Hire automakers to build mass transit systems in exchange for a government money.

http://rawstory.com/rawreplay/?p=2551

Sounds like a good way to give the big 3 money and keep people working. The public also gets something for our investment.

http://rawstory.com/rawreplay/?p=2551

Sounds like a good way to give the big 3 money and keep people working. The public also gets something for our investment.

It's a stupid idea.

(A) The industry is already very tight and competitive. Besides mass transit systems are typically government contracts and use a low-bid contract system. The Big 3 would be priced out of the market.

(B) Keep them the he** away from us. :p

I dont like mass Transit...This is not Europe.

I dont like mass Transit...This is not Europe.That's the fundamental problem. In urban cities, our mass transit (passenger rail) systems are mediocre at best when compared to Europe. In rural areas, our mass transit (passenger rail) system is absolutely pathetic. The Auto industry (i.e. Detroit) practically killed the US passenger rail system in the middle part of the 20th century, and now this clown (Moore) suggests we give what's left of it to them to run? Is he insane? :rolleyes:

http://rawstory.com/rawreplay/?p=2551

Sounds like a good way to give the big 3 money and keep people working. The public also gets something for our investment.

There are few people I despise more than Michael Moore. Since "Roger & Me" (which actually pointed out a real issue that needed to be pointed out), he has gotten so full of himself and nowadays seems to have lost any sense of logic. Today he's nothing more than a dumba**ed publicity hound.

He has a huge amount of money, gets driven to book signings and appearences in limos, yet he continues with this scruffy, borderline homeless appearence hides behind a populist, I'm-on-you-side facade, and purposely misleads simply to make more money. Yet that earnings is based on essentially stupid people buying into his act (try having a logical discussion with a Michael Moore fan pointing this out, and you'll see what I mean).

This is a guy who went in Rolling Stone magazine and actually said that Obama wouldn't win because he wasn't embracing (Michael Moore's style of) liberalism.

Congress is already falling all over themselves to ensure that the public's investment is protected. Also, the incoming administration is already looking to improve our infrastructure as a way to jumpstart the economy.

If the big 3 is given money to create mass transit systems, what money is going to go towards fixing the industry? If Hybrids and Electric cars still cost far more than conventional vehicles (even diesels) then how is that going to save the auto industry if no one is buying.

Sorry if I seem a little antsy, but I absolutely dislike Moore.

We do need to invest in mass transit more than we have but I'm not sure how viable it is to have an auto maker working on this stuff. It's not even close to their forte... not to mention what then happens to the companies that are already producing mass transit?

IMO, mass transit only makes sense in dense urban/city environments.

GM making trains with public money = No camaro

Speaking of this, does GM still own most or even a part of their Electro-Motive locomotive buisness anymore?

I dont like mass Transit...This is not Europe.

You got that right...and I'd rather the gov't stayed out of the car business myself!

One thing that I have always felt is a big hurdle for mass transit is that a lot of people tend to look down on mass transit

"Take the bus? Pish-posh, that's for poor people!"

I think cities need to do something to shake that stigma from the system. I think subway/trolley systems don't suffer from that view, but for buses that seems to be what a lot of people think.

Buses, trains, trollies....phooey! I'd rather drive my own car anywhere, than get on any kind of public transportation! It's all the same to me! I have family in san fran, who is forever trying to get my whole family to get rid of our cars! It's about to come to a head too. Next time she starts in with this nonsense, I'm letting her have!

Once upon a time - back when it was a huge manufacturing company and not just a distributor of benefits that happens to make cars on the side - GM was the largest manufacturer of mass transportation vehicles in the world. GMC was known as a manufacturer of buses and coaches (and not luxury pickup trucks), and Electromotive trains quite honestly revolutionized the rail business (the diesel-electric locomotive eliminated the need to carry water, and thus greatly stretched the usable range of trains).

