Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

trALErun t1_jeeasxv wrote

Reply to comment by and_dont_blink in Feds inspect Springfield factory as part of probe into MBTA’s Chinese contractor by and_dont_blink

Damn, that's... really dumb. Any clue what Patrick's motivations were? Did he benefit from this terrible decision in some way?

11

just_planning_ahead t1_jef1n7h wrote

This is speculation, but I think think it's more substantial than /u/ShriekingMuppet to just assume it's all straight up money. But it was a gambit that went very wrong.

Let me put it like this and bare with me - you can see a much bigger example if you watch from 8:56 to 10:53 of this Youtube documentary about the failed Superconducting Super Collider project. A common tactic to please various constituents is to give everyone a piece of the pie, no matter how small.

When it came to the failed Superconducting Super Collider project, it was spreading out contracts across 47 states. But this type of politics applies to smaller scale projects too. To appease Western MA that a project doesn't only "benefits" Boston, they tied a new factory with the project.

It also notable that unlike the discussion has implied so far. If you look at links like this(Page 8), CNR had a record as good as Bombardier (Which anyone who follows knows they aren't perfect, but nobody questions them as a legit manufacturer). So any person who assess by what the data says, then it's not just choosing the less "iffy", it was choosing a company who has done a good as a job as Bombardier... and promptly got bought out by the company rated so poorly that they were explicitly rejected.

So it was an attempt to make it into a "win-win". Western MA gets jobs. Boston gets new trains. CNR gets a foothold in the NA market. MA in general gets Bombardier-level trains at bargain prices. And it all went to shit.

12

Moohog86 t1_jeffx6d wrote

It would have been better if all this happened in the 1990's when the trains were nearing end of life. So what if they were late, we still would have gotten them 20 years ago.

Instead they are now late and the trains are like 30 years past end of life.

5

bakgwailo t1_jefx064 wrote

What should have happened was they got their mid life overhaul back then and then wouldn't be nearly in as bad shape today. But they didn't so here we are.

5

and_dont_blink OP t1_jegs46z wrote

> So any person who assess by what the data says, then it's not just choosing the less "iffy", it was choosing a company who has done a good as a job as Bombardier...

The issue here is yo're talking about things like technical proposal scores -- what they say they'll deliver and what they can conceivably deliver.

If we go by iffy, it was that they bid $567M with the other bids being in the $800-$1B range. CNR makes a lot of rolling stock, but not primarily for the western world and when they started there were serious, serious issues. It put MA in the position of having to then defend asbestos being found on trains, and faulty brakes and a failure rate double the rest of the fleet.

...and that's before you get to the human rights issues of a company ostensibly spun out from the government. We face a similar issue with things like solar panels unfortunately.

2