Thread by @OccTranspo

Day 4 - June 16

#Ottawa Light Rail Transit Commission Live Tweet Mega Thread 🎉

Today's guests:
Yves Declercq (Alstom) – Morning
Manuel Rivaya (OLRT Constructors) – Afternoon

#Ottawa #OttawaLRT #OLRTCommision

ottawalrtpublicinquiry.ca/public-hearing…

And we are starting on time.

They are talking in French, but "you'll be able to translate in zoom".

@CommissionOlrt such things don't exist for anyone watch the screen share live stream or after the fact recording.

At least the close captioning is in English :)

Finally translations came over ❤

Someone was trying to break into my apartment, they though I was moving out and needed a repaint.

Everything is about bidding, costs and what was requested by RTG/City.

No gems yet.

The justification for new train to NA (aka USA market) was that the older train was outdated and this train body was running for 2 years (I presume in Europa) so they planned to modified the 'new solution' to fit NA market, with hopes it can be resold anywhere else.

Alstom notes 'The Train isn't purely custom to Ottawa, because they wanted something that could be sold other places'

But that said, we know, due to the nature of trainsets being "one-offs" they are almost always customized to the end consumer.

But If I recall correctly, we also know the design choices we asked for (100km/h speed, 100% low floor).

Required unique/custom (see: unproven) gearboxes and bogeys) is our points of failure right now and likely a major source of headaches at launch to derailment.

Alstom gave us a Tram with a NY Subway engine. Interesting.

That was done to lower maintenance by using a traditional engine and because Ottawa requested a tram that could haul cube like a subway.

This caused conflicts with train length. Eventually the city dropped that requirement. The target was 140m (4 units at 30m) but they talked the city down to 90M.

As we learned earlier this was a RTG request to lower station construction cost.

48M ended up being the length.

The request from RTG it seems was to do two trains back to back, super long.

Alstom said that is nuts, and there was a bunch of back and forth, so they can meet capacity requests of the city.

Alstom just builds to the bidders.
*Some hand washing here*

(I think Ottawa's) requests to Alstom over the European standards:
- Higher ride quality
- High tolerance to track defects (aka expansion/contractions)
- Insulated cabins

This train was Alstom's first deployment of a train in NA/US Standards.

We got 34 vech's which is a significant amount.

These are the longest LR Trains in NA - and the money question - that requires custom modifications?

Alstom dodged the question.

1m30sec was the target dwell time and it was supposed to be all automatic. !:30 isn't possible with humans.

Alstom got surprised by this. They built for automatic only. OC let them know, via the training manual that there would be human sitting for opening the doors.

Counsel points out that this then violates what the city was looking for, it wouldn't be possible to deliver the concept

Thus, and here is the money, that forced behaviors to push the train in a direction it wasn't built/designed for. Which causes problems when running in manual

Alstom just said this likely what lead to the derailment.

Running in automatic also has the potential to wrecks their internals because you grind the same repeated action.

lol, I'm confused now. If you run the train it will break 😂

The blame the signaling (I believe, Thales) being the root of the issues. Most specially the complex system for exiting and entering stations. It forced design various design change and is very difficult on a low floor, do to lack of space.

Paraphrased, If I heard it right:
"So what went wrong"
"Well, it works good in France"

Alstom innovation is what allows for what we wanted. It is a very purpose built design. (again hinting on the customizations)

Custom bogeys (One of our failure points) was needed to push the low floor and NA standards.

Special that it is articulated and it can handled twists and bends.

Basically they had to build all-terrain pimp train. Because Europa has weak-sauce design for mild weather 😁

We also got load leveling on the train because NA standards enforce station alignment.

It sounds like the train auto load levels as it enters a station - fully adaptable to all weights, giving perfect door to station each time.

Alstom reiterates that even though these are customized - they are service proven sub systems.

While there is no vech's of this type running. The technology was proven. That can handle the weather and speed wanted.

A look at the design changes needed to make the system work for Ottawa's demands.

So the Train control and equipment was Thales, but Alstom states it was already successfuly deployed on the LUL Jubilee line and in Shanghai Line 6 and 7.

