[sustran] Re: Chennai battles for sustainable transport

[Brendan Finn]

Alok, 

It very much depends on the bus design, and also on the maintenance regime throughout its life.

Most buses in western countries would have an economic life of about 12 years, after which increased maintenance costs make it an increasingly unviable proposition. Nonetheless, there is no reason why they cannot last many more years. For the last decade there has been a thriving business throughout the CIS in buses which have been discarded by European cities, and are shipped out to Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, etc. to get another 3-5 years working life. 

Standard bus life in China is 8 years. A fairly respectable 10-metre standard buses costs about $20,000. Engines usually outlast the body. Some cities are now extending bus life to 10 years, but it is not a good proposition to do a major capital overhaul of the vehicle at 8 years to get another 3-5 years out of it. As a very general statement, it is not a problem for Chinese cities to finance bus replacements. 

As I recall most Russian buses of the Soviet era (LAZ, LiAZ) also had 8 year design life. This was based on a strong production sector which churned out fit-for-purpose vehicles. By mid- to late-1990's, it became normal to carry out major capital repair to extend the vehicle life by 4-5 years. This usually cost about 25-30% of the price of a new vehicle. I don't know whether this was normal practice during the Soviet era, I suspect not and that it was a practical way of surviving in the transition years when they had absolutely no money. This never prevented individuals and small companies in rural areas from keeping some buses ticking over for maybe 20 years, but such extreme long life was never practice for city fleets. 

>From recollection, Sri Lanka doesn't get too much productivity out of 8 year old buses, a mix of Tatas (?) and Ashok Leylands.

Just because a bus is 8 years old doesn't make it unworkable. However, if normal experience with the bus design and local conditions are that most buses are deadbeat and spend a lot of time off the road by 8 years, then it is reasonable to apply it as a threshold. 

With best wishes, 


Brendan.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
>From Brendan Finn, ETTS Ltd.   e-mail : etts at indigo.ie   tel : +353.87.2530286
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Jain Alok 
  To: Asia and the Pacific sustainable transport 
  Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2006 3:31 AM
  Subject: [sustran] Re: Chennai battles for sustainable transport


  > The total number of buses in Chennai is 2773,
  > out of which 1294 are more then 8 years old. That
  > means Chennai has only about 1500 workable buses.

  Buses more than 8 years old are non-workable? That seems a bit odd. I
  have seen buses older than 10 years working perfectly well. In Hong Kong
  the useful life of the buses is taken as 14 to 17 years, depending on
  the body frame.

  Alok
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20060222/07d8cde4/attachment.html