compro common procurement of collective and public service ... · compro common procurement of...

COMPRO

COMmon PROcurement of collective and public service

transport clean vehicles

Intelligent Energy – Europe (IEE)

D4.5 – Report on participatory consultation in the field of clean road transport vehicles

Type of document Working paper

Target groups Local authorities; automotive industry; national Ministries; Environmental organisations

Lead particicpant ISIS

Dissemination level Public

Delivery date 36

2

Table of Content

1. Introduction...................................................................................................................... 3 2. The participatory approach ........................................................................................ 4 3. The Procurement Management Group – creation and composition ........... 5 4. The meetings ................................................................................................................... 6 5. The different roles – contributions and expectations ...................................... 9 6. The supply side ............................................................................................................. 11 7. Conclusions..................................................................................................................... 14 ANNEX 1 - Responses to the COMPRO questionnaire to manufacturers ..... 15

3

1. Introduction The project COMPRO final objective was to analyse the conditions for a common procurement at European scale of clean collective and public service transport, taking action from the demand side. However, it was clear from the very beginning that COMPRO needed to work in accordance with the technological, economic and environmental options available and preferable on the market and with a general consensus. It was therefore fundamental that an interface between demand and supply was established. The involvement of the industry and other relevant stakeholders who have an influential say in the uptake of clean road transport vehicles in the COMPRO activities has been ensured by the creation of the Procurement Management Group (PMG). The PMG is an external Advisory Board composed by around 10-15 individual experts carefully chosen as to provide technical know-how and represent the different interests on the topic. High level personalities coming from the industry, national ministries, local authorities, public transport operators as well as environmental networks and organisations have been invited to join the group and follow the project activities.

Each category of stakeholders participating to the PMG was expected to have specific goals and constraints, and the main role of the PMG was to discuss how the various perspectives could be reconciled in order to achieve overall consensus.

4

2. The participatory approach From the very beginning, COMPRO put the basis for a wide participatory approach with the aim to involve targeted actors from outside the project to help the consortium in the analysis of common procurement. Two groups were formed with different composition, aims and tasks: the Procurement Management Group and the Follower cities working group. Various meetings have been organised with the two groups both separately and joint. The following scheme summarises the interconnections between the COMPRO consortium with the groups and between the groups themselves:

Several electronic interchanges also occurred in-between the meetings so as to keep the groups constantly updated on the outcomes of the project and give them the possibility to react.

PMGFollower citiesWorking Group

COMPROConsortium

First meetingNantes - March 2008

First meetingNantes - March 2008

Second meetingBremen - September 2008

Second meetingBremen - September 2008

First ‘open’ meetingBremen - September 2008

First ‘open’ meetingBremen - September 2008

Second ‘restricted’ meetingRome - January 2009

Second ‘restricted’ meetingRome - January 2009

Joint PMG-Follower citiesWorking Group

Bologna – June 2009

Joint PMG-Follower citiesWorking Group

Bologna – June 2009

5

3. The Procurement Management Group – creation and composition The members of the Procurement Management Group were selected from the partners according to some criteria: to have representatives with different background and interests; to come from different member states; to represent different stakes.

An invitation letter was sent to a list of potential members explaining the aim of COMPRO and the objectives of the PMG. The positive answers received provided for an heterogeneous group, in line with the expectations set in the original workplan:

Ministry of Environment, Italy, National Authority (Mrs Giovanna Rossi)

Bredamenarini, Italy, Automotive Industry (Ing. Francesco Polito)

UITP, Belgium/International, Interest Group/PT operator (originally André Niemegers, then Mohamed Mezghani)

Transdev, France, PT operator (Mr Pierre Moise)

ADEME, France, National Agency (Mr Gabriel Plassat)

Volvo, Sweden, Automotive Industry (Mr Edward Jobson)

Solaris, Poland, Automotive Industry (Mr Slawomir Jarzabkowski)

EIB, Luxembourg/European (Mr Neri di Volo)

Independent, Portugal (Mr Robert Stussi)

Low Carbon vehicle partnership, UK, Local authorities Network (Mr Jonathan Murrey)

ATM Milan, Italy, Transport operator(Mrs Elena Montafia)

PROCURA, Europe, Project (Mrs Marieke Reijalt)

To the original list, two new members were added in the course of the project for their potential value:

Polis, Belgium/International, Local authorities Network, (Mrs Melanie Kloth; Mr Sylvain Haon)