BUT admits none of these were light rails.

Looks like counsel leading at poor labour and dysfunction being a root cause.

Alstom points out that Ottawa's weather is ridiculous and the service demands more difficult - so as far as he can tell no one had a ready-made solution.

Definitely no one that bidded.

Plus he notes, you generally tailor your product to the client.

Alstom notes they were a bit rushed to get the project/design to market - but refuses to take the bait to admit that this caused shortcuts or a reduction in quality.

Alstom admits again it was a "race" to deliver, but again, states - you deliver on time.

Counsel is again baiting. Trying to paint the picture that perhaps time pressure and because the fact they had to design new things and make new choices - this may have led to issues.

Alstom is avoiding the bait, but acknowledges it wasn't an easy process.

Alstom points out, all of these probing questions are irrelevant because they signed a contract saying they would deliver this and Thales said the same thing, so they both worked on that technical agreement.

Counsel points out what she's trying to understand is the mentality and the scenario.

Alstom is getting a little heated.

Reiterates that they talked and they had a technical agreement and they both worked off that agreement.

Lol.

Counsel: Did OLRT / Thales raise any objections to your design agreement?
Alstom: Well they signed it

C: Did OLRT have any staff with expertise?
A: Nope

C: Anything?
A: Just a guy that handles project timelines

Call the burn unit.

C: Is this normal?
A: Not at all what you would expect.

A: There is so many complex parts between train and software, and power delivery ect.

C: And you didn't see anyone handling this?
A: Nope, but again not our problem. We are a supplier.

C: Ok... but again. Is this odd?
A: [Long reply about lack of coordination and Thales just meandering]

(Lines up with what I know)

C: Did this impact your manufacturing?
A: Greatly and costly

C: Did OLRT construction have any system integration staff?
A: Again there's no one that we interfaced with that seemingly had full control or knowledge of the entire system. We only integrated with the "train department"

Alstom admits it got adversarial as a result

Most of my inside info during 2019 noted Thales as being a subpar player in this project. With second being construction, for reasons not yet known to me.

Alstom goes on a soliloquy about Thales screwing them hard.

And we're on break for 15.

So we came back from break and went back on break I missed the reason why. Alstom is interviewing Alstom talking about like cause for the failures.

Also noting for the record that Alstom was quick to respond to issues and are good faith actor.

A lot more softball questions and basically covering that they did the best they could, covered the investigation process, to figure out what was going wrong.

Alstom states the axel issue source cause was because of "fretting" and the train was pushed well beyond operating specs

Alstom believes this to this being a rail issue (which means OLRT) because if the rail was to spec, there wouldn't be this premature wear of the hub, and the train wouldn't wouldn't be under these strains.

ALSTOM STATES THE RAIL PROFILE IN VARIOUS PLACES WERE NOT UP TO THE STANDARDS AS STATED IN THE AGREEMENT.

(What people told me back when they were constructing the train)

This was their investigation findings that this lead to stressors and thus failures of their trains.

Mitigation measures are now in place. They bring the train in now every 7000 km to check for erosion.

But these are just Band-Aids on a lemon

So, it looks like my hunches are coming true. Thales and Construction did us the dirty

It will be good to hear their counter arguments

I had quite a few whistleblowers back when I first started talking about the problems of the LRT.

One of them stated that the rail was not to specifications or as it was supposed to be engineered.

Another major one was the failure of Thales with the software and deadlines

I couldn't prove either, so it's just speculation.

But now it's looking like this is all coming to light. Two derailments and what could have been deaths later.

Known well before 2019, but someone committed (arguably criminal) negligence...

And it's looking like OLRT const.

When I started this project it was to help curb violence and to preserve life because of the failures of this system and OC Transpo.

Lots of people have helped me get to this position and I'm sure people have taken risks and sacrificed for #Ottawa to get here.

I'm glad that this is all coming to light now. Whether or not the city will do anything about this is another story.

But I'll continue to hold the city to account.

Proving this kind of evidence and being a lawyer, is not something we could have done.