Seeing as how this was done during the period where GM was undisputably the most profitable company in the world, I think it's safe to say that mass transportation need not imply some sort of evil socialist motives. Last time I checked, even capitalists need to ride a bus around the airport, and rail is the most efficient mode of land transportation (efficiency being something that all good capitalists love).

Would it be a bad thing if GM had to go back to making mass transportation vehicles? Hardly - it'd just be a return to the company's roots. A whole lot of you folks who claim to be in love with GM due to its heritage clearly don't know jack squat about the company's history :irk:

I know about it, but it just ain't my bag man. I like to ride alone, in my car, or on my bike. Wait did you just say GM revolutionized....anything? I concede. You win...lol!!!

I live in a city now, so I use mass transit (busses here) regularly. Parking is a pain in the ass, and its easy cause I can drink some and not worry about having to drive. I also get a mass-transit free pass from work, so it means I can move for pleasure or business without cost.

But I love the ability to drive some days. Or not drive if I dont want to. It is a nice option.

I would love to see GM get into more mass transit - but more cities would have to WANT mass transit. Bus systems are great and all - but we need more longer-distance travel like high speed trains and such. The problem is the upfront for those projects is beyond rediculous.

What's a nearly broken GM to do? :shrug:

You got that right...and I'd rather the gov't stayed out of the car business myself!

So no bail out, no loans, let the big 3 die? I think it is too late for keeping gov't out of the car business.


Buses, trains, trollies....phooey! I'd rather drive my own car anywhere, than get on any kind of public transportation! It's all the same to me! I have family in san fran, who is forever trying to get my whole family to get rid of our cars! It's about to come to a head too. Next time she starts in with this nonsense, I'm letting her have!

So higher fuel prices, no parking, and more traffic are your thing. Good Mass transit means less cars on the road and less fuel consumed. Amtrak is probably the most pleasant form of transportation for longer trips I've ever taken. Big seats, lots of leg room, smooth ride, safe. They just need to make them run faster and on time. Good mass transit would also raise standards of living for non car people. No insurance, no car payment, no maintenance, and best of all no chance for DWI. :)

Mass transit is a great thing! More trains means fewer trucks on the road, which means less congestion, better pavement, and cheaper diesel.

And I'd like to see how someone gets around a major airport without the evils of mass transist. Wouldn't it be better if the necessary buses were built by GMC with Detroit Diesel engines and Allison transmissions instead of by foreign companies like BAE and Bombardier?

Shockingly enough, GM used to own the market in locomotives, trains, and heavy trucks while still building some kick-ass cars. The two activities are not mutually-exclusive except in the brains of the feeble-minded (that covers both certain members of this board, as well as the GM management that decided to sell off so much of the company in the name of dividends and fat bonuses).

Wouldn't it be better if the necessary buses were built by GMC with Detroit Diesel engines and Allison transmissions instead of by foreign companies like BAE and Bombardier?You're leaving out one important factor in that generalization, it is sometimes more cost effective for transit vehicle manufacturers to do the final assembly in plants close to the delivery site. Therefore it doesn't necessarily mean that if a foreign manufacturer gets the contract, the work will go overseas. Typically our cars have been assembled in plants within 60 miles of the system, regardless of who the manufacturer was. Thus a lot of local people were employed for several years while the cars were being built.

Mass transit is a great thing! More trains means fewer trucks on the road, which means less congestion, better pavement, and cheaper diesel.

And I'd like to see how someone gets around a major airport without the evils of mass transist. Wouldn't it be better if the necessary buses were built by GMC with Detroit Diesel engines and Allison transmissions instead of by foreign companies like BAE and Bombardier?

Shockingly enough, GM used to own the market in locomotives, trains, and heavy trucks while still building some kick-ass cars. The two activities are not mutually-exclusive except in the brains of the feeble-minded (that covers both certain members of this board, as well as the GM management that decided to sell off so much of the company in the name of dividends and fat bonuses).

People should move closer to their work. Cheap gas made it possible to migrate to the suburbs. Cheap gas, as we can all agree, is a matter of demand and not finite qualities.