ICLEI, Germany, Local Authorities Network (Mr Philipp Tepper)

6

4. The meetings

The first meeting was successfully organised in Nantes on 6 March 08, just after the first COMPRO workshop. The outcome of the meeting was definitely important for the future activities of the project. A lively debate took place, the main outcomes being the following: The overall exercise of the PMG will be based on the EC proposal for

directive on the promotion of clean and energy efficient road transport vehicles (COM(2007) 817 final)

The directive implies that public authorities and operators providing services under a contract with a public authority, will have to include as award criteria for the procurement of buses the “operational lifetime costs”. According to the directive, the operational lifetime costs mean the monetised values for energy consumption, CO2 emissions, and pollutant emissions that are linked to the operation of the vehicles to be procured, calculated in accordance

with a specific methodology set out in the directive. In respect to the directive, the manufacturers’ position is in favour of a

dialogue with the potential purchasers so as to define together the vehicles technical specifications that would respond to the directive requirements.

While manufacturers welcomed the debate on buses specifications to meet

the ‘operational lifetime costs’ limits, they are not in the position to analyse the process according to a specific energy technology such as CNG and/or hybrid as foreseen in the COMPRO project. They made a technology neutral approach an absolute requirement. Anyhow, as for the technologies analysed in COMPRO, they considered that hybrid has a greater potential compared to CNG, for which not much further development can be seen.

The second PMG meeting was organised in Bremen on 19 September 2008 at the occasion of the first gathering of the working group (potential) members (18

7

September 2008). The meeting provided for fruitful results as it was the first time that demand and supply side got together and exchanged views and expectations. In addition, the separate PMG meeting provided for useful inputs on how to deal with follower cities in the future to ensure their involvement and participation. In fact, the PMG members were asked to comment on the Working Group of follower cities meeting that took place the previous day. All in all, they provided

precious feedbacks on the event as well as recommendations on the way forward. PMG members shared the impression that participants to the Working Group meeting mainly expected advices on a technological choice between CNG and hybrid. To avoid the misunderstanding, PMG members suggested that: The objectives of COMPRO and

the role of cities in the Working Group should be better clarified. COMPRO is not a promoter of technologies but rather an opportunity for cities to analyse together the feasibility of a process leading at the end to a standard procedure for common procurement.

The offer to join the COMPRO analysis should detail the modus operandi of

the Working Group as well as the benefits that cities would get by participating.

Another important exercise was to present the benefits that common

procurement would provide to both local authorities and manufacturers: influence on the prices of the vehicles; estimation of the critical mass needed for a potential reduction in price; influence on the costs of the overall administrative procedures; enlargement of the market; convergence between demand and supply; etc..

The third PMG meeting took place in Bologna on 18 June 2009 and was organised jointly with the follower cities working group. This represented the occasion of a face-to-face between demand and the market, in particular suppliers. The round table discussion that took place between cities and other stakeholders allowed for the elaboration of two final questionnaires that were sent afterwards to follower cities on the one side and suppliers on the other side.

8

Quite fundamental for the final achievement of COMPRO results was the questionnaire sent to manufacturers and the feedback received from them afterwards.

The exercise is reported in chapter 6.

Leisure activities with the group

9

5. The different roles – contributions and expectations

As mentioned in the introduction, the PMG composition was meant to be heterogeneous and bring around the table different categories of stakeholders with diverse goals and constraints.

The main role of the PMG was then to discuss how the various perspectives could be reconciled in order to achieve overall consensus.

The following table summarises the main concerns corresponding to each category of PMG members:

Stakeholder group

Critical concerns/parameters

Automotive industry Investment costs Commitment on volumes Spread of production over time (avoiding peak

production loads followed by under utilisation of capacity)

Local authorities Purchase price Flexibility of purchase orders Safety Infrastructure investment costs (fuel supply) Local environmental impacts

PT operators Purchase price Maintenance costs Other investment costs (e.g. training)

National authorities Compliance with technical standards Global impacts on energy supply Contribution to environmental targets

NGOs, Interest Groups Local and global environmental impacts Quality of transport services Safety

EC Compliance with Directive Contribution to the attainment of energy and

environmental targets, including security of supply

While a special chapter is dedicated to the supply side (the automotive industry), the main roles and contributions received from the various stakeholders is presented here below: NGOs, Interest Groups

A major contribution to the PMG debates was offered by the Low Carbon Vehicles Partnership and their work undertaken in the UK. In response to the Powering Future Vehicles Strategy, published by the UK Government in 2003, which establishes targets for the procurement of low carbon buses, the LowCVP seeks to implement the demonstration and procurement of clean buses in sufficient volume to achieve these targets.