All that we could have done, all that we did, is to maintain the pressure, to get to this point, to get people to do their job.

But now that the evidence is getting out in the open.

We can redouble our efforts to have the government hold people accountable, and get the public best possible result from this bungled project.

As for me I will continue to keep the pressure up. Pushing wherever realistically possible. Now armed with this important evidence, and more to come.

I'm here for is a government that works for its people, uses money effectively and doesn't punish people with incompetency.

Alstom didn't like our poor manufacturing sector and labour sector - said it was impossible to meet the 25% content Canadian content requirement goal post.

They also didn't like the American style system of high labor. Apparently in France people work for a company for life

Now on break till 2:00 p.m.

The City of Ottawa was the last interviewer and it got a little directed at the end.

Basically getting Alstom to confirm that what they sent the city was a complete and functional train.

Alstom points out "complete" is subjective.

Reiterating that what they said they were going to do in the contract is what they did in the contract.

Now RTG/RTM/OLRT is grilling the Alstrom director. Noting this person that he wasn't on the project full time. Lots of probing questions.

Nothing valuable. Might be fishing, trying to discredit or entrap the witness.

No clear line on these random personal questions.

RTG trying to divorce ownership on the document from earlier?

Saying that Alstom made the claims that the trains were functional and capable.

Alstom leans in, saying [Yes, that's what we (us+RTG) agreed upon when we made this document in 2012]

Now RTG is grilling them on the derailments.

Ooh.... Alstrom fked up...

That analysis that stated 'the root cause' was just released just before this commission - they were sitting on it. Claiming we just finished it.

And they are sitting on other internal evidence.

They did an internal safety check as required by law but the people that did the internal safety checks were all their people.

Alstom argues that there's no experts on root causes - although that doesn't sound quite true.

The analysis is apparently a month old.

Apparently the city and RTG both repeatedly asked for this analysis.

Alstom continues to assert that it took months and months of work and that it required expert intervention - so it couldn't be released until now.

Alstom replies that I wasn't in direct communication with RTG, so I can't speak to the day to day communications.

RTG is trying to divorce themselves from the report.

Now tossing shade in the axels. Trying to point out point out they were wea

RTG is trying to prove that they checked that the axles were good before they put the Train on the rails and a third party said everything said was ok.

Yea, but that's only if the rails are not fooked and the train is driven to specifications.

RTG is trying to say that Alstom knew about the rails ahead of time. He's confusing the witness.

Yes they knew about the rails as they were specified in the technical documents.

No they didn't know that people would build non complaint rails.

RTG replies you can't point to any independent audit proving that we did bad rails.

To which we can all lol, because like anyone has the needed expertise, and can walk up and check the rails 🤣

And we are to believe RTG is going to admit failures that they can cover up...

They were independently tested to be functional and safe.

Infrastructure Ontario passes.
STV passes.
Thales appears with a black screen and the worst microphone.

Thiiis should be good.

So far the questions match the microphone.

They're all pretty much irrelevant. Sounds like Thales is trying to save space and distance themselves.

How the system is designed on paper and what said you would deliver - is all irrelevant if you don't deliver...

Now Thales is getting snippy. "You didn't even have a train built yet" You said the train was unique?

Alstom points out how can we do our work, if you haven't nailed down your product?

T: Wasn't there supposed to be a collaborative project?

Paraphrased A: You were 2 years late you tool. How can we build-in a system to the train when you changed what, where, and how it was frequently. 😂

Paraphrased T: You don't have the experience to know [us] right?

What kind of argument is that 🤣
"You don't know me"
"You don't know what I'm going through"

You signed a contract and a technical agreement... Nobody cares about your personal issues, Thales.

David Jeanes asking probing questions nothing too important.

But he did get Alstom to talk about not being able to test the train or have a test bed for testing - they had to fight to get that done (I presume it's done because it just be a legal requirement)

Alstom lawyer just 2x4'ed Thales.

SNC Lav owned the people that verified the train axles...

🚑 Another to the hospital.