Now is when you could drill and maximize what we have in our grasp, as far as resource within our own borders.

< Parentheticly, I fear the government will find the present low prices of gasoline an opportunity to add $.80 to $1.00 in tax to the pump price.>

Between a reverse migration to urban as opposed to suburban living spaces, combined with aggressive utilization of cheap fuel in our own realm of influence, we could actually explore the viability of alternative energy.

And I'd like to see how someone gets around a major airport without the evils of mass transist. Wouldn't it be better if the necessary buses were built by GMC with Detroit Diesel engines and Allison transmissions instead of by foreign companies like BAE and Bombardier?



When I hear the words "Detroit Diesel" I get lofted off to a special place in my memory.

Nothing is quite as sexy to my ears as the the song of the Detroit Diesel 2 cycle engine... The Ferrari of the truck world!:yes:

Fast S.O.B.. The real monster Detroit Diesel's would weep oil at every seam, but my Lord did they make the "juice".:usa:

Speaking of this, does GM still own most or even a part of their Electro-Motive locomotive buisness anymore?

I think they sold it a few years ago to concentrate more on its core business. Electromotive was actually a profitable business for them.

Btw, didn't GM, Ford etc.. rip out the rail lines in Detroit so that more commuters relied on car transport?

Btw, didn't GM, Ford etc.. rip out the rail lines in Detroit so that more commuters relied on car transport?

They did that in a lot of cities along with Firestone, Mobil, Chevron and other Standard Oil companies.

So no bail out, no loans, let the big 3 die? I think it is too late for keeping gov't out of the car business.

No insurance, no car payment, no maintenance, and best of all no chance for DWI. :)

thats enough reason to sell your cars.


When you go to a country with good mass transit and come back home to the US.. you kinda feel like you just entered a 2nd world country. I LOVE GOOD MASS TRANSIT. i really really really hate that about this country

- and for everyone in this thread that is bashing it is because they have never been anywhere where it WORKS and is widely used!

IMO, mass transit only makes sense in dense urban/city environments.

Exactly, and at the moment, most major cities are far from dense.

Even if we're just talking buses, the longer the routes get and the lower the amount of passengers on each one the less sense it makes. Without a large migration back to the city, it's a losing game.

Btw, didn't GM, Ford etc.. rip out the rail lines in Detroit so that more commuters relied on car transport?

That's the conspiracy theory, but reality was a little more complicated.

GM wanted to sell buses to the transit companies, and the transit companies were looking for a way to make a quick buck by selling the tracks for scrap. Within a few years, most of private transit companies had folded and were socialized.

Also in the 1970s, the government encouraged Boeing to go into the transit market to make up for the decline in war contracts. Many cities, including Boston and San Francisco, decided to "Buy American" and use Boeing trains.

The result was a disaster -- the trains were terribly unreliable and expensive to operate.

It would probably be very difficult for a new company to be successful in the transit market. There's so many other companies around the world with expertise and proven products.

Exactly, and at the moment, most major cities are far from dense.

Even if we're just talking buses, the longer the routes get and the lower the amount of passengers on each one the less sense it makes. Without a large migration back to the city, it's a losing game.

It's a chicken and egg problem. If you can't have access to good transportation and living in the city just means sitting in congestion, then there is no reason to migrate back to the city. That being said, I think buses just seem like they cause more congestion than they prevent, due to the constant stopping in the middle of busy thoroughfares. I'd rather spend the money on rail. Lots of it.

When I hear the words "Detroit Diesel" I get lofted off to a special place in my memory.

Nothing is quite as sexy to my ears as the the song of the Detroit Diesel 2 cycle engine... The Ferrari of the truck world!:yes:



The best sounding V8 is an 8V71. The best sounding V6 is a 6V92.

More rail would be cool, but without "railways" what the **** would building more trains solve?

They've long ripped up most of the railways around here. The only one I know of that is relatively close (if I have to drive anymore then 20 miles i'll just drive to the city myself) will only send me east or west. That's it!