10

Among other tasks, the LowCVP aims at:

developing draft specifications of a low carbon bus appropriate for procurement. in cooperation with TfL.

obtaining supplier feedback on the draft specifications, contract length and the volumes required to establish economies of scale and reduce risk.

A list of specifications was already identified. This was considered as a good starting point for the PMG analysis to make the demand and supply interests converge at European level. The list was circulated among the PMG members in order to compile a check list on that basis. Polis and ICLEI have been invited to join the group in the course of the project. They represent cities and regions in Europe (and worldwide in the case of ICLEI) dealing with mobility and transport and green procurement. Their experience in the field and the large network of contacts helped the communication and dissemination of the project activities and further involvement of local authorities from around Europe. PT operators UITP expressed their support to the COMPRO project and the intention to report on the PMG discussions to their working groups, in particular the ones on buses, technology and environment. UITP regularly followed the PMG meetings (with different representatives) and supported the project in the phase of data collection on the state of the art of the local bus fleets at European level. ATM Milan attended two of the PMG meetings, expressing positive attitude to the COMPRO initiative. However, belonging to the category of large urban PT operators, made quite clear thee decision to proceed independently from a join procurement initiative standing its foreseen volume of acquisitions. National authorities The Italian Ministry of Environment acknowledged the relevance of COMPRO objectives to its policy of promoting the sustainable urban mobility, based upon a CIVITAS like strategy with the priority to the improvement of quality and quantity of the surface PT. Others A special note should be given to the regular participation of the European Investment Bank (EIB) to the COMPRO PMG meetings. This definitely represented an important element not only for the ‘institutional’ support given to the project, but also for the support offered to exploit the expertise acquired in the real market, under the ELENA1 programme.

1 European Local ENergy Assistance, a technical assistance facility established by the European Commission and the European Investment Bank to support cities' and regions' sustainable energy programs

11

6. The supply side

The producers involved at various stages of the project were: Volvo, EvobusMercedes, Heuliezbus, Bredamenarini and Solaris. They have been chosen to have a representativeness from small to big companies.

Several measures were taken to create the conditions of grouped as well as individual contacts and discussions. The responsiveness from the industry varied over time and as a final general remark of the COMPRO process it can be stated that:

The manufacturers deeply anchored on regional markets –the ones that follow the market and are not in the measure to influence it- actively participated in the COMPRO analysis from the beginning to the end. The main industries –the ones ‘making the market’- were definitely the less committed.

The involvement of the producers in the project has been fundamental for the elaboration of the ‘COMPRO zero base bus’, one of the main results achieved by COMPRO. To this end, a special questionnaire was elaborated and circulated to the automotive companies asking to reply to a series of questions and most of all providing comments on the common technical specifications agreed among the COMPRO partners (Nantes, Bremen, Bologna and Goteborg) together with other 7 follower cities (Craiova, Tirana, Stuttgart, Bochum, Angers and Prague).

Bologna

Nantes

Bremen

Goteborg

12

The questionnaire was presented as follows:

As some of you already know, the COMPRO project aims at analysing the conditions for a common procurement of clean buses at a European scale.

The COMPRO partners have now entered the last phase of the common procurement process, dedicated to the setting up of the joint procurement procedure, both from a juridical and technical point of view. As far as the technical part is concerned, the goal is agree over a “bus base zero” corresponding to a compromise over the requirements of all the cities involved in the project. The process of definition of this “bus base zero” is the following: 1st step: gathering specifications from the partners and the follower cities.

The COMPRO partners2 as well as the “follower cities”3 having shown an interest in joining the common procurement have filled a common table based on a UITP nomenclature (UITP tender structure recommendation, 2004). For each of the items they have indicated if an agreement could be easily found, if it was negotiable or not negotiable at all (prevented by national legislations, network specificities, cultural specificities, etc.). 2d step: analysis of the specifications

From this table, the COMPRO partners have extracted a common basis (“common specifications”) as well as options to be added to this common basis (the options corresponding to items where no compromise could be found): see document enclosed. 3d step: feasibility of the common bus

The next step of the analysis will be to determine if the common basis can correspond to an actual bus and if the options can be added to this basis independently according to the expectations of the network. In short: if this demand is feasible from the manufacturers’ point of view.

