Discussion:
Borders Railway (Edinburgh - Tweedbank) opening Sun 6 Sep 2015
(too old to reply)
David
2015-08-28 13:06:47 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Hi,

Is there anybody "in the know" who knows how busy the reopened Borders
Railway is likely to be on the opening day on Sunday 6 September?

A group of us are planning on heading out on the opening day for a trip
to Galashiels and a wee walk in the countryside. We're just a bit
concerned that the trains are perhaps likely to be extremely busy,
perhaps with standing room only (there will be some small children in
our group).

I am sure that the first train will be absolutely jam-packed (as the
first Edinburgh Tram was), but I suspect that even after that, we'll be
far from the only people who are thinking of taking a wee train trip
into the countryside, and so perhaps all of the trains might be very
busy?

As the opening day is a Sunday, there is a more limited (only hourly)
service, which reduces capacity, but I wonder whether ScotRail are
predicting that there might be a lot of visitors on the first day and
will be operating trains of the maximum length, just in case? Does
anybody know what the platform length of the stations on the Borders
Railway stations is, is it 4-coach, 6-coach? (Surely not only 2-car?) I
know that Tweedbank is extra-long to accommodate tourist trains, but I
would hope that the other stations are a reasonable length to
accommodate peak services and potential for additional growth.


Hopefully the weather will be good on the opening day, and hopefully
the railway will be a significant factor in improving the quality of
life for Borders towns and bringing additional tourist and other money
into a part of the map that has been poorly accessible 'blank
territory' for too long..


David.
DerekF
2015-08-29 20:52:42 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by David
Hi,
Is there anybody "in the know" who knows how busy the reopened Borders
Railway is likely to be on the opening day on Sunday 6 September?
A group of us are planning on heading out on the opening day for a trip
to Galashiels and a wee walk in the countryside. We're just a bit
concerned that the trains are perhaps likely to be extremely busy,
perhaps with standing room only (there will be some small children in
our group).
I am sure that the first train will be absolutely jam-packed (as the
first Edinburgh Tram was), but I suspect that even after that, we'll be
far from the only people who are thinking of taking a wee train trip
into the countryside, and so perhaps all of the trains might be very busy?
As the opening day is a Sunday, there is a more limited (only hourly)
service, which reduces capacity, but I wonder whether ScotRail are
predicting that there might be a lot of visitors on the first day and
will be operating trains of the maximum length, just in case? Does
anybody know what the platform length of the stations on the Borders
Railway stations is, is it 4-coach, 6-coach? (Surely not only 2-car?) I
know that Tweedbank is extra-long to accommodate tourist trains, but I
would hope that the other stations are a reasonable length to
accommodate peak services and potential for additional growth.
Hopefully the weather will be good on the opening day, and hopefully the
railway will be a significant factor in improving the quality of life
for Borders towns and bringing additional tourist and other money into a
part of the map that has been poorly accessible 'blank territory' for
too long..
David.
Trainspotters amd freaks will be coming from around the country for the
first day.
Derek
Geoff Pearson
2015-08-30 11:56:55 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by David
Hi,
Is there anybody "in the know" who knows how busy the reopened Borders
Railway is likely to be on the opening day on Sunday 6 September?
A group of us are planning on heading out on the opening day for a trip
to Galashiels and a wee walk in the countryside. We're just a bit
concerned that the trains are perhaps likely to be extremely busy,
perhaps with standing room only (there will be some small children in
our group).
I am sure that the first train will be absolutely jam-packed (as the
first Edinburgh Tram was), but I suspect that even after that, we'll be
far from the only people who are thinking of taking a wee train trip
into the countryside, and so perhaps all of the trains might be very busy?
As the opening day is a Sunday, there is a more limited (only hourly)
service, which reduces capacity, but I wonder whether ScotRail are
predicting that there might be a lot of visitors on the first day and
will be operating trains of the maximum length, just in case? Does
anybody know what the platform length of the stations on the Borders
Railway stations is, is it 4-coach, 6-coach? (Surely not only 2-car?) I
know that Tweedbank is extra-long to accommodate tourist trains, but I
would hope that the other stations are a reasonable length to
accommodate peak services and potential for additional growth.
Hopefully the weather will be good on the opening day, and hopefully the
railway will be a significant factor in improving the quality of life
for Borders towns and bringing additional tourist and other money into a
part of the map that has been poorly accessible 'blank territory' for
too long..
David.
Trainspotters amd freaks will be coming from around the country for the
first day.
Derek

It is hard to believe there will be much traffic once the initial flush is
over. The line was built to placate the LibDems in the first coalition -
now a dying breed. Initially it was planned to cost £65 million.