Sad things is I don't see the Govt ever being able to buy that land back; overhead rail might be an option, but all the idiots will protest that because it ruins their scenic environment (ie: the windmill problem).

The only solution I see is to get back to more efficient "smaller towns". When the Walmarts of the world have dried up all the small places that I used to be able to go shopping and now have no choice but to drive 25 miles to Indianapolis; what did they expect would happen?

The only solution I see is to get back to more efficient "smaller towns". When the Walmarts of the world have dried up all the small places that I used to be able to go shopping and now have no choice but to drive 25 miles to Indianapolis; what did they expect would happen?

That is expected to be a future trend
http://www.cnuflorida.org/resources/future_boy_dover_article.pdf

When I hear the words "Detroit Diesel" I get lofted off to a special place in my memory.

Nothing is quite as sexy to my ears as the the song of the Detroit Diesel 2 cycle engine... The Ferrari of the truck world!:yes:

Fast S.O.B.. The real monster Detroit Diesel's would weep oil at every seam, but my Lord did they make the "juice".:usa:Yep, that sound takes me back to my childhood like nothing else. Growing up in Western MD/WV, strip mining was HUGE in the early 70s, and I'd sit outside the fire hall downtown with my grandfather, and watch the dump trucks run for hours. The GMCs ran the 8V71 and had that high-pitched rat-tat-tat that sounded like nothing else. I always imagined that they were shouting and angry, trying to haul that load.

Dad's been driving truck for 40+ years, and he *hated* the 2-stroke DDs though. He said the powerband was ridiculously narrow, and that 2-stick shifting trans they usually came with was a PITA. Of course, now he whines about having two cruise control buttons in his Freightliner Coronado.:lol:

The problem w/ "news" stories like this is that they are mostly opinion & not enough fact.

When I hear the words "Detroit Diesel" I get lofted off to a special place in my memory.

From my birth up until I was 13 or so, my dad was the service manager at a local GMC dealer - and this place sold GMC trucks - Generals, Astros, Brigadiers, Top Kicks, and so on. Needless to say, I'm quite fond of that two-stroke DD sound.

There's nothing quite like a "Michigan Special" GMC General with an 8V92, high-floatation front tires, an 8-axle trailer, and a gross weight of 80 tons :bow:

My dad left the place right around the time of the White/GMC merger, IIRC, and then that company was divested to Volvo a few years later :cry: That building where he worked is now a Honda dealership.

http://fr.youtube.com/watch?v=xWkHuPgkLps&feature=related

http://fr.youtube.com/watch?v=dVjXwS8HzFw&feature=related

Mmmmm, Good!:yes:

Wouldn't it be better if the necessary buses were built by GMC with Detroit Diesel engines and Allison transmissions instead of by foreign companies like BAE and Bombardier?

Honestly I thought GM was already making hybrid Metro busses?


Very weird to see you say BAE is Foreign. I worked for the all american "TRACOR" which was bought by "Marconi" (british) making it one of the first foreign owned Govt contractors. Marconi had to distance its British Management from the actual company for National Security issues. BAE is the current company of which TRACOR is a large part of.

It's rather interesting that GE plays in all sorts of areas that were abandoned by GM - locomotives, buses, and off-highway equipment (Terex was started by GM).

I got to see a presentation by a GE engineer at an automotive battery conference earlier in the year. The company is very interested in hybrid drive systems, as $4/gallon diesel means that a diesel-electric locomotive can use around $800k of fuel per year! Since that's about the same as the purchase price of the locomotive, it's possible to throw a couple hundred thousand at hybrid powertrains, get a fuel savings of 10-20% (which can work out to be a six-figure number) and present a very compelling value proposition to the customer:

http://ge.ecomagination.com/site/products/hybr.html

The technical challenge is how to store regeneration braking energy in a vehicle that can experience braking events that are minutes or even hours in length (imagine a train heading down a long mountain pass). Needless to say, the batteries are huge. Fortunately, the impact to the rest of the drivetrain is rather minimal, as one can imagine.

