Guys,
It is becoming increasingly clear to me that many of you fail to
factor in LOGISTICS and WHOLE-OF-LIFE
COSTS when taking into consideration the types of buses
that operators purchase.
Let me start with the former. SMRT already operates a
large fleet of Mercedes-Benz buses. This means that their
engineers and mechanics already have experience working on this
make of bus and that potentially they have a stockpile of spare
parts that can be interchanged between the O 405-series and the OC
500 / O 530-series of buses or chassis. Introducing a new
make of bus into the fleet will require retooling, retraining, and
stocking a unique set of spare parts. It would be
economically more feasible for the operator therefore to continue
to buy from the same manufacturer provided that the latest
offerings meet their requirements.
Secondly, the overall cost of a vehicle to operate revolves
around more than just the initial cost of the chassis and the
bodywork. Operators need to factor in such details as fuel
consumption, spare parts costs, servicing requirements (and
associated downtime) as well as the projected longevity major
components (e.g. drivetrain). Chassis 'A' may cost more to
purchase initially, but if it uses 10L less diesel per 100km
compared to Chassis 'B' (which costs, say, 10% less to purchase
initially) in the same operating conditions, has longer service
intervals and a guaranteed powertrain lifespan of 10 years compared
to 8 years for Chassis 'B', you'll find that the overall
whole-of-life cost associated with the operation of Chassis 'A'
will be lower.
In Australia, it is widely accepted that the Mercedes-Benz OC
500 LE has extremely good fuel consumption figures compared to the
competition (easily averaging below 40L/100km on urban
duties). The performance and reliability of the powertrain
and transmission are also second-to-none. I can personally
understand why SMRT have chosen Mercedes-Benz over its rivals.
I'd like to add that the presence of a reliable and established
local dealer for the particular make also goes a long way to
reducing the two aspects of costs mentioned above. It's a
mutually beneficial relationship whereby
- the operator is able to receive more timely support e.g.
stocking replacement parts
- lower costs and a better deal for the operator through entering
long-term service contracts
- the dealer has a better chance of securing future orders from the
operator by showing a proven track record.
The mutual synergies between, say, SBS Transit and CDGE (for
Volvo) and Scania Singapore, and between SMRT and Cycle &
Carriage is probably the reason why they remain loyal to the
respective providers.
Not to mention that it is logistically challenging and almost
impossible to bring in a particular make without the help of a
local dealer, which is the reason why we don't see Alexander Dennis
in Singapore yet because there is no local dealership for it.
ST Kinetics, being the dealer for MAN, has only recently began
pushing buses to the operators having previously focused on
military and commercial trucks - a pity for they have missed the
boat (or the bus, if you like!)