"Manufacturer is independent of design. The design is controlled by the buyer, who specifies the features in a lengthy document called a request-for-proposals (RFP). The MBTA put out specifications, and all bidders would have had to propose the same thing. But because this was a competitive procurement, the MBTA also had the opportunity to negotiate with each bidder before making an award. Whatever Rotem delivers is what the MBTA asked for, and agreed to."
Thanks... you beat me to the punch. To classify anything Rotem puts out as "nonsense" is, in effect, criticizing the buyer and not the manufacturer. You may not like what Rotem builds, or Rotem specifically, but the "nonsense" referred to is what the particular buyer specified..... right down to how it looks. Want proof? Take a look at the WMATA's Metro fleet from 1976 to present. The cars were built by Rohr, Breda, CAFS and Alstom, yet, apart from minor spotting differences are practically identical. Why? Because WMATA specified the design, NOT Rohr, Breda, CAFS or Alstom.
While each manufacturer may have small "signature" features, overall, the blame for the design belongs to the agency that ordered it, drew up specifications, prepared the RFP and RFQ and approved the designs and bids. Plenty of manufacturers have built cars that some would consider "nonsense", stupid, ugly, etc., NOT just Rotem, so let the blame lie where it belongs, and give this predjudice against any particular manufacturer a rest based on appearance. How it looks? Blame the MBTA, MNCRR, LIRR, SEPTA...... etc. How it performs? How it holds up? How it was built? Blame the builder.
Last edited by fl9m2026 on Tue Jul 15, 2008 10:24 am, edited 2 times in total.
"You're so ugly you could be a modern art masterpiece! Did your parents have any children that lived?" R. Lee Ermey