West London Tram Proposal
 

Have just been reading through the West London tram proposal. While I
am all for upgrading our transport system, I can't help wondering
whether building tram systems is the best value for money. This will
cost £648 million - £49 million per mile. I wonder how that compares
with building the channel tunnel rail link (the part that is already
open - not the tunnel under East London) - does anyone know?

My point is that the biggest advantage to be had from trams is that they
will run on separated track from the rest of the traffic, and so not
be held up by other traffic and hence more reliable.

Couldn't that be done by making a completely separate bus lane,
separated from other traffic by kerbs? This would deliver the
reliability and speed benefits at a fraction of the cost, and allow
similar schemes to be rolled out to other parts of London as well.

West London Tram Proposal
 

"Stephen Richards" wrote in message
...
Have just been reading through the West London tram proposal. While I
am all for upgrading our transport system, I can't help wondering
whether building tram systems is the best value for money. This will
cost £648 million - £49 million per mile. I wonder how that compares
with building the channel tunnel rail link (the part that is already
open - not the tunnel under East London) - does anyone know?

My point is that the biggest advantage to be had from trams is that they
will run on separated track from the rest of the traffic, and so not
be held up by other traffic and hence more reliable.

Couldn't that be done by making a completely separate bus lane,
separated from other traffic by kerbs? This would deliver the
reliability and speed benefits at a fraction of the cost, and allow
similar schemes to be rolled out to other parts of London as well.

A bus lane occupies more road space and carries fewer passengers per driver.
There was previously a tram from Shepherds Bush to Uxbridge which was
withdrawn in 1951.

For a current thread on the subject see "Why Trams?" in uk.transport.

West London Tram Proposal
 

On Fri, 3 Sep 2004, Stephen Richards wrote:

Have just been reading through the West London tram proposal. While I
am all for upgrading our transport system, I can't help wondering
whether building tram systems is the best value for money.

I asked more or less the same question - and made the same comparison to
busways - a few months ago:

http://groups.google.co.uk/groups?hl...oogle%2BSearch

(the thread's called 'Trams' and started on 2004-03-30, if that's no good)

I didn't get any really show-stoppingly good answers, but there are a few
things which stand out:

- Although a tram _may_ be more expensive (in terms of pence per
passenger-mile or whatever), a tram will have a higher capacity than a bus
route over the same corridor, so if you're looking at high traffic levels,
a tram may be able to provide a service that a bus simply can't.

- The cost of a tram isn't necessarily as much greater than a bus as you
might think; good figures are hard to come by, but what there is seems to
be within a factor of 2 of each other.

- There are soft factors: a tram is a fixed route, and has imposing
infrastructure, so it seems more secure; people thus trust it more than a
bus, which is basically some random guy driving wherever he likes.

- I came across something else recently (in that Maidenhead proposal,
actually): light rail (and so presumably trams) gets much more modal shift
than buses. That is, people will switch from cars to light rail who won't
switch from cars to buses. Presumably, this is about the ride experience
(and trams do tend to be much smoother and more spacious), and the
aforementioned trust issue. If you want to relieve traffic congestion, you
need modal shift.

The thing which bothers me about all this is that while you can make a lot
of theoretical arguments about the performance of high-quality bus routes
(using large, modern vehicles, fitted out with good furniture, exclusively
using prioritised bus lanes and busways, with relatively infrequent and
posh-looking stops and well-trained drivers - basically, a bus that looks
like a tram; what Clive calls Rapid Transit on Rubber Tyres), nobody's
really tried it, so there isn't any hard data. However, should the
Greenwich Waterfront Transit plan go ahead as it stands, we'll have
exactly that on our own doorstep, and we'll find out at last!

tom

--
Crazy week so far, which at one point involved spewing down the inside of my jeans! -- D

West London Tram Proposal
 

"Stephen Richards" wrote in message
...

My point is that the biggest advantage to be had from
trams is that they will run on separated track from
the rest of the traffic, and so not
be held up by other traffic and hence more reliable.

Couldn't that be done by making a completely
separate bus lane, separated from other traffic
by kerbs? This would deliver the reliability and
speed benefits at a fraction of the cost, and allow
similar schemes to be rolled out to other parts of
London as well.

I would imagine that the cost of the rails is a small fraction of the
project cost, so your bus lanes would be nearly as expensive as the tram
line.