This is the reason why we are asking for your cooperation and vision on the enclosed document, elaborated between 11 European cities. Even though the document only addresses one aspect of the whole range of tender specifications, the manufacturers’ point of view seems essential.

In the first place can you identify specifications missing from our list, which you consider essential to take into account?

Do you think that these specifications are a relevant basis for all European countries?

Can you identify specific obstacles preventing you from answering to some of the options described?

In other words, will these specifications allow you to build a technical and financial proposal corresponding to a single bus type plus options or will the

2 Nantes, Bremen and Emilia Romagna region 3 These cities are the following: Göteborg, Craiova, Tirana, Stuttgart, Bochum, Angers and Prague. The process is however still open and more cities could join in.

13

common basis not be sufficient considering the options and lead to different bus types?

More generally speaking, could you share with us your feelings on the advantages / drawbacks you see, as a manufacturer, in this type of approach?

The feedbacks from the suppliers have been only marginal to the deep assessment of the supply side positions as requested by the 3 steps contents of questionnaire.

By large contributions have been restricted to the main characteristics of their products, either already on the market or in the development stage (see annex 1)

However it has been possible to summarize the perspectives between demand and supply, as reported below:

What can be expected from

clean buses joint procurement

Cities (or buyers) point of view

Bus industry providers, manufacturers point of view

A direct effect on prices (lower

prices)

+++ This seems to be the MAJOR expectation of the first working group participants

-- Forget it !! The gross margin on the bus construction is very low Quantities required to achieve a cost reduction are very high

Under the demand

pressure, the creation of new

products. A strong potential for innovation

± + Towards the dream of the “zero” consumption bus - Not so keen on financing R&D, on top of other costs.

± + As long as the joint procurement is not only an aggregate of individual requirements

Share and/or take

benefit of competencies and

skills

± + Benefit is true for smaller structures and cities -- not so true for the “flag holders” who would have to spend time, energy and money in putting in place adequate procurement structures

± Less retail selling but a potential for economies of scale

Standardisation

± + Better reliability of proven standards + a more open market - danger of uniformity, less space for city identification

+ + industrial stability, improved visibility on the market requirement + more open market - Too many standards would hinder competition. A preference for “requirements” rather than for “specifications”

14

7. Conclusions

COMPRO has been a participatory project that has involved different actors in a structured manner. Actors from outside the project have provided valuable inputs and concreteness to the analysis undertaken.

The creation of the Procurement Management Group involving various stakeholders -there included the manufacturers- allowed for a continuous exchange of views on the needs and requirements coming from the demand side between cities (the COMPRO group together with followers) and the ‘real world’ outside.

Such platform for discussion not formally established before, gave COMPRO an added value and allowed the analysis to keep in line with the options available on the real market.

All in all, the contacts regularly maintained with the ‘outside’ were very valuable for the project, contributing to the achievement of one of the strategic objective of the IEE programme, and surely there avoiding COMPRO to remain an exercise withdrawn into itself.

15

ANNEX 1 - Responses to the COMPRO questionnaire to manufacturers

Name of Supplier : HeuliezBus Bredamenarinibus Solaris EvoBus/Mercedes

Name of vehicle : GX327 (12 meters)

and GX427 (18 meters) Avancity Citaro G Blue-Tec Diesel electric Hybrid DEH

N° Chapter Expected functionality Option Comments Option

Comments Option

Comments Option Comments

1 Generality

The vehicle supplied is homologated according to European requirements and requirements specific to each European country. Yes

These elements should be used as a basis to fix a price for customised layouts and equipments.

For the time being for EURO with OBD2 (the new version) - Swiss type homologation. Others on the way. Will be soon probably european type homologation.

Regulation EU 2001/85 classe 1, plus homologation

demads in the single countries

2 General characteristics

Exterior overall height 3m40 maximum (air conditioning option included), interior net height 2m55 Yes

Interior net height may vary from 2300mm to 2400mm

Exterior 3,25m. Interior 2,37m

Citaro G DEH - exterior height = 3.325mm - interior height = 2.313mm


Length of base vehicle : 12m Yes 12 or 18 m 18m

Citaro DEH - length b. veh. = 17.940mm

16

5 General characteristics 18m Yes For articulated buses

12, 15, 20 or 24m buses can be purchased through another call for tender

In 2010 production of 12m hybrid. Other versions possible - but must be discussed separately

at the moment the Citaro G

DEH is only available as articulated bus in the length

of 17.940mm





Body structure: protected steel and/or stainless steal and/or aluminium Yes Stainless steel ok

Corrosion resistive steel with protective coating, aluminium sidewalls.

steel, protected by

cataphoretic anticorrossion painting


Maximum speed 80km/h, adjustable by the operator Yes ok OK.

possible


minimum acceleration on the first meters: 30 m in less than 8 sec. Yes It's better 8 to 10 sec.