The trams lost £450k in the first year even with lots of curious people.
Does anyone make regular use of the tram to do something a bus would not do?
David
2015-08-31 18:15:25 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Geoff Pearson
It is hard to believe there will be much traffic once the initial flush
is> over. The line was built to placate the LibDems in the first
coalition -> now a dying breed. Initially it was planned to cost £65
million.
I disagree. Given the bad traffic congestion in Edinburgh, I imagine
the section as far as the city boundary, say Gorebridge, will be busy
all day long. South of Gorebridge is likely to be more dominated by
peak flow journeys. I will be making a trip in six weeks' time so will
report on that.
I suspect that the main use of the line will be commuter journeys,
along with some leisure trips to/from the Borders at weekends and
to/from Edinburgh in the evenings.

But with only a 30-minute service frequency, I'm not sure how well-used
the line might be used during the weekday daytime off-peak.

To be a useful park and ride or metro-like service, it really needs a
frequency of 20 or 15 minutes (from Gorebridge inwards). I wonder if
there would be scope (and capacity), once the service has settled in,
to have a metro-like cross-city service to/from Inverkeithing (to act
as a further alternative to car travel over the Forth Road Bridge) or
Edinburgh Park (for business travel or connections to the tram to
Edinburgh Airport)?
Post by Geoff Pearson
The trams lost £450k in the first year even with lots of curious
people.> Does anyone make regular use of the tram to do something a bus
would not do?
The tram has a lot more capacity for pushchairs and wheelchairs than a
bus, which are pluses in their own right (and they also now take bikes
off-peak), and much greater capacity than a bus in general (there is a
lot of commuter traffic to Edinburgh Park, Gyle Centre, RBS Gogarburn,
etc). Eventually you get to the stage where you'd need so many buses to
meet demand that they'd start to become a traffic jam in themselves,
hence something with higher capacity becomes needed. The trams are of
course also electrically powered, which reduces local air pollution and
reduces fossil fuel use.

On a slightly more flippant note, my gut feeling is that the shopping
centre at Edinburgh Park Station (Hermiston Gait) has seen quite an
upturn in custom thanks to the tram, as the bus service there takes
forever and so it was never a tempting option (unless you really,
really, needed to go to Decathlon). The train service isn't covered by
a TfE travel pass (which is really perhaps an argument for local train
journeys to be integrated into the TfE fares system, rather than a plus
for the tram per se).

Tram use has been better than expected and will probably gradually
increase as people get used to it and modify their journeys. If the
line is extended to Leith/Newhaven (as was originally planned, and may
still be possible) that would increase passenger numbers significantly,
as it passes through a very high density residential area (where at
times the buses already struggle to cope).



David.
Richard Tobin
2015-08-31 19:17:31 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by David
The trams are of
course also electrically powered, which reduces local air pollution and
reduces fossil fuel use.
How does that compare with the extra pollution from buses which now
take twice as long to get along Princes Street as they used to?

And will it ever cancel out the extra pollution from the traffic
delays during the construction work?

-- Richard
Scott
2015-08-31 20:17:53 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Richard Tobin
Post by David
The trams are of
course also electrically powered, which reduces local air pollution and
reduces fossil fuel use.
How does that compare with the extra pollution from buses which now
take twice as long to get along Princes Street as they used to?
And will it ever cancel out the extra pollution from the traffic
delays during the construction work?
Funny how the people in the west are enthusiastic about public
transport and the people in the east like to whinge.
Richard Tobin
2015-09-01 10:41:27 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Scott
Funny how the people in the west are enthusiastic about public
transport and the people in the east like to whinge.
I'm enthusiastic about public transport. That's why I'm annoyed
that it's got so much worse in the last few years.