--
John Rowland - Spamtrapped
Transport Plans for the London Area, updated 2001
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Acro...69/tpftla.html
A man's vehicle is a symbol of his manhood.
That's why my vehicle's the Piccadilly Line -
It's the size of a county and it comes every two and a half minutes

West London Tram Proposal
 

The thing which bothers me about all this is that while you can make a lot
of theoretical arguments about the performance of high-quality bus routes
(using large, modern vehicles, fitted out with good furniture, exclusively
using prioritised bus lanes and busways, with relatively infrequent and
posh-looking stops and well-trained drivers - basically, a bus that looks
like a tram; what Clive calls Rapid Transit on Rubber Tyres), nobody's
really tried it, so there isn't any hard data. However, should the
Greenwich Waterfront Transit plan go ahead as it stands, we'll have
exactly that on our own doorstep, and we'll find out at last!

Ever come across the Silver Lie in Boston, MA?

West London Tram Proposal
 

In message , James
writes
The thing which bothers me about all this is that while you can make a lot
of theoretical arguments about the performance of high-quality bus routes
(using large, modern vehicles, fitted out with good furniture, exclusively
using prioritised bus lanes and busways, with relatively infrequent and
posh-looking stops and well-trained drivers - basically, a bus that looks
like a tram; what Clive calls Rapid Transit on Rubber Tyres), nobody's
really tried it, so there isn't any hard data. However, should the
Greenwich Waterfront Transit plan go ahead as it stands, we'll have
exactly that on our own doorstep, and we'll find out at last!

Ever come across the Silver Lie in Boston, MA?

Yes, and in my opinion is no better than your average bus service. It's
still subject to (quite severe) traffic delays and at the end of the day
is just a bus painted silver.
--
Steve Fitzgerald has now left the building.
You will find him in London's Docklands, E16, UK
(please use the reply to address for email)

West London Tram Proposal
 

On Fri, 3 Sep 2004 23:02:00 +0100, Tom Anderson
wrote:
The thing which bothers me about all this is that while you can make a lot
of theoretical arguments about the performance of high-quality bus routes
(using large, modern vehicles, fitted out with good furniture, exclusively
using prioritised bus lanes and busways, with relatively infrequent and
posh-looking stops and well-trained drivers - basically, a bus that looks
like a tram; what Clive calls Rapid Transit on Rubber Tyres), nobody's
really tried it, so there isn't any hard data.

There is one in Ottawa, with a dedicated busway from the city centre
to the out-of-town railway station (and beyond, but I didn't venture
further). The buses are trying to be trams, but the dedicated roads
are wider than a tramway would be. They run on normal roads in the
centre.

There is also a short light-rail-esque DMU-operated branch railway
into the suburbs from a not-quite-interchange with the buses outside
the city centre. All a bit odd.

In France there are some guided trolleybus things. One had a lot of
teething problems, but it is supposedly now fixed.
--
Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK

West London Tram Proposal
 

The thing which bothers me about all this is that while you can make a lot
of theoretical arguments about the performance of high-quality bus routes
(using large, modern vehicles, fitted out with good furniture, exclusively
using prioritised bus lanes and busways, with relatively infrequent and
posh-looking stops and well-trained drivers - basically, a bus that looks
like a tram; what Clive calls Rapid Transit on Rubber Tyres), nobody's
really tried it, so there isn't any hard data.

There is one in Ottawa, with a dedicated busway from the city centre
to the out-of-town railway station (and beyond, but I didn't venture
further). The buses are trying to be trams, but the dedicated roads
are wider than a tramway would be. They run on normal roads in the
centre.

There's one in the UK as well - in Runcorn. Sadly, it was never
allowed to develop into what it could have been, with off-bus
ticketing, high-quality vehicles and more railway-station-like stops,
and is now more like a traditional bus service that happens to use a
large proportion of dedicated "track".

Neil

--
Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK
To e-mail use neil at the above domain

West London Tram Proposal
 

Steve Fitzgerald ] wrote:
James:

Ever come across the Silver Lie in Boston, MA?

Yes, and in my opinion [...] at the end of the day
is just a bus painted silver.

So James' typo describes it quite well? ;-)

.... Martin

West London Tram Proposal
 

"Arthur Figgis" ] wrote in message
...
On Fri, 3 Sep 2004 23:02:00 +0100, Tom Anderson
wrote:
In France there are some guided trolleybus things. One had a lot of
teething problems, but it is supposedly now fixed.
--
Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK

You would be referring to Nancy where the vehicles look like very modern
multiple-unit trams but have pneumatic tyres, trolleybus poles and a guiding
slot in the road surface. Looked like a very good idea to me, incorporating
some of the best features of all systems but capable of ascending steep
gradients which was why they chose it.
Cheerz,
Baz

West London Tram Proposal
 

"Stephen Richards" wrote in message
...

