- 3

Question #10:

At what date did you place this full fleet of buses with the anti-skid devices into service?

Of the

29

respondents answering this question the average length of time that The range of length

the buses reported upon have been in service is 2.72 of service is between 1/2 month and 5-1/2 months.

months.

Additional Comments and Information:

1. of the 30 responses received to date 9 transit systems said that they have either disconnected all of these antilock devices or they are covering the warning light in front of the driver. Other transit systems have had to disconnect from 36% to 83% of their buses' antilock devices.

3

2. Several transit systems reported that the data which they were supplying us concerning Questions 3, 4 and 6 (malfunctions, downtime and maintenance costs) was considerably less now than it had been when the buses were first delivered.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

Many transit systems reported that in the first one or two months of use of the antilock devices they oft-times had 75% to 100% of the fleet inoperative insofar as the antilock device was concerned.

Many transit systems referred to a legal problem of being required by state or local law of complying with all Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards and being unable to do so and thus the buses were deadlined at the garage and were not permitted to go into revenue service. Transit systems reported many instances of the bus manufacturers and representatives from Rockwell working all day, many evenings and over weekends to try to affect repairs. In addition, all manufacturers have had "campaigns" for fleetwide modifications or retrofit of the antilock devices. Some transit systems report improvement in the rate of malfunctions and downtime after such "campaigns" but indicate that there is still a very unsatisfactory failure rate as reported in Questions #3, #4 and #6.

Some transit systems reported telephone calls or written communication with NHTSA requesting permission to disconnect the anti-skid devices so that the buses could remain in revenue service and allow the buses to operate legally (without violating the statutes regarding compliance with NHTSA regulations).

A number of transit systems reported being "overwhelmed" with the initial quantity of malfunctions, downtime and maintenance costs and indicated that they had no method of keeping exact records of the malfunctions, downtime and maintenance costs attributable only to malfunctions of thes Standard #121 components. Several transit systems remarked that they had not kept track of the labor costs in repairing Standard #121 malfunctions since all such costs were recorded as a part of the "warranty" provisions of their contract with the bus manufacturer. The same or other transit systems reported that in addition to the labor costs that they reported in Question #6 all of the costs of parts should be added, but that these were supplied by either the bus manufacturer or by Rockwell.

The transit systems that had had a sizeable fleet of buses with Standard #121 devices in service for more than 3 months were able to give accurate estimates as to the front and rear wheel brake lining life. It appears that the average of rear wheel brake lining life is approximately 50% that of previous buses, with the difference in lining life of the front wheels not as severe. One major

9.

10.

11.

12.

transit system estimated that it would cost them approximately $142 per bus per year for additional brake relining due to the reduced brake lining life caused by Standard #121.

One major transit system reports sending 6 supervisory employees to Rockwell training sessions in Troy, Mich. prior to receiving delivery of the new buses. "The authority further equipped those facilities with the proper instruments recommended by Rockwell for diagnosis of the possible problems which may occur. Replacement parts were placed on order on April 28th, 1975 (a good deal prior to coach delivery date) and the first spare computer arrived on June 2, 1975; the second delivery of spare parts on that particular order was not received before the end of July and we are now in mid-September and the parts situation has not materially improved."

The same transit system reports that their average rate of transit vehicles having the anti-skid system working properly was 58.5%. A serious problem resulted with the question of whether the drivers should operate the "unsafe" vehicles comprising 41.5% of that fleet. The drivers were convinced to ignore the anti-skid light on the dashboard since the bus manufacturer and Rockwell were unable to affect any repairs.

Another transit system reports that in order to keep their new fleet of 20 buses operating, "A GMC representative was here for four weeks, plus two other men from GMC for one week. We also had a man from Rockwell Standard here on two different occasions." This same transit system reports, "The brake lining only lasts from 12,000 to 15,000 miles compared with our usual 25,000 to 35,000 miles. Our buses did not have automatic slack adjusters and we now find that the brakes will need adjusting every 1,000 miles (as compared to 3,000 miles previously) and that automatic slack adjusters are going to have to be a required item for our buses in the future.

Another transit system reports that after being forced to disconnect all of their fleet of vehicles representatives from GMC and Rockwell reconnected and completely serviced 10 vehicles for further testing. In the approximate 30 day period since these 10 vehicles were replaced in service there have been further problems on 8 of the 10 and only 6 of the antilock systems remain in operation at this time.

Another transit system reports, "The incidents and requirements to maintain the system in an operational mode indicates that the buses must all be checked daily, which greatly increases maintenance and man hour requirements for assurance that the buses are safe and operable. Further, the excessive lining wear will be exceedingly costly to our system. Needless to say, further research and development must be mandatory on these devices prior to units being placed in revenue service. It is my contention that devices of this nature are not necessary for equipment operating and maximum speeds within the city of 25-35 miles per hour. The cost of the system and maintenance requirement for the system is entirely untenable. Unproven reliability on standard braking systems has been evident from past engineering design."

13.

14.

Another transit system reports that representatives of the bus manufacturer and Rockwell state that there is, "no reason" why the antilock device should not remain in proper operating condition and that they do not understand why the intermittent total release of brakes at low speeds is occurring".

There were a few comments (5) that the anti-skid device works well (when it is working) but the consensus of response was that the standard should be rescinded until a safe reliable device has been developed. Even then, there is considerable question as whether the additional capital and maintenance costs for such a device have any cost benefits in the transit bus industry. There were some comments that particular transit systems felt so strongly about the "disservice" that the implementation of this standard had been to the operation of their transit system, that they were considering filing suit against the bus manufacturer, Rockwell Standard, and NHTSA to recover the costs of all maintenance and downtime as well as the additional capital costs which were needlessly incurred.

JBS:ml

ACCIDENTS INJURIES DAMAGES AND CLAIMS

CAUSED BY MALFUNCTIONS OF STANDARD #121 COMPONENTS

8

1

Brakes failed at under 20 miles per hour
and bus hit car at traffic light.

1

1

Yes

1

Brakes failed at low speed and bus hit car.
Brakes failed at low speed causing accident

?

?

Yes

?

?

?

?

?

?

17

1

A very severe brake grabbing at low speed
threw twelve passengers out of their seats
with no serious injuries.

12

?

?

Bus approached another bus at a stop sign,
brakes failed to operate and the second
bus hit the first bus.

$3,000.00