-- Richard
Geoff Pearson
2015-09-01 14:01:17 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Richard Tobin
Post by David
The trams are of
course also electrically powered, which reduces local air pollution and
reduces fossil fuel use.
How does that compare with the extra pollution from buses which now
take twice as long to get along Princes Street as they used to?
And will it ever cancel out the extra pollution from the traffic
delays during the construction work?
Funny how the people in the west are enthusiastic about public
transport and the people in the east like to whinge.

I use my bus pass and bike almost every day. Still not found a use for the
tram.
Scott
2015-09-02 18:42:25 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Tue, 1 Sep 2015 15:01:17 +0100, "Geoff Pearson"
Post by Scott
Post by Richard Tobin
Post by David
The trams are of
course also electrically powered, which reduces local air pollution and
reduces fossil fuel use.
How does that compare with the extra pollution from buses which now
take twice as long to get along Princes Street as they used to?
And will it ever cancel out the extra pollution from the traffic
delays during the construction work?
Funny how the people in the west are enthusiastic about public
transport and the people in the east like to whinge.
I use my bus pass and bike almost every day. Still not found a use for the
tram.
Whereas the trams were adored by Glaswegians .
charles
2015-09-02 18:47:59 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Scott
On Tue, 1 Sep 2015 15:01:17 +0100, "Geoff Pearson"
Post by Scott
Post by Richard Tobin
Post by David
The trams are of
course also electrically powered, which reduces local air pollution and
reduces fossil fuel use.
How does that compare with the extra pollution from buses which now
take twice as long to get along Princes Street as they used to?
And will it ever cancel out the extra pollution from the traffic
delays during the construction work?
Funny how the people in the west are enthusiastic about public
transport and the people in the east like to whinge.
I use my bus pass and bike almost every day. Still not found a use for
the tram.
Whereas the trams were adored by Glaswegians .
the last Edinburgh trams were liked too. I went to school using two routes
(1, 12, 25 or 26 and then 24) - buying a "Transfer" ticket.
--
Please note new email address:
***@CandEhope.me.uk
Richard Tobin
2015-09-02 20:12:05 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Scott
Whereas the trams were adored by Glaswegians .
Perhaps they went to more useful places? If you happen to want to
travel between two places served by the tram it's no doubt very useful
(though apparently slower than the bus), but that's rather a small
proportion of the people in Edinburgh.

-- Richard
Basil Jet
2015-09-02 20:53:12 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Richard Tobin
Post by Scott
Whereas the trams were adored by Glaswegians .
Perhaps they went to more useful places? If you happen to want to
travel between two places served by the tram it's no doubt very useful
(though apparently slower than the bus), but that's rather a small
proportion of the people in Edinburgh.
No way! The tram is slower than the bus?
Sam Wilson
2015-09-03 08:38:04 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Basil Jet
Post by Richard Tobin
Post by Scott
Whereas the trams were adored by Glaswegians .
Perhaps they went to more useful places? If you happen to want to
travel between two places served by the tram it's no doubt very useful
(though apparently slower than the bus), but that's rather a small
proportion of the people in Edinburgh.
No way! The tram is slower than the bus?
The City-Airport scheduled timing is longer for the tram than for the
dedicated airport bus. A bus following the same route as the tram would
take a lot longer, and the airport bus is subject to congestion at more
places than the tram is.

Sam
--
The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in
Scotland, with registration number SC005336.
David
2015-09-06 21:25:24 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Basil Jet
Post by Richard Tobin
Post by Scott
Whereas the trams were adored by Glaswegians .
Perhaps they went to more useful places? If you happen to want to
travel between two places served by the tram it's no doubt very useful
(though apparently slower than the bus), but that's rather a small
proportion of the people in Edinburgh.
No way! The tram is slower than the bus?
Well, yes, and no.. ;-)

The Edinburgh tram system is a metro system with relatively frequent
stops which serves the city centre and various trip generators (some
residential areas, business/retail parks, a Park & Ride site) to the
west of the city ...and which also 'happens' to serve Edinburgh
Airport. It was also originally intended to serve a significant part of
the residential areas to the north of the city.