Couldn't that be done by making a completely separate bus lane,
separated from other traffic by kerbs? This would deliver the
reliability and speed benefits at a fraction of the cost, and allow
similar schemes to be rolled out to other parts of London as well.

Living in a town where they are setting up just such a system now, I
wouldn't recommend it.

Crawley has been in a state of utter chaos for three years now with the set
up of a guided bus system (Fastway) and it looks like going on for at least
another three.

Once fully operational it will serve a minute fraction of the population at
a huge cost.

Not nice if you live here.

West London Tram Proposal
 

"Henry" wrote in message
...

Crawley has been in a state of utter chaos for three years
now with the set up of a guided bus system (Fastway)
and it looks like going on for at least another three.

Once fully operational it will serve a minute fraction
of the population at a huge cost.

Since its purpose is to get workers to Gatwick reliably, and the majority of
the population in that part of the world work in Gatwick, that is hardly a
minute fraction of the population.

--
John Rowland - Spamtrapped
Transport Plans for the London Area, updated 2001
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Acro...69/tpftla.html
A man's vehicle is a symbol of his manhood.
That's why my vehicle's the Piccadilly Line -
It's the size of a county and it comes every two and a half minutes

West London Tram Proposal
 

"John Rowland" wrote in message
...
"Henry" wrote in message
...

Crawley has been in a state of utter chaos for three years
now with the set up of a guided bus system (Fastway)
and it looks like going on for at least another three.

Once fully operational it will serve a minute fraction
of the population at a huge cost.

Since its purpose is to get workers to Gatwick reliably, and the majority
of
the population in that part of the world work in Gatwick, that is hardly a
minute fraction of the population.


That's the nice theory.

In practice it starts in one estate (almost as far from Gatwick as you can
get), passes through another and the rest is over busy roads with no local
population.

Everyone else is stuck with 6 years of chaos and when its finished narrower
roads than they started out with.

West London Tram Proposal
 

In article , John Rowland
writes
I would imagine that the cost of the rails is a small fraction of the
project cost, so your bus lanes would be nearly as expensive as the tram
line.

The cost of the rails themselves might be quite low, but there's a major
cost in diverting all services (phone, gas, water, etc.) from out of the
line of route. A bus lane doesn't have this problem, because you just
divert the buses into traffic when you need to dig up the lane.

--
Clive D.W. Feather | Home:
Tel: +44 20 8495 6138 (work) | Web: http://www.davros.org
Fax: +44 870 051 9937 | Work:
Please reply to the Reply-To address, which is:

West London Tram Proposal
 

In article , Arthur Figgis
] writes
There is one in Ottawa, with a dedicated busway from the city centre
to the out-of-town railway station (and beyond, but I didn't venture
further).

I used it the other day to get to and from the airport. And, yes, I was
quite impressed by the operation - it didn't have any traffic problems
and it was run like a separate tramway. The buses are multi-part artics.

The service was well patronised for much of its length when I used it
and it was cheap.

The buses are trying to be trams, but the dedicated roads
are wider than a tramway would be. They run on normal roads in the
centre.

This is very true. There's room for one vehicle to pass another in each
direction (it's a dual carriageway).

--
Clive D.W. Feather | Home:
Tel: +44 20 8495 6138 (work) | Web: http://www.davros.org
Fax: +44 870 051 9937 | Work:
Please reply to the Reply-To address, which is:

West London Tram Proposal
 

In article ,
Tom Anderson writes
basically, a bus that looks
like a tram; what Clive calls Rapid Transit on Rubber Tyres),

Two notes:

(1) The term RToRT refers to a *trolleybus* that behaves like a tram.
(2) It's not my term originally - I picked it up at a TfL presentation.

--
Clive D.W. Feather | Home:
Tel: +44 20 8495 6138 (work) | Web: http://www.davros.org
Fax: +44 870 051 9937 | Work:
Please reply to the Reply-To address, which is:

West London Tram Proposal
 

On Mon, 6 Sep 2004, Clive D. W. Feather wrote:

In article ,
Tom Anderson writes

basically, a bus that looks
like a tram; what Clive calls Rapid Transit on Rubber Tyres),

Two notes:

(1) The term RToRT refers to a *trolleybus* that behaves like a tram.
(2) It's not my term originally - I picked it up at a TfL presentation.

Apologies.

I shall coin the almost indistinguishable term RT-RT to refer to
super-buses, and then hope that someone in the relevant ministry gets them
confused with AT-ATs, and that all our congestion problems are thereby
solved.

tom

--
3118110161 Pies

West London Tram Proposal
 

In article ,
Tom Anderson wrote:

Apologies.

