By Birgitte Marfelt, Wednesday 27 May 2009

Ansaldo Breda appreciate not only Danish train passangers patience to the test by providing delayed IC4 trains of poor quality. The Italian togproducent, according to the British train publication Rail Magazine notorious for late deliveries.

According to the British magazine bust lurking just around the corner for Ansaldo Breda .. It is not only a challenge to the DSB, which should have supplied 83 IC4 trains and 23 IC2 trains from Italy in October 2012, but also for the high-speed project, which the Dutch Railways is undertaking.

The company has major difficulties with the supply of Holland’s high-speed Albatros/V250. Ansaldo Breda had delivered trains for high speed line to Amsterdam in 2006, but the Dutch trains are delayed because of problems with Ansaldobredas supplying Denmark.

Italian trams to both Oslo and Gothenburg has been delayed for years, and transportation authorities in several U.S. cities have nervous tics at the thought of Ansaldo Breda:

In Los Angeles is Ansaldo Breda long after schedule. Here are the Italians more than three years late in delivery of the city’s light rail.

And walk a couple of years back in time to report, several U.S. newspapers, including Washington Post and Boston Globe that Ansaldabredas train in Washington, Boston, Cleveland, San Francisco is filled with errors and breaks more frequently together than other trains.

It is not the first time that Ansaldo Breda has major economic problems. Three years ago it had to be partially state-owned parent company, Finmeccanica, adding 1.5 billion dollars in fresh capital to avoid a shutdown.

http://ing.dk/artikel/99019-ic4-leverandoer-spreder-kaos-paa-jernbaner-i-hele-verden

Nate or anyone else-Is there a video or a transcript of the meeting? I think it must be available somewhere to comply with the Brown act, no?

Would love to pass it along…

He doesn’t care about the voice of his people, his voters, his constituents. I think that video should be up all over the net. If anybody has a video, please post it here!

We also need to understand an elected Board is no magic bullet. It means we would have insider interests trying to elect their person, etc. Likely would have many folks run for a Metro seat seeking a place to land after being term limited from the legislature/city council/what have you. The most knowledgable member of the BART board lost his re-election some years ago. It is no guarantee we would end up with anything better than we have now. But it would provide clear lines of accountability. Maybe also Board meetings would at least be held twice a month (the way OCTA and MTD do). Trying to do everything at one meeting by a group of people who want the power but find the actual topic of transportation of scant interest creates the chaotic atmopshere described by Damien Newton. Which is why I some years ago stopped attending.

Don’t confuse the agency and its governance board–the latter was a political solution to power sharing demands that the legislature had to deal with in forming Metro. Political sausage making as it most blunt and bloody. The supervisors, city reps, etc. are mostly there to protect various interests, and have little actual knowledge or desire to learn about transportation except to serve their careers, the dictates of thwe COGS and munis, etc.

And who is Metro’s advocate on its own Board? In my view–no one….

the real problem here seems to be METRO more than Breda. they’ve never been good at overseeing contracts and this is no exception. if mta keeps changing requirements, even after delivery, obviously things are going to take more time to finish.

And then, instead of accepting their own mistakes, Metro trries to blame it all on Breda and launch itself into a long procurement process that gives us more expensive cars that take even longer to build? Metro should take the option and spend that extra money on hiring competent people to administer the contract, instead of wasting it on a new bid process.

http://www.rtd-denver.com/BoardDirectors.shtml

Best.Close.Ever!

- why didn’t they just turn their heads to Gloria Molina and ask her specifically where she heard the “outcry” for Linea de Oro. I’m glad people are critizing this tactic. I don’t even hear the spanish translation on the Red/Purple/Blue line say “La linea de Rojo”. Absolutely stupid.

First off, public comment was filled with statements by politicians and the Astroturf organization Build-It-and-I-Will-Ride Gold Liners who were all commenting on Item 9 – the budget.

Why the acting Chair (Knabe) didn’t just stop the first or second person and tell them they would be called up at Item 9 instead (a procedure done at many meetings in the past at MTA and Board of Supervisors) was beyond me. I thought it was a stall tactic (Knabe buying time for Villaraigosa to get there) until two hours later board members started clearing the room. Then it was clearly incompetence.

The few of us who actually followed the rules (including several South Bay politicians) by putting in our cards for Item 9, had to sit there not only to wait 60-90 mins for people to speak during the wrong item, but then wait on the 10 minute Chair’s report about nothing and then listen to the Ansaldobreda B.S. consume some 30-45 mins of the meeting.

If everyone’s schedule was so tight, why wasn’t the budget moved to the top of the agenda?

In fact, I was confident that it would be – if only because I and everyone else in the room knew the politicians would flood the room and beg for money/kiss the ring for their pet projects.

The kicker though was the board members talking for 10-15 mins talking about how the 40 public comment cards submitted for the budget was going to make them lose a quorum (IT DIDN’T). And the irony of course, is that in talking about how to wiggle out of having to consider public comment for the budget, they began discussing the item – which then mandated that public comment be allowed per the Brown Act.

After they started the meeting late, mismanaged public comment, put the train manufacturing B.S. at the top of the agenda (after the Consent Calendar), they then had the audacity to complain THAT MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC ACTUALLY WANTED TO COMMENT ON THE 3.9 FRICKING BILLION DOLLAR ANNUAL BUDGET?!

And lastly, there were pretty clear court rulings stating that the Brown Act prevents public comment from being “closed” at the beginning of the meeting. As long as the card is in by the time the item comes up you can speak. The Board of Supervisors used to try to do the same thing, and now they have to take public comment and provide…imagine the thought…THREE WHOLE MINS FOR EACH MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC to comment on an item prior to board consideration.