Now we are done with Alstrom director and we are now dealing with a Dragados Canada (Director?) - Manuel Rivaya

Dragados one 2 other parties (SNC Lav, EllisDon) involved in the construction

Talking about what they're supposed to be doing which is they are the design-build ele

If I heard this right, OLRT-C kept their financial separate from RTG.

Going over the group's:

> OLRT-C formed and entered into agreement with RTG to do the design build

> RTM another entity formed the maintenance

> RTG-JV was Alstrom + Thales to deliver the trains

* By separate I mean secret. They didn't report back to RTG about their financials.

Counsel looks like he's leading into talking about the lack of system integration. Which is good considering Alstom's moderate bombshell.

https://twitter.com/OccTranspo/status/1537517714838896642/photo/1

Counsel points out it would be very hard (but not impossible 🤣) to get a safety certification if you didn't have integration engineer/group.

Counsel points to this, as part of the responsibilities for OLRT-C, saying they are responsible for the "project integration"

Getting confused here. OLRT-C did not have any requirement to provide anything relating to building the train and the control systems.

But he just said OLRT-C was responsible overall, but then passed the responsibility down for Thales and Alstrom to perform their own work.

I'm getting lost in the project groups and subcontractors here.

They are now talking about OLRT-C having disputes with Thales and Alstrom.

(The previous director illustrated this quite well)

They're still trying to figure out who was responsible for the system integration.

Drago's says "I don't know who was responsible or preparing the plans". [We just follow the plans we were told to do]

Sounds about right 🤣

They're going back and forth now trying to figure out if there was a person doing project integration.

They both agree it should have been done.
They don't agree that it was done.

And that's a problem... 😂

Now Counsel points out the black and white saying 'looky here, you had requirements software that you said you were going to use' but the paperwork clearly states "there was gaps".

Nails in the coffin here.
This is the calmest legal murder I've ever seen.

OLRT-C response was 'well if this is true that would be a problem but I don't have any knowledge of it'

Well at least we can agree on that 🤣

This email points out that "the JV" cut the staff for specialist activities and they reduced engineering.

They're also charging 2.7 times over cost.

They're also instructing to do the bare minimum. At the very bottom there's a conflict about scope and roles because profits.

Counsel points out that this was an ongoing issue starting in 2015 and continuing till likely still now.

And we just suddenly and rapidly went on break.

Will be back at 4:20

My guess is Counsel is smartly working towards the fact that Alstrom is acknowledging that there is problems with the system integration, and for essentially five plus more years, it was ignored, which creates a unsafe environment (which thankfully hasn't killed anyone yet)tRls

This will go to establish credibility and the mentality of one of the 3 construction groups.

The other one which has been found guilty of criminal charges (SNC Lav) and Elis Don, which I don't know too much about their secret internals.

If they're ignoring a key issue of safety and what is necessary to have proper regulatory oversight - it then begs the question what else are they ignoring or what else did they cut to keep the profits.

And I hope that's where we're headed.

All right we're back.

SEMP group that was retained to do system integration.

Counsel implies is that the reason they hired them is because they realized that there was lacking was subpar (smart play).

Presents testimony and a document from 2017.

The report finds that the

"System engineering on the project to date is considered to be substantially below the minimal acceptable level of a project of this size and complexity"

🚑 😂

Jan 2018 report now from SEMP.

Fkkkk...
There own internal report.

"No Evidence to demonstrate a rigorous or systematic approach to safety"

How did this pass the @ottawacity safety assessment?

Cc: @smwgilbert

Counsel suggest that these are all the areas they are looking at to being addressed.

Witness, finally defends himself. Points out that some of these are probably to double check - not all of these are flaws.

Regardless, SEMP felt these needed a check.

And they're going back and forth now, some more about what the audit found.

OLRT-C admits their sub contractor goofed up, and they should/would have paid more attention if they repeated this process or not delegated responsibility.

*High labour turnover.

People would work for Alstrom and after a few months to a year "to get the title in the resume" then they would go and get a better job.

They're still going back and forth nothing too important I could hear waiting for a document to load.