I shall coin the almost indistinguishable term RT-RT to refer to
super-buses,

Is that like two RTs with a hinge connecting them ?

and then hope that someone in the relevant ministry gets them
confused with AT-ATs, and that all our congestion problems are thereby
solved.

I didn't know AT-ATs had open rear platforms ;-)

Nick
--
"And we will be restoring neurotypicality just as soon as we are sure
what is normal anyway. Thank you". -- not quite DNA

West London Tram Proposal
 

On Mon, 6 Sep 2004 18:35:01 +0100, Tom Anderson
wrote:

I shall coin the almost indistinguishable term RT-RT to refer to
super-buses, and then hope that someone in the relevant ministry gets them
confused with AT-ATs, and that all our congestion problems are thereby
solved.

:)

I think the term used for such a bus system (certainly in the US) is
BRT, or Bus(-based) Rapid Transit.

Neil

--
Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK
To e-mail use neil at the above domain

West London Tram Proposal
 

On Mon, 6 Sep 2004, Nick Leverton wrote:

In article ,
Tom Anderson wrote:

I shall coin the almost indistinguishable term RT-RT to refer to
super-buses, and then hope that someone in the relevant ministry gets
them confused with AT-ATs, and that all our congestion problems are
thereby solved.

I didn't know AT-ATs had open rear platforms ;-)

:)

However, they do have quite spacious side doors, and, as indicated in this
TfL publicity shot, they have a unique new method of dropping off
passengers while on the move:

http://urchin.earth.li/~twic/lt-at-at.jpg

Initial tests of the Mercedes-Benz AT-AT G, however, have been less than
successful:

http://urchin.earth.li/~twic/lt-at-at-g.jpg

tom

--
And he talked about the future, underneath a giant sphere

West London Tram Proposal
 

"Clive D. W. Feather" wrote in message ...
In article ,
Tom Anderson writes
basically, a bus that looks
like a tram; what Clive calls Rapid Transit on Rubber Tyres),

Two notes:

(1) The term RToRT refers to a *trolleybus* that behaves like a tram.
(2) It's not my term originally - I picked it up at a TfL presentation.

Seems to me like some of the people involved in transport planning need to
look up the definition of "rapid" in the dictionary. Trolleybuses may be
many things but rapid isn't one of them.

B2003

West London Tram Proposal
 

"Henry" wrote in message ...
"Stephen Richards" wrote in message
...

Couldn't that be done by making a completely separate bus lane,
separated from other traffic by kerbs? This would deliver the
reliability and speed benefits at a fraction of the cost, and allow
similar schemes to be rolled out to other parts of London as well.

Living in a town where they are setting up just such a system now, I
wouldn't recommend it.

Crawley has been in a state of utter chaos for three years now with the set
up of a guided bus system (Fastway) and it looks like going on for at least
another three.

Once fully operational it will serve a minute fraction of the population at
a huge cost.

Not nice if you live here.

I wish someone could explain the attraction of a guided busway. As far as I can
see they have no saving graces whatsoever as they have the disadvantages of
both buses and trams and the advantages of neither.

B2003

West London Tram Proposal
 

In article ,
Tom Anderson wrote:
However, they do have quite spacious side doors, and, as indicated in this
TfL publicity shot, they have a unique new method of dropping off
passengers while on the move:

http://urchin.earth.li/~twic/lt-at-at.jpg

Initial tests of the Mercedes-Benz AT-AT G, however, have been less than
successful:

http://urchin.earth.li/~twic/lt-at-at-g.jpg

*giggle* :-)

Nick
--
"And we will be restoring neurotypicality just as soon as we are sure
what is normal anyway. Thank you". -- not quite DNA

West London Tram Proposal
 

"Boltar" wrote in message
om...
Major snip

Seems to me like some of the people involved in transport planning need to
look up the definition of "rapid" in the dictionary. Trolleybuses may be
many things but rapid isn't one of them.

B2003

What are your experiences which back up that statement ? The old London
trolleybuses were very quick indeed with extremely rapid acceleration and if
outright speed had been a factor in their design I don't see why they
shouldn't have been fast too.
Baz

West London Tram Proposal
 

"Marratxi" wrote in message ...
"Boltar" wrote in message
om...
Major snip

Seems to me like some of the people involved in transport planning need to
look up the definition of "rapid" in the dictionary. Trolleybuses may be
many things but rapid isn't one of them.