Because of that core purpose, it was never intended that the tramline
should be the absolutely most rapid route to the airport, that was
supposed to be the airport rail link (which was cancelled). The
tramline is intended to be a medium-capacity metro system with greater
capacity and speeds than a local bus service, and it does do exactly
that, following a corridor with already existing high passenger flows.


The Airlink bus service is a semi-fast bus service to the airport with
only limited stops (and which does indeed also serve some different
residential areas en route), which follows a slightly more direct route
than the tramline. The two co-exist and serve slightly different
purposes and intermediate areas.


Regarding speed and journey time, the tramline was at some point of the
design process downgraded from 80 km/h to 70 km/h (which probably costs
2 - 3 minutes on the off-road section overall for starters (although I
suppose it would have savings in electricity costs)).

It also has some sections which seem to be slower than they perhaps
ought to be:

* indirect and S-bendy route between Ingliston and Gogarburn
* unnecessary 'switchbacking' vertical curvature (and speed limits)
between adjacent high-level bridges between Bankhead and Saughton (I
don't know why the embankment wasn't built at full height between them)
* sharp horizontal and vertical curves on the Carrick Knowe bridge over
the railway which impose 30 km/h speed limits on an otherwise long
continuous 70 km/h section (I don't know why the bridge and approaches
weren't designed for higher speeds (with noise baffling if necessary))
* speed limits through the admittedly unavoidably wiggly section around
Haymarket depot that seem a little on the conservative side, my gut
feeling is that this section could be 5 - 10 km/h faster).

Each of these restrictions perhaps only costs 30 - 60 seconds, but
together they all add up over the length of the route..


The overall journey time figures often quoted may be slightly
misleading. The end to end journey time by tram is indeed about 10
minutes longer than the Airlink bus, but this ignores that the tramline
also continues further northeast in the city centre than the bus (which
is more useful for connections for people in the north and east of the
city).

Depending on where you are actually travelling to, or what onwards
connections you need to make, it might be the case that sometimes the
tram may be more convenient and sometimes the bus (for example, the
tram has very good adjacent connections to bus services at the Mound
which go to high-density areas south of the city centre, including the
University of Edinburgh and Marchmont, which the Airlink bus does not -
time "saved" on the bus might be lost again by the walk to change
buses).

Both services are useful parts of the city's transport infrastructure,
it's not an all-or-nothing issue. Hope this helps to explain!


David.
h***@yahoo.co.uk
2015-09-02 23:34:40 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Richard Tobin
Post by Scott
Whereas the trams were adored by Glaswegians .
Perhaps they went to more useful places? If you happen to want to
travel between two places served by the tram it's no doubt very useful
(though apparently slower than the bus), but that's rather a small
proportion of the people in Edinburgh.
-- Richard
Any plans to bring trams back to Glasgow? I thought that Aberdeen was
next on the list, however, north of the border.
The Real Doctor
2015-09-03 09:44:18 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Richard Tobin
Perhaps they went to more useful places? If you happen to want to
travel between two places served by the tram it's no doubt very useful
(though apparently slower than the bus)
Princes Street to the airport in under half an hour during the rush hour
is a hell of a lot faster than the bus. Ditto Ingliston park and rise.

Ian
Graeme Wall
2015-09-03 10:37:14 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by The Real Doctor
Ditto Ingliston park and rise.
For the red light district?
--
Graeme Wall
This account not read, substitute trains for rail.
The Real Doctor
2015-09-03 09:43:08 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Geoff Pearson
I use my bus pass and bike almost every day. Still not found a use for
the tram.
I use buses and trams in Edinburgh regularly, but I still haven't found
a use for the number 44 bus.

Yours parochially

Ian
David
2015-09-01 22:47:35 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Richard Tobin
Post by David
The trams are of
course also electrically powered, which reduces local air pollution and
reduces fossil fuel use.
How does that compare with the extra pollution from buses which now
take twice as long to get along Princes Street as they used to?
Well, I hope the Council and TfE are continuing to monitor things and
will tweak the traffic light timings as best they can to achieve a
better balance and reduce delays. You could always poke them about this
(as I probably also should)!

