Roman Duplak: Why Smaller Purpose-Built Buses Can Fill a Major Gap in Transit
Updated: Sep 8
I spoke with Roman Duplak, Vice President, America Sales at Damera, about the company’s growing role in the North American bus market and the opportunity for smaller, purpose-built transit vehicles. We discussed Damera’s electric minibus portfolio, Roman’s path from New Flyer and the broader transportation supply chain into his current role, changing U.S. transit-market conditions, the differences between traditional cutaways and purpose-built buses, and where autonomous and AI-enabled mobility could have the greatest practical impact.
Tell me about Damera, its history, what the company does today, and the markets and customers you serve.
For the U.S. market, we provide two configurations of battery-electric buses. The first is the E-Jest, which is available in one-wheelchair and two-wheelchair configurations. The second is the new Vero, which we recently finished designing.
The Vero is about five feet longer than the E-Jest and has seating capacity of up to about 20 passengers, compared with roughly 12 for the E-Jest.
The first customer for the Vero is the TTC. Five units will be delivered for their pilot project next year.
Our American customers are very interested in seeing both the E-Jest and particularly the new Vero. These are exciting times for us.
Tell me about your own journey to becoming Vice President of Sales at Damera and how your experience has shaped the way you look at the bus and transit market.
It was a unique path.
Previously, I was Director of Business Development at AAA Canada. I was working on a large contract for AAA Canada to become a prime contractor providing pre-delivery inspection and related services for New Flyer Industries on behalf of customers in the Greater Toronto Area, primarily TTC.
New Flyer needed support addressing snag-list items and retrofit work on buses that had already been delivered. The idea was to create an extended arm that could resolve those issues, return the buses to TTC for sign-off, and reduce the delays and penalties associated with that work.
AAA Canada could not do it alone because it did not have enough 310T-licensed technicians. I started identifying companies in the Greater Toronto Area that had the technicians and experience required to repair transit buses.
That eventually led me to MBCT (Mississauga Bus, Coach, and Truck Repair Ltd.), which is part of the Damera group of companies. I reached out to Roger, and there was an immediate connection.
Once the prime contract with New Flyer was signed, we put the agreement with MBCT in place. I helped broker the relationship, set up the operations, and interview people for the new positions that were created.
That process took more than a year to establish properly. During that time, the owners of MBCT got to know me very well. In many ways, it became a long interview process without any of us realizing it at the beginning. Eventually I was asked to join Damera.
How did moving from larger transit buses into the minibus market change your view of the industry?
Earlier in my career, I worked for New Flyer Industries selling 40-foot and 60-foot buses across different propulsion types.
At the time, I never really thought about the fact that some of those buses do not get filled. There are also service areas and applications such as paratransit, on-demand service, and first-mile/last-mile transportation that are not always properly served by the larger OEM bus suppliers.
Damera opened my eyes to that.
It helped me understand that there is a niche market that is not necessarily competing directly with the traditional 40-foot and 60-foot transit-bus market.
There are applications where agencies may only need to carry 20 or 30 passengers or fewer, but they still want a vehicle that is actually designed as a bus.
That is important because many smaller vehicles in this market are cutaways or vans originally designed for commercial trucking or other applications.
What we offer is a purpose-built bus designed for public transportation with the kind of life expectancy you would associate with a traditional heavy-duty transit bus.
That is where I think Damera has a real opportunity.
Why do you think purpose-built electric minibuses make sense when there are already cutaways and other smaller transit vehicles available?
There are electric cutaways in the market, but the underlying chassis was not necessarily developed to be the most efficient structure for that application. That includes weight efficiency, but it also includes life expectancy.
There are very few smaller bus suppliers offering vehicles designed around a 12- to 15-year useful life in the same way agencies would expect from a traditional heavy-duty transit bus.
That creates an opportunity.
If an agency is operating a route where a 40-foot bus is not needed, or it is serving paratransit, first-mile/last-mile or on-demand applications, there should be a purpose-built product designed for that job rather than adapting a vehicle that was originally built for something else.
That is the market we are focused on.
What is the biggest change you see happening in the North American bus market today?
The biggest change is the amount of uncertainty that has entered the market, particularly in the United States.
Transit agencies had become accustomed to a relatively predictable environment around federal funding and propulsion policy. That environment has changed.
The overall availability of funding has not disappeared, but the way some of it is being allocated and the expectations around how agencies use it have changed.
That is affecting transit agencies, but it is also affecting markets such as university transportation.
Universities are an important market for us. Even very wealthy institutions such as Harvard and Yale rely on federal funding for parts of their operations, and some of their plans around battery-electric transportation have slowed or been postponed.
The broader result is that many organizations are reassessing their plans.
I actually think there is value in allowing the entity responsible for the transportation service to determine which propulsion technology is the most cost-effective and clean-air-effective solution for its particular application.
How should bus manufacturers work with transit agencies during a period of that much uncertainty?
You have to take more of a consultative approach.
Instead of simply saying, "Here is the bus I want to sell you," you have to ask the customer where they are in their planning.
Have they completed their evaluation? Have they determined which propulsion they want? What information are they still missing? What do they need in order to complete that process?
That is where a supplier can actually help, and you also have to be patient.
There has been a significant slowdown because agencies and other operators are still evaluating how they should spend their money and how they should proceed.
They may have funding available, but that does not necessarily mean they are ready to make a procurement decision.
How do you see the zero-emission bus markets in Canada and the United States differing today?
The pace of deployment in the U.S. has slowed.
There is less emphasis on requiring every organization to follow one particular zero-emission pathway, and more emphasis on allowing individual entities to determine which propulsion technology makes the most sense for their operation.
That changes the market.
Instead of beginning with the assumption that a particular propulsion technology has already been selected, operators have more reason to evaluate the actual application, cost and operational requirements before making that decision.
That means manufacturers also have to be more flexible in how they approach the customer.
Where do you see AI having the greatest practical impact on buses, fleet operations and the broader transit market?
The first area is autonomous buses.
AI is fundamental to making autonomous bus capability work and eventually making it a cost-effective mobility solution.
The second area is using AI with human-driven buses in on-demand applications.
Think about an Uber-style model. If ten people request trips at the same time, AI can determine the most efficient sequence for picking them up and the most efficient route.
That is where I see a lot of practical value: using AI to make on-demand transportation more efficient rather than simply running a fixed route regardless of where the actual demand is.
Which organizations are already moving in that direction?
Argo is one of our partners in Canada, and they are expanding into the U.S. They are working on the on-demand side of the market.
For autonomous applications, Beep is another organization we work with.
Those are two examples of companies already moving toward the kinds of AI-enabled and autonomous transportation models I expect to become increasingly important.
I’d like to thank Roman for taking the time to share his perspective. His experience across bus manufacturing, fleet support and now the purpose-built minibus market gives him a uniquely practical view of where transit is heading.
-Adam
Comments