GE also showed off a hybrid mining truck. While its regen braking events are typically much shorter (10-15 minutes as the truck drives down into the open-pit mine), the power levels are much higher. I believe the goal was to capture up to 6000 HP of regen power, and then spit that back out to the drive motors as the loaded truck climbs back out of the mine. The battery pack is smaller than the locomotive's pack, but has to be able to handle much more severe charge and discharge cycles.

Terex is also developing plug-in hybrid trucks.

How does this relate to the subject? Simple - had GM still been able to "play" in these markets, it could transform itself into the world's leading supplier of clean surface-transportation technology. Imagine the PR potential of lining up a series of vehicles from the Volt to an hybrid EMD locomotive, and taking claim to having The Solution to our surface transportation needs. Imagine the profit potential...

Oh well - that's a "what if" scenario that almost certainly won't come true :(

Honestly I thought GM was already making hybrid Metro busses?



They only make the hybrid transmissions. There are currently three suppliers of hybrid transmissions for buses -- BAE, ISE, and GM/Allison. Though now that Allison has been sold, I guess it's a joint venture between GM and Allison?

GM has been out of the transit bus business ever since 1987. They sold it due to high manufacturing costs (UAW rates were too high compared to non-union rates -- sound familiar?). The story of what happened to the transit lines is long and complicated. Check out wikipedia if you're interested.

They only make the hybrid transmissions. There are currently three suppliers of hybrid transmissions for buses -- BAE, ISE, and GM/Allison. Though now that Allison has been sold, I guess it's a joint venture between GM and Allison?

GM has been out of the transit bus business ever since 1987. They sold it due to high manufacturing costs (UAW rates were too high compared to non-union rates -- sound familiar?). The story of what happened to the transit lines is long and complicated. Check out wikipedia if you're interested.

Are the big 3 propetually stuck with Unions? If not Im starting to wonder why they havent shed them long ago. Some companies are stuck. If this spreads to the company I work for which is doing good even in this downturn and this hurts us Ill be pissed. I know their pushing for that, but leave the Union foolishness off our companies working business model:mad:

Ill definately have to check that out later. Im just confused now because there was an article on Toyota being the first Hybrid bus and Lutz correcting that. Ahh here

http://fastlane.gmblogs.com/archives/2006/03/toyota_first_ma.html

Since GM introduced a commercial parallel hybrid propulsion system for mass transit bus fleets in 2003, and the world’s first full-size hybrid pickups in 2004, we follow any news about rear-wheel drive hybrids very closely.

Now I guess hybrid propulsion could simply be transmission but thats not the way I took it. Was that all they were refering to?

It's rather interesting that GE plays in all sorts of areas that were abandoned by GM - locomotives, buses, and off-highway equipment (Terex was started by GM).

I got to see a presentation by a GE engineer at an automotive battery conference earlier in the year. The company is very interested in hybrid drive systems, as $4/gallon diesel means that a diesel-electric locomotive can use around $800k of fuel per year! Since that's about the same as the purchase price of the locomotive, it's possible to throw a couple hundred thousand at hybrid powertrains, get a fuel savings of 10-20% (which can work out to be a six-figure number) and present a very compelling value proposition to the customer:

http://ge.ecomagination.com/site/products/hybr.html

The technical challenge is how to store regeneration braking energy in a vehicle that can experience braking events that are minutes or even hours in length (imagine a train heading down a long mountain pass). Needless to say, the batteries are huge. Fortunately, the impact to the rest of the drivetrain is rather minimal, as one can imagine.

GE also showed off a hybrid mining truck. While its regen braking events are typically much shorter (10-15 minutes as the truck drives down into the open-pit mine), the power levels are much higher. I believe the goal was to capture up to 6000 HP of regen power, and then spit that back out to the drive motors as the loaded truck climbs back out of the mine. The battery pack is smaller than the locomotive's pack, but has to be able to handle much more severe charge and discharge cycles.

Terex is also developing plug-in hybrid trucks.