The Scott Monument junction seems to work particularly badly at peak
times, I have to agree (not enough time for queued buses to come out of
South St David Street), but I haven't personally noticed things being
noticeably worse elsewhere on Princes Street (although I don't travel
the full length of Princes Street at peak times myself, so am probably
not best placed to notice).

As you may know, the bus stops on the western half of Princes Street
have recently been tweaked so that each bus service now only stops once
rather than twice in a "relatively" short distance, which saves some
time. That's something I also noticed when the buses were diverted
along George Street during the tramway construction, that the fewer
stops actually made things better (Princes Street really had too many
stops for each service to work effectively for the number of buses
which use the street, having to constantly leapfrog each other.)

There is also a gradually growing number of hybrid buses in use, which
reduces air pollution in general and especially when slow-moving (on
electric power) or idle (the engine cuts out). With stricter limits on
air pollution, their numbers will only increase over time.
Post by Richard Tobin
And will it ever cancel out the extra pollution from the traffic
delays during the construction work?
I guess that probably depends on how long-term a view you are thinking of.. ;-)

By taking the first steps to shift the balance towards an
electrically-powered transport system now, we're providing the
opportunity to reduce fossil fuel use in the future, at least..


David.
Clive D. W. Feather
2015-09-01 11:30:20 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by David
The tram has a lot more capacity for pushchairs and wheelchairs than a
bus, which are pluses in their own right (and they also now take bikes
off-peak), and much greater capacity than a bus in general (there is a
lot of commuter traffic to Edinburgh Park, Gyle Centre, RBS Gogarburn,
etc). Eventually you get to the stage where you'd need so many buses to
meet demand that they'd start to become a traffic jam in themselves,
hence something with higher capacity becomes needed.
I remember being at a talk by someone from TfL or its predecessor. One
topic was the Cross-London tram (King's Cross to Peckham, or something
like that). A listener asked why it couldn't be trolleybuses instead.
The answer was that the service would require 30 trams per hour or 140
trolleybuses.
--
Clive D.W. Feather | Home: <***@davros.org>
Mobile: +44 7973 377646 | Web: <http://www.davros.org>
Please reply to the Reply-To address, which is: <***@davros.org>
Recliner
2015-09-01 19:42:01 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Clive D. W. Feather
Post by David
The tram has a lot more capacity for pushchairs and wheelchairs than a
Post by David
bus, which are pluses in their own right (and they also now take bikes
Post by David
off-peak), and much greater capacity than a bus in general (there is a
Post by David
lot of commuter traffic to Edinburgh Park, Gyle Centre, RBS
Gogarburn, >etc). Eventually you get to the stage where you'd need so
many buses to >meet demand that they'd start to become a traffic jam
in themselves, >hence something with higher capacity becomes needed.
I remember being at a talk by someone from TfL or its predecessor. One
topic was the Cross-London tram (King's Cross to Peckham, or something
like that). A listener asked why it couldn't be trolleybuses instead. The
answer was that the service would require 30 trams per hour or 140 trolleybuses.
I wonder why? Articulated long trolley buses can be quite long (though
nothing like the really long multi-section trams, as found, for example, in
Edinburgh).
Clive D. W. Feather
2015-09-01 19:51:03 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
In message
Post by Recliner
Post by Clive D. W. Feather
A listener asked why it couldn't be trolleybuses instead. The
answer was that the service would require 30 trams per hour or 140 trolleybuses.
I wonder why? Articulated long trolley buses can be quite long (though
nothing like the really long multi-section trams, as found, for example, in
Edinburgh).
Legal limits on length, IIRC.
--
Clive D.W. Feather | Home: <***@davros.org>
Mobile: +44 7973 377646 | Web: <http://www.davros.org>
Please reply to the Reply-To address, which is: <***@davros.org>
Recliner
2015-09-01 20:37:49 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Clive D. W. Feather
Post by Recliner
Post by Clive D. W. Feather
A listener asked why it couldn't be trolleybuses instead. The
answer was that the service would require 30 trams per hour or 140 >>trolleybuses.
I wonder why? Articulated long trolley buses can be quite long (though
nothing like the really long multi-section trams, as found, for example, in
Edinburgh).
Legal limits on length, IIRC.
I was quite impressed with these double-bendy trolley buses in Lucerne:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/recliner/19192403209/in/album-72157655400441705/