Depends on load and slope, also selected program


Max acceleration allowed on drive: 1,5m/s² Yes ok

Depends on load and slope, also selected program


The manufacturer has to provide fuel consumption values according to the 3 SORT cycles. Yes ok

SORT1 - 56,9 l/100km SORT2 - 47,8 l/100km SORT3 - 43,2 l/100km


Capacity of tanks to be specified, 400 km minimum Yes

255 l (3 doors version) and 285 l (2 doors version) ok

OK. - different versions available - 250l standard (also available 350l or 450l)

280 Litres


Standard interior design to be specified in further design specifications Yes ok Yes

EvoBus colors


pneumatic brand to be specified Yes

Michelin, Goodyear, Bridgestone, Dunlop ok Wabco

all brands available

17


The engine company has to describe the biofuel compatibility tests done. Yes ok

7% - available, 20% is underway (not known when is going to be available)

diesel and biofuel

17 Accessibility 4 double doors for an 18m, front door at driver level Option ok OK.

standard on the Citaro G DEH




18 Accessibility The movement is in Yes Pneumatic ok OK. In option possible the movement out

?

19 Accessibility

Pre disposition for internal, external and driver post command button Yes ok, but not clear at all OK.

posiible

20 Accessibility

Position of the button for disabled pasengers at door 2, outside same than for other passengers, inside: 1 button at each space for disabled passengers Yes ok OK.

with the regulation EU 2001/85 the position of the botton for disabled people and other passengers is clearly described. The

position outside is not the same.

21 Accessibility

Step height is 320-350 for everybody, kneeling can be activated or not Yes ok

320/320/340/340 is the Solaris standard, kneeling standard (based on Wabco ECAS)

Citaro G DEH without kneeling activated

- front door = 320mm - centre doors = 340mm - back door = 340mm

22 Accessibility

2 dedicated spaces for wheelchairs near door 2 and 4 seat priority for disabled passengers close to doors (EC-EU/2001/85) Option

Basic version with 1 space for wheelchairs near door 2 and 4 PMR seats ok

Wheelchair place next to the door nr. 2. Four priority seats in the first car. 2nd wheelchar place as an option

the regulation EU 2001/85 demands only 1 space for

wheelchairs. 2 spaces are possible with

the consequence of reduced seatin capacity

23 Accessibility Emergency button at height 1m20 Yes ok Option

position to be defined

18

24 Accessibility option: manual ramp Option Option

ramp is mandatory to comply 2001/85 directive Option In standard

Option

25 Accessibility option: automatic ramp Option Option ok Option OK. Option

a ramp, mauel or automatic is compulsary with EU

2001/85 classe 1

26 Accessibility

option: installing or not a n internal or external button (if not, commanded by the driver) Option Option ok Option In standard

Option possible




27 Driver post

Adjustable driver's seat full option with a safety belt (brand and type to be specified) Option

Safety belt is an option ok ISRI 6500 or ISRI 6860

possible

28 Driver post

The driver's compartment layout and the dashboard sould follow the VDV standard. Option ok OK.

the Citaro drivers place follows almost the VDV

standard

29 Driver post Standard vehicles without ticketing equipments Option ok OK.

possible

30 Driver post

For the security glazing and the emergency button (to cut off the energy supply in case of emergency), the systems come from the regulation. Yes ok

According to industry standard, (emergency swtich, battery ground switch)

security glazing => OK

emergency button => not demandes in the EU

regulation 2001/85

31 Driver post Prewiring for communication equipments Option ok

Must be explained - how to prepare the prewiring for communication equipment (different types of prewiring possible)

there is space over the drivers place

32 Driver post Glass closure system activated by the driver Option Option not clear Option ???

Option possible

33 Driver post Cabin subdoor fitted for ticket selling Option Option ok Option Possible

Option possible

19

34 Passengers layout

Interior lightning level must be EC standard; adjustable with 3 settings: 0%, 50% or 100% Yes ok OK.

?