B2003

What are your experiences which back up that statement ? The old London
trolleybuses were very quick indeed with extremely rapid acceleration and if
outright speed had been a factor in their design I don't see why they
shouldn't have been fast too.
Baz

I was thinking more about the fact that like ordinary buses they get stuck
in traffic. But talking about shear speed they may have good acceleration
but most of the the old ones topped out at about 40 or 50mph and would
probably have dewired before they got to that speed anyway.

B2003

West London Tram Proposal
 

Boltar wrote:
"Marratxi" wrote in
message ...
"Boltar" wrote in message
om...
Major snip

Seems to me like some of the people involved in transport planning
need to
look up the definition of "rapid" in the dictionary. Trolleybuses
may be
many things but rapid isn't one of them.

B2003

What are your experiences which back up that statement ? The old
London
trolleybuses were very quick indeed with extremely rapid
acceleration and if
outright speed had been a factor in their design I don't see why they
shouldn't have been fast too.
Baz

I was thinking more about the fact that like ordinary buses they get
stuck
in traffic. But talking about shear speed they may have good
acceleration
but most of the the old ones topped out at about 40 or 50mph and would
probably have dewired before they got to that speed anyway.


Given that trolleybuses are primarily an urban vehicle how high a speed
would expect them to reach?

Strange that I've never hear shearing force refered to as speed before. It's
always been phrased in terms of the pressure required.

West London Tram Proposal
 

"Boltar" wrote in message
om...

I was thinking more about the fact that like ordinary buses they get stuck
in traffic. But talking about shear speed they may have good acceleration
but most of the the old ones topped out at about 40 or 50mph and would
probably have dewired before they got to that speed anyway.

The Mexborough and Swinton trolleys got up to quite a high speed on their
rural sections. We certainly went over 40 mph on the farewell tour in 1961.
See http://www.btinternet.com/~terry.harper/ms1961.htm for pictures of the
vehicle involved. Stayed on the wires most impressively:-)
--
Terry Harper, Web Co-ordinator, The Omnibus Society
75th Anniversary 2004, see http://www.omnibussoc.org/75th.htm
E-mail:
URL: http://www.terry.harper.btinternet.co.uk/

West London Tram Proposal
 

"Piccadilly Pilot" wrote in message ...
Boltar wrote:
"Marratxi" wrote in
message ...
"Boltar" wrote in message
om...
Major snip

Seems to me like some of the people involved in transport planning
need to
look up the definition of "rapid" in the dictionary. Trolleybuses
may be
many things but rapid isn't one of them.

B2003

What are your experiences which back up that statement ? The old
London
trolleybuses were very quick indeed with extremely rapid
acceleration and if
outright speed had been a factor in their design I don't see why they
shouldn't have been fast too.
Baz

I was thinking more about the fact that like ordinary buses they get
stuck
in traffic. But talking about shear speed they may have good
acceleration
but most of the the old ones topped out at about 40 or 50mph and would
probably have dewired before they got to that speed anyway.


Given that trolleybuses are primarily an urban vehicle how high a speed
would expect them to reach?

Well if they don't go fast then they're not "rapid" are they which was the
whole point of this mini thread. I assume you know the meaning of the word.


Strange that I've never hear shearing force refered to as speed before. It's
always been phrased in terms of the pressure required.

You should be a stand up, you'd have them rolling in the aisles. If you're
going to play spot the typo I suggest you look to your own posts first, they're
not exactly going to win any english prizes.

B2003

West London Tram Proposal
 

Boltar wrote:
"Piccadilly Pilot" wrote in message
...
Boltar wrote:
"Marratxi" wrote in
message ...
"Boltar" wrote in message
om...
Major snip

Seems to me like some of the people involved in transport planning
need to
look up the definition of "rapid" in the dictionary. Trolleybuses
may be
many things but rapid isn't one of them.

B2003

What are your experiences which back up that statement ? The old
London
trolleybuses were very quick indeed with extremely rapid
acceleration and if
outright speed had been a factor in their design I don't see why
they
shouldn't have been fast too.
Baz

I was thinking more about the fact that like ordinary buses they get
stuck
in traffic. But talking about shear speed they may have good
acceleration
but most of the the old ones topped out at about 40 or 50mph and
would
probably have dewired before they got to that speed anyway.


Given that trolleybuses are primarily an urban vehicle how high a
speed
would expect them to reach?

Well if they don't go fast then they're not "rapid" are they which
was the
whole point of this mini thread. I assume you know the meaning of the
word.


Strange that I've never hear shearing force refered to as speed
before. It's
always been phrased in terms of the pressure required.

You should be a stand up, you'd have them rolling in the aisles. If
you're
going to play spot the typo I suggest you look to your own posts
first, they're
not exactly going to win any english prizes.


I'm beginning to understnad.