This is the burn master in chief 🤣

Ouchy. The CBTC (train control software I believe) was supposed to be frozen in 2013 and Alstrom was legally privileged to make those own system

And we learned today Thales delivered it like 2015 or later

and I just learned that Thales' contract says we will deliver much later

Oh that's bad. They got two and a half contracts and they're all saying different things.

Who the hell is managing this show. This is bad 😂

Counsel is now leaning to OLRT says 'Can you see how this can cause problems?'

And keep in mind there was oversight holes because there was no solid "overall project integration" guy/group and we just covered that they didn't follow contracted process.

The City of Ottawa now interrogating

Drageto is a sophisticated tunneling and engineering group.

The city implies that's why they were brought on.

The process was agreed to be fair.

Loving the Ottawa Counsel. This guy clearly knows what he doing. He is now pointing out the dates.

There was a requirement of giving 180 day notice before the trains could be launched.

SEMP was likely called on to verify that the LRT was ready to launch Nov 2017 + 180 days

If you remember our history that did not happen.

Ottawa Counsel points out that the city's safety auditor delivered a preliminary report and implied that they should probably retain someone address the issues.

Ottawa Counsel points out that two OLRT project directors were terminated and that one was due to "concerns about how the project was going" 😂

A few more back and forth, and some talk about litigation with Metrolinx.

Now Alstom legal is going on for the grill.

Going on about pushing for the dates. He points out the OLRT project time frames was achievable.

Alstom states we told ages before we can't meet the dates.

OLRT says he doesn't remember.
Alstom with confidence in the voice providing the smackdown with evidence.

First message Jan 2017.
We can't meet May 2018.

Next month.
We can't do this till December 2018

Next month
Angry letter how there is no way we can do this anytime soon

OLRT states this is Thales. They were probably sending these letters just to look for additional compensation. (For their inability to deliver to their promises)

Alstom is making a good case that OLRT gave tight timelines and they couldn't just "cut from somewhere".

Alstom proves that Thales got the extension they wanted, and then asked for my money to a speed up the timeline...

Alstom used that point by giving the extension that proves the May 2018 date was unreasonable.

I guess he is trying to prove bad project management?

Alstom proves that Thales got the extension they wanted, and then asked for my money to a speed up the timeline...

Alstom used that point by giving the extension that proves the May 2018 date was unreasonable.

I guess he is trying to prove bad project management?

He is poking holes again in the testimony given earlier when he talked the quality intergation and decent project management.

Points out that alstom had an arbitration in 2020 which found a project manager (Dr. Oakley) for OLRT-C for the Alstrom sub contract had no knowledge of everything talked about above.

If the PL doesn't know and the director didn't know. Who the fk is driving 😂

Yikes.

OLRT retorts if no one was handling this they yes there'd be a problem. However somebody must have been handling it.

Lol, one might hope - but hope is not a method.

The arbitration (if I read this correctly) goes on to say that if even by magic all the vehicles were available in 2018, the remainder of the subsystems were nowhere ready to go, so there was no way in hell they would have ever made their deadline of May 2018.

So what that means is with all this smoke and mirrors saying that there's problems with this group and that group - the end of the day the construction company itself was out to lunch.

So basically we have a turd with everyone's pointing fingers.

Which goes back to my earlier guess.

I think we're going to find out that whoever put down the rail and Thales are going to be the reason almost all our problems - most importantly the derailments.

Thales is now interrogating OLRT pointing out the contract (probably the one that's different 🤣) and I think implying that OLRT didn't care to follow it, and it was their responsibility to manage the integration (not sure)

Thales is fishing to prove they did their due diligence in warning that they were having troubles, and how friendly they became after they got more money....

(Overlooking that testimony of incompetency was a source of the troubles that Alstom's business ethics help mitigated)

So the remainder of the testimony that went longer into the day wasn't really meaningful as far as I can tell.

We wrapped at 6:15pm and will be back at 9:00am tomorrow.

Quite the bombshell revelation from Alstrom today. Going to try to get my hands on that report.

@threadreaderapp unroll