It's a sort of poor man's tram. One snag with the large road wheels is that
they limit the low floor area much more than slimmer and smaller diameter
tram wheels do.
Charles Ellson
2015-09-02 00:07:11 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Tue, 1 Sep 2015 20:37:49 +0000 (UTC), Recliner
Post by Recliner
Post by Clive D. W. Feather
Post by Recliner
Post by Clive D. W. Feather
A listener asked why it couldn't be trolleybuses instead. The
answer was that the service would require 30 trams per hour or 140 >>trolleybuses.
I wonder why? Articulated long trolley buses can be quite long (though
nothing like the really long multi-section trams, as found, for example, in
Edinburgh).
Legal limits on length, IIRC.
Possibly also even more limiting practical limits if garaged
off-route.
Post by Recliner
https://www.flickr.com/photos/recliner/19192403209/in/album-72157655400441705/
It's a sort of poor man's tram. One snag with the large road wheels is that
they limit the low floor area much more than slimmer and smaller diameter
tram wheels do.
Sam Wilson
2015-09-02 14:39:39 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
In article
<507826803462832598.890041recliner.ng-***@news.eternal-septem
ber.org>,
Post by Recliner
Post by Clive D. W. Feather
In message
Post by Recliner
Post by Clive D. W. Feather
A listener asked why it couldn't be trolleybuses instead. The
answer was that the service would require 30 trams per hour or 140
Post by Clive D. W. Feather
trolleybuses.
I wonder why? Articulated long trolley buses can be quite long (though
nothing like the really long multi-section trams, as found, for example, in
Edinburgh).
Legal limits on length, IIRC.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/recliner/19192403209/in/album-72157655400441705/
It's a sort of poor man's tram. One snag with the large road wheels is that
they limit the low floor area much more than slimmer and smaller diameter
tram wheels do.
The Edinburgh trams are low-floor throughout, but where the bogies are
there is a considerable incursion into the passenger space for the wheel
arches. [1] shows it reasonably well - the backs of the sideways-facing
seats are 30-40 cm away from the window and there's a similar bulge
under the luggage rack facing them.

Sam

[1] <https://www.flickr.com/photos/royanf/4593139125>
--
The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in
Scotland, with registration number SC005336.
Recliner
2015-09-02 15:19:30 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Sam Wilson
In article
ber.org>,
Post by Recliner
Post by Clive D. W. Feather
In message
Post by Recliner
Post by Clive D. W. Feather
A listener asked why it couldn't be trolleybuses instead. The
answer was that the service would require 30 trams per hour or 140
Post by Clive D. W. Feather
trolleybuses.
I wonder why? Articulated long trolley buses can be quite long (though
nothing like the really long multi-section trams, as found, for example, in
Edinburgh).
Legal limits on length, IIRC.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/recliner/19192403209/in/album-72157655400441705/
It's a sort of poor man's tram. One snag with the large road wheels is that
they limit the low floor area much more than slimmer and smaller diameter
tram wheels do.
The Edinburgh trams are low-floor throughout, but where the bogies are
there is a considerable incursion into the passenger space for the wheel
arches. [1] shows it reasonably well - the backs of the sideways-facing
seats are 30-40 cm away from the window and there's a similar bulge
under the luggage rack facing them.
Sam
[1] <https://www.flickr.com/photos/royanf/4593139125>
The wheel arch intrusion is much worse in a trolley bus:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/recliner/19352514226/in/album-72157655400441705/lightbox/