35 Passengers layout Simple glazing, tinted and impervious Yes ok OK.

standard on the Citaro G DEH





Wheelchair position in accordance with CEE 2001/85 directive i.e. back to the road with safety belts. Yes

better without safety belts, as per attached 7 par. 3.8.3 of the 2001/85 Directive OK.

yes, but safety belt is not

compulsary


Common floor covering in accordance with CEE 2001/85 directive with neutral grey colour and yelow for entry and exit (brand and type to be specified) Yes ok OK.

possible

38 Passengers layout Levels of noise emissions in accordance with the norms. Yes

Fitted with EEV engines. Superior than norms. ok

Lower to 77 dB (as planned for the new directive)

?

20


Maximum number of seated and standing passengers while transporting wheelchairs. Yes ok

Different layouts available, may be optimized for max seats or max total passangers. Max number of seated 52+1 (seat optimization). Max mount of passanger up to 176 (total passanger optimization - very simple bus specyfication, usualy the total amount in the range of 150).

37 seating and 103 standing passengers

45 seating and ? Standing passengers


Pre wiring for validation equipment close to each door. Option ok

Yes, must be checked what cabling

possible





2 "stop requested" buttons per door + electronic display (front) with audio signal and dashboard reminder Yes ok Possible

possible


Price of vehicle should be given without fittings, seats, handrails and bars and livery. No ok

May be prepared based on ealier agreement of specification - standard and options

?

21


Declarative lay-out to be given with average share between seated and standing spaces, medium range passenger seats and handrails (brand and type to be specified) and a white exterior livery without design. Option Option Option

These elements should be used as a basis to fix a price for customised layouts and equipments.

Option


Customisation of passenger seats with choice of material and colours. Option Option Option Yes

Option


Customisation of bars and handrails (shape and colours) Option Option Option

standard proposition form Solaris based on standard layout- other as an option

Option

46 Passengers layout Customisation of external painting Option

These elements should be used as a basis to fix a price for customised layouts and equipments. Option

These elements should be used as a basis to fix a price for customised layouts and equipments. Option

In quote - white paint, and for every customer painting as an option

Option

These elements should be used as a basis to fix a price for customised layouts and

equipments.




22

47 Environment

EEV-level emissions (pollution and noise) waiting for future Euro 6 Yes Base version ok

EURO5 OBD 2 now, EEV soon, EURO 6 will be in the future (as EURO 6 engines available). Apart from engine emission level also hybridisation of the driveline reduces emissions - but it can not be taken into account in homologation - as there is no rules about it.

zero emissions with the batteries

Euro5 norm with the diesel engine OM 924 LA

48 Environment

The issue of end of life recycling must be in conformity with international standards without any other specification Yes ok Yes

?

49 Environment

Manoeuvrability should allow a 24m circle between walls. Yes 23m - turning diameter

22.850mm

50 Safety

Doors to be equipped with sensitive edges, infrared sensors, light signals and acoustic signals. Door 1 is manual. Yes ok

Standard - sensitive edges and info from door ECU based on door potentiometers. As an option - optic sensors. Door acoustiq signal when closing

possible

51 Safety Driver alarm thanks to an emergency pedal. Option ok

An option - depends on system used by customer.

possible

52 Safety

Security cameras (3 to 6) in accordance with international standards. Option ok

Possible - as an opotion

possible




23

53 Safety

Position of emergency exits on doors and glazing left to manufacturer's choice in accordance with interior layout and international standards. Yes ok

Emergency exits as requested in directive

yes

54 Safety No safety belts Yes ok Yes, except for wheelchair place

yes

55 Safety Visual control of back doors by mirrors Yes ok

Possible - but preffered cameras for door monitoring

yes

56 Safety Visual control of doors by camera monitoring Option Option ok Option

In case of manual door closing - a must

Option possible

57 Safety Automatic extinguish system in the engine compartment Option Option ok Option Yes

Option possible

58 Safety

Acousting signal when reversing, can be inhibited in workshop Option ok

Available as an option, may be included in the standard version for Compro cities

possible

59 Technical characteristics

Automatic gearbox, clavier DNR (brand and transmission type to be specified)

Yes ok

No gearbox, in place of gearbox - drive unit from Allison

the Citaro G DEH doesn't need an automatic gear

box. The wheel hubs of the rear axle are fitted with electric motors, powered by the

batteries or the fuel cells on the top of the bus

compro common procurement of collective and public service ... · compro common procurement of...

Documents