Transbus Program: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added
m Adding custom short description: "Plan to improve US transit bus design" (Shortdesc helper)
Shifting requirements: Copyedits. Brought the two AMG lawsuit sentences together.
Line 73:
1978/3 TPR updated, single rear axle
1978/8 TPR updated, tandem rear axles, lift or ramp for access-->
In January 1975, UMTA Administrator [[Frank C. Herringer]] announced the prototypes would be used to create a composite performance specification for Transbus<ref name=UMTA-oversight-hearing/>{{rp|4}} and that new bus procurements would need to meet the Transbus specification to qualify for federal subsidies; his intent was to quash GM's competing RTS bus design. GM was undeterred and continued development of the RTS, and Herringer soon left UMTA to head the [[Bay Area Rapid Transit District]].<ref name=Reason-80/> One of his successors, [[Robert E. Patricelli]], quietly encouraged GM to continue its development ofdeveloping the RTS; by that time, GM already had concluded the Transbus project wasrequirements were impossible to implement.<ref name=Reason-80/> GM made its first sale for the RTS to a consortium of transit agencies in May 1976; GM was the sole bidder for that contract, and AM General filed suit over the "exclusionary" specifications in that contract.<ref name=UMTA-oversight-hearing/>{{rp|4}}
 
Patricelli would go on to effectively kill Transbus by issuing a policy order in July 1976 stating the specified Transbus floor height of {{convert|22|in|abbr=on}} was impractical, adding that Advanced Design Bus (ADB) designs{{efn|'Advanced Design Bus' collectively refers to the General Motors [[Rapid Transit Series]] and the Rohr/Flxible [[Flxible Metro|870/Metro]] designs.}} then under development would qualify for federal subsidies.<ref name=UMTA-oversight-hearing/>{{rp|3–4}} In February 1977, Patricelli made the ADB specification a requirement for buses procured using federal subsidies,<ref name=Reason-80/> shutting out AM General, who had not developed an ADB in parallel with their Transbus prototype, as GM and Flxible had.<ref name=AMGvDOT/>
 
The changingChanging requirements for Transbus also led to considerable confusion. The Transbus Procurement Requirement (TPR) specifications were first promulgated in 1976, but amended numerous times, occasionally in conflict with prior versions. For instance, in March 1978, TPR were amended to require a single rear axle, but were subsequently amended that August to require tandem rear axles.<ref name=UMTA-oversight-hearing/>{{rp|5}}
 
AM General filed itsa lawsuit against the [[United States Department of Transportation]] in 1976 over the "exclusionary" specifications in the GM RTS contract awarded by the consortium,<ref name=UMTA-oversight-hearing/>{{rp|4}} asserting the new ADB specification requirement to qualify for federal subsidies essentially shut them out of the transit bus market altogether;<ref name=AMGvDOT>{{cite court |url=https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/FSupp/433/1166/1814278/ |vol=433 |reporter=F.Supp. |opinion=1166 |litigants=AM General Corp. v. Dept. of Transp. |court=[[US District Court for the District of Columbia|D.D.C.]] |date=1977}}</ref> the lawsuit effectively halted all transit bus procurement nationwide.<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.newspapers.com/clip/28488981/the-philadelphia-inquirer/ |title=It's the best of all possible buses — on paper |author=Tulsky, Frederic S. |date=April 19, 1981 |newspaper=The Philadelphia Inquirer |accessdate=9 October 2020}}</ref> AM General's lost their suit in April 1977.<ref name=UMTA-oversight-hearing/>{{rp|5}}
 
Incoming Secretary of Transportation [[Brock Adams]] revived the Transbus project, and in May 1977, stated that by October 1979, new buses would have to meet the Transbus specifications to qualify for federal subsidies.<ref name=UMTA-oversight-hearing/>{{rp|114}}&nbsp;<ref name=TBMP/>{{rp|3-10}}&nbsp;<ref name=Reason-80/> In 1978, the [[San Francisco Municipal Railway]] ruled out Transbus for its forthcoming procurement of accessible buses, noting the undersidelowered floor and undercarriage would get caught on the city's hills.<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.newspapers.com/clip/37197407/the-san-francisco-examiner/ |title=Bids weighed for buses that handicapped can use |author=Glover, Malcolm |date=August 2, 1978 |newspaper=San Francisco Examiner |accessdate=9 October 2020}}</ref>
 
===Bid failure===