Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Yes no doubt there was a stuff up but I wouldnt say its 100% engineers fault. They are contracted/paid to come up with a design that meets the budget of the project. Engineering Dept can show several designs at different costs and risks associated but at the end whoever approved and accepted the risk is at fault.

We dont know.. perhaps at the start of the project they believed the budget was enough to cover. Once you start doing the final design/costing, thats where it adds up and could have blown over budget. With investors promised a return & capital locked, cost would have been cut to squeeze within budget. Most likely the order was given to cut costs, changes were rushed, materials swapped, support beams deleted etc to deliver something which falls close to budget.

If the project manager was guaranteed that it wouldnt fail then I would agree that the Engineering/design team was negligent. If there was a risk, thats where management decide to ask for money or accept the risk...

In the end, its nothing new. Many large ferris wheels built around the world. We know it can be built & material composition, structure & loading isnt complex,

The buck stops with how much money they are willing to spend on building one and whoever thought they can build a ferris wheel for that amount of money in Australia.

Also well aware of IRR, NPV etc when it comes down to capital investment & approval.

Discussion was not tailored towards Chartered Accountants :cheers:

S'all good Pat. Just some friendly banter. At the end of the day we can only speculate. :cheers:

and My ki,

Some manager made the call that we can make a system cheaper than just buying one made.

However after the final details came through, thats where the same manager realised he greatly underquoted.

Nothing to do with Engineering in my opinion. Purely money saving driven, instead of opting for a longer payback period with an existing overseas system.

Don't even bring Gov't Funded stuff into discussion on private enterprise.

They are two ends of the field.

Myki was NOT done with money saving in mind.

Add to the fact Keane/Kamco is American owned... Yet the other tender was MTR...

I mean MTR have the current fking contract! Why would they give it to Kamco to do the ticketing system when MTR have a tried and proven system.

Gov't projects are always under quoted on purpose to snap the contract and then bump costs during it.

However before myki even went live it was something in the order of 60% OVER BUDGET... Since it's gone live, fck knows, it's probably closer to 100% blowout.

It's just absurd bureaucracy at it's best. Do not confuse this for one second with private enterprise. There is nowhere near the abuse that Gov't stuff endures. I mean they even had to go to a probity audit on the tender FFS.

Yes they "ruled" it was fair, but who knows what was really going on.

Yes cause we've all heard of that obscure artist before.

Edit: have one of his songs tagged in Shazam, dammit.

i highly doubt anyone with regular play on nova could be considered obscure ;)

Dubstep is also terrible

this

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • It would be well worth deciding where you want to go and what you care about. Reliability of everything in a 34 drops MASSIVELY above the 300kw mark. Keeping everything going great at beyond that value will cost ten times the $. Clutches become shit, gearboxes (and engines/bottom ends) become consumable, traction becomes crap. The good news is looking legalish/actually being legal is slighly under the 300kw mark. I would make the assumption you want to ditch the stock plenum too and want to go a front facing unit of some description due to the cross flow. Do the bends on a return flow hurt? Not really. A couple of bends do make a difference but not nearly as much in a forced induction situation. Add 1psi of boost to overcome it. Nobody has ever gone and done a track session monitoring IAT then done a different session on a different intercooler and monitored IAT to see the difference here. All of the benefits here are likely in the "My engine is a forged consumable that I drive once a year because it needs a rebuild every year which takes 9 months of the year to complete" territory. It would be well worth deciding where you want to go and what you care about with this car.
    • By "reverse flow", do you mean "return flow"? Being the IC having a return pipe back behind the bumper reo, or similar? If so... I am currently making ~250 rwkW on a Neo at ~17-18 psi. With a return flow. There's nothing to indicate that it is costing me a lot of power at this level, and I would be surprised if I could not push it harder. True, I have not measured pressure drop across it or IAT changes, but the car does not seem upset about it in any way. I won't be bothering to look into it unless it starts giving trouble or doesn't respond to boost increases when I next put it on the dyno. FWIW, it was tuned with the boost controller off, so achieving ~15-16 psi on the wastegate spring alone, and it is noticeably quicker with the boost controller on and yielding a couple of extra pounds. Hence why I think it is doing OK. So, no, I would not arbitrarily say that return flows are restrictive. Yes, they are certainly restrictive if you're aiming for higher power levels. But I also think that the happy place for a street car is <300 rwkW anyway, so I'm not going to be aiming for power levels that would require me to change the inlet pipework. My car looks very stock, even though everything is different. The turbo and inlet pipes all look stock and run in the stock locations, The airbox looks stock (apart from the inlet being opened up). The turbo looks stock, because it's in the stock location, is the stock housings and can't really be seen anyway. It makes enough power to be good to drive, but won't raise eyebrows if I ever f**k up enough for the cops to lift the bonnet.
    • There is a guy who said he can weld me piping without having to cut chassis, maybe I do that ? Or do I just go reverse flow but isn’t reverse flow very limited once again? 
    • I haven’t yet cut the chassis, maybe I switch to a reverse flow. I’ve got the Intercooler mounted as I already had it but not cut yet. Might have to speak to an engineer 
    • Yes that’s another issue, I always have a front mount, plus will be turbo plus intake will big hasstle. I’ve been told if it looks stock they’re fine with it by a couple others who have done it ahahaha.    I know @Kinkstaah said the stock gtt airbox is limiting but I might just have to do that to avoid a defect so it atleast looks legit. Or an enclosed pod so it’s hidden away and feed air from the snorkel and below Intercooler holes like kinstaah mentioned. Hmm what to do 
×
×
  • Create New...