How does this relate to the subject? Simple - had GM still been able to "play" in these markets, it could transform itself into the world's leading supplier of clean surface-transportation technology. Imagine the PR potential of lining up a series of vehicles from the Volt to an hybrid EMD locomotive, and taking claim to having The Solution to our surface transportation needs. Imagine the profit potential...

Oh well - that's a "what if" scenario that almost certainly won't come true :(

very interesting. I didnt know Terex was a GM spin off. Weird how these are spun off or take over by other companies such as GE and become profitable on their own. What changed? Is Terex Union?

Are the big 3 propetually stuck with Unions? If not Im starting to wonder why they havent shed them long ago. Some companies are stuck. If this spreads to the company I work for which is doing good even in this downturn and this hurts us Ill be pissed. I know their pushing for that, but leave the Union foolishness off our companies working business model:mad:

The union issues are complex. A union does not have to make a company uncompetitive. But it can. I think the UAW has changed their stripes. I also don't think that GM could have "broken" the union earlier without causing huge damage to itself. Reforming the relationship requires both sides to be willing to reform.


Ill definately have to check that out later. Im just confused now because there was an article on Toyota being the first Hybrid bus and Lutz correcting that. Ahh here

Now I guess hybrid propulsion could simply be transmission but thats not the way I took it. Was that all they were refering to?


It's not a simple transmission, so I don't think I'd use the word 'simply'. It's the Allison EP40 and EP50 in these buses. And the hybrid system includes a large battery pack. The beauty of it is that it uses a standard diesel engine. And it gives quick takeoff acceleration without smoke -- something nearly impossible to accomplish without an oversized diesel engine otherwise.

The Allison hybrid seems to be better than the BAE hybrid for the majority of transit systems, as it works much better at medium to high speeds that most North American transit systems operate at. NYC has had good experience with the BAE hybrid, because their buses spend a lot of time moving fairly slowly, but Toronto hasn't, because theirs operate at higher speeds than in NYC (30-35mph is common).

Any bus system with highway service is much better off with the Allison, because the engine drives the axle directly, whereas with the BAE, you go through the conversion to electricity always.

Are the big 3 propetually stuck with Unions? If not Im starting to wonder why they havent shed them long ago. Some companies are stuck. If this spreads to the company I work for which is doing good even in this downturn and this hurts us Ill be pissed. I know their pushing for that, but leave the Union foolishness off our companies working business model:mad:

If they file bankruptcy, the union contract is void. If I remember correctly, if they wanted to break the union they would have to close down for x amount of days and then re-open possibly under a different name??? I'm not sure so don't quote that. If that is true, I think the lawsuit/appeals would be endless and its not something they would want to deal with.

I think the UAW has realized that the automakers are in serious trouble, and so are they if they go bankrupt, so they do seem to be trying to help. I remember seeing that they suspended the job bank (cost $478 million last year) and were willing to re-open the latest contracts for negotiation. The msnbc article posted in another thread lists them as a reason the deal is falling apart in the senate though.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28166218

"So no bail out, no loans, let the big 3 die? I think it is too late for keeping gov't out of the car business."
MO is under NO circumstances should we let them die! Mass transit, whatever they have to do, as long as they still build what I'd want to buy. Sadly for all of US, it might be too late for keeping gov't out of the car business...


So higher fuel prices, no parking, and more traffic are your thing. Good Mass transit means less cars on the road and less fuel consumed. Amtrak is probably the most pleasant form of transportation for longer trips I've ever taken. Big seats, lots of leg room, smooth ride, safe. They just need to make them run faster and on time. Good mass transit would also raise standards of living for non car people. No insurance, no car payment, no maintenance, and best of all no chance for DWI. :)

I live close to my job and in the boonies, so I have none of these issues. However the way things are going there won't be any boonies left before long. I hate the city, so therefore I would never live in one. Mass transit might be for some people, but NOT for me, not out here! I need to be in control of where I'm going and how fast I'm getting there.