Incidentally, do the Edinburgh trams have actual bogies? I thought the
four sections with wheels just had four fixed wheels, which releases more
low level floor space.
Sam Wilson
2015-09-02 17:11:11 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
In article
<497030186462899327.998107recliner.ng-***@news.eternal-septem
ber.org>,
Post by Recliner
Post by Sam Wilson
In article
ber.org>,
Post by Recliner
Post by Clive D. W. Feather
In message
Post by Recliner
Post by Clive D. W. Feather
A listener asked why it couldn't be trolleybuses instead. The
answer was that the service would require 30 trams per hour or 140
Post by Clive D. W. Feather
trolleybuses.
I wonder why? Articulated long trolley buses can be quite long (though
nothing like the really long multi-section trams, as found, for example, in
Edinburgh).
Legal limits on length, IIRC.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/recliner/19192403209/in/album-721576554004417
05/
It's a sort of poor man's tram. One snag with the large road wheels is that
they limit the low floor area much more than slimmer and smaller diameter
tram wheels do.
The Edinburgh trams are low-floor throughout, but where the bogies are
there is a considerable incursion into the passenger space for the wheel
arches. [1] shows it reasonably well - the backs of the sideways-facing
seats are 30-40 cm away from the window and there's a similar bulge
under the luggage rack facing them.
Sam
[1] <https://www.flickr.com/photos/royanf/4593139125>
https://www.flickr.com/photos/recliner/19352514226/in/album-72157655400441705/lightbox/
Ah, I thought you were saying that there were high floor areas in a
trolley bus. Sorry for misunderstanding.
Post by Recliner
Incidentally, do the Edinburgh trams have actual bogies? I thought the
four sections with wheels just had four fixed wheels, which releases more
low level floor space.
Actually I don't know. I had assumed there was an underslung bogie with
the wheels on stub axles, but I've never seen a picture. The CAF web
site talks about the Urbos series bogies[2], and various Wikipedia and
other pages refer to Urbos tram sections being mounted on bogies[3,4,5],
but none has pictures and Mr Google isn't helping.

Sam

[2]
<http://www.caf.es/en/productos-servicios/familia/urbos/accesibilidad.php
[3] <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urbos>
[4] <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Midland_Metro_rolling_stock>
[5] <http://centro.org.uk/transport/metro/trams/caf-urbos-3/>
--
The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in
Scotland, with registration number SC005336.
h***@yahoo.co.uk
2015-09-02 00:02:14 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Recliner
Post by Clive D. W. Feather
Post by David
The tram has a lot more capacity for pushchairs and wheelchairs than a
Post by David
bus, which are pluses in their own right (and they also now take bikes
Post by David
off-peak), and much greater capacity than a bus in general (there is a
Post by David
lot of commuter traffic to Edinburgh Park, Gyle Centre, RBS
Gogarburn, >etc). Eventually you get to the stage where you'd need so
many buses to >meet demand that they'd start to become a traffic jam
in themselves, >hence something with higher capacity becomes needed.
I remember being at a talk by someone from TfL or its predecessor. One
topic was the Cross-London tram (King's Cross to Peckham, or something
like that). A listener asked why it couldn't be trolleybuses instead. The
answer was that the service would require 30 trams per hour or 140 trolleybuses.
I wonder why? Articulated long trolley buses can be quite long (though
nothing like the really long multi-section trams, as found, for example, in
Edinburgh).
Zurich and Budapest also come to mind, when discussing multi-section trams.

I think that there are also a few of them in Helsinki.
Recliner
2015-09-02 00:39:42 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by h***@yahoo.co.uk
Post by Recliner
Post by Clive D. W. Feather
Post by David
The tram has a lot more capacity for pushchairs and wheelchairs than a
Post by David
bus, which are pluses in their own right (and they also now take bikes
Post by David
off-peak), and much greater capacity than a bus in general (there is a
Post by David
lot of commuter traffic to Edinburgh Park, Gyle Centre, RBS
Gogarburn, >etc). Eventually you get to the stage where you'd need so
many buses to >meet demand that they'd start to become a traffic jam
in themselves, >hence something with higher capacity becomes needed.
I remember being at a talk by someone from TfL or its predecessor. One
topic was the Cross-London tram (King's Cross to Peckham, or something
like that). A listener asked why it couldn't be trolleybuses instead. The
answer was that the service would require 30 trams per hour or 140 trolleybuses.
I wonder why? Articulated long trolley buses can be quite long (though
nothing like the really long multi-section trams, as found, for example, in
Edinburgh).
Zurich and Budapest also come to mind, when discussing multi-section trams.
I think that there are also a few of them in Helsinki.
There are plenty of multi-section trams, though few have as many as the
seven in Edinburgh. Three section trolleys are rarer, and I don't know of
any longer than that.
Roland Perry
2015-09-02 07:09:08 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
In message
<2002153826462846810.985053recliner.ng-***@news.eternal-septem
ber.org>, at 00:39:42 on Wed, 2 Sep 2015, Recliner
Post by Recliner
Post by h***@yahoo.co.uk
Post by Recliner
Articulated long trolley buses can be quite long (though
nothing like the really long multi-section trams, as found, for example, in
Edinburgh).
Zurich and Budapest also come to mind, when discussing multi-section trams.
I think that there are also a few of them in Helsinki.
There are plenty of multi-section trams, though few have as many as the
seven in Edinburgh. Three section trolleys are rarer, and I don't know of
any longer than that.
They have (some) three section trolley buses in Geneva.
--
Roland Perry
h***@yahoo.co.uk
2015-09-02 12:02:56 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Recliner
Post by h***@yahoo.co.uk
Post by Recliner
Post by Clive D. W. Feather
Post by David
The tram has a lot more capacity for pushchairs and wheelchairs than a
Post by David
bus, which are pluses in their own right (and they also now take bikes
Post by David
off-peak), and much greater capacity than a bus in general (there is a
Post by David
lot of commuter traffic to Edinburgh Park, Gyle Centre, RBS
Gogarburn, >etc). Eventually you get to the stage where you'd need so
many buses to >meet demand that they'd start to become a traffic jam
in themselves, >hence something with higher capacity becomes needed.
I remember being at a talk by someone from TfL or its predecessor. One
topic was the Cross-London tram (King's Cross to Peckham, or something
like that). A listener asked why it couldn't be trolleybuses instead. The
answer was that the service would require 30 trams per hour or 140 trolleybuses.
I wonder why? Articulated long trolley buses can be quite long (though
nothing like the really long multi-section trams, as found, for example, in
Edinburgh).
Zurich and Budapest also come to mind, when discussing multi-section trams.
I think that there are also a few of them in Helsinki.
There are plenty of multi-section trams, though few have as many as the
seven in Edinburgh. Three section trolleys are rarer, and I don't know of
any longer than that.
You haven't been to Budapest in a while, I'm guessing.

There are also a few multi-sections running around Helsinki, IIRC.
August West
2015-09-02 12:12:02 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by h***@yahoo.co.uk
Post by Recliner
Post by h***@yahoo.co.uk
Post by Recliner
Post by Clive D. W. Feather
Post by David
The tram has a lot more capacity for pushchairs and wheelchairs than a
Post by David
bus, which are pluses in their own right (and they also now take bikes
Post by David
off-peak), and much greater capacity than a bus in general (there is a
Post by David
lot of commuter traffic to Edinburgh Park, Gyle Centre, RBS
Gogarburn, >etc). Eventually you get to the stage where you'd need so
many buses to >meet demand that they'd start to become a traffic jam
in themselves, >hence something with higher capacity becomes needed.
I remember being at a talk by someone from TfL or its predecessor. One
topic was the Cross-London tram (King's Cross to Peckham, or something
like that). A listener asked why it couldn't be trolleybuses instead. The
answer was that the service would require 30 trams per hour or 140 trolleybuses.
I wonder why? Articulated long trolley buses can be quite long (though
nothing like the really long multi-section trams, as found, for example, in
Edinburgh).
Zurich and Budapest also come to mind, when discussing multi-section trams.
I think that there are also a few of them in Helsinki.
There are plenty of multi-section trams, though few have as many as the
seven in Edinburgh. Three section trolleys are rarer, and I don't know of
any longer than that.
You haven't been to Budapest in a while, I'm guessing.
There are also a few multi-sections running around Helsinki, IIRC.
There are also multi-section trams on some lines in Prague.
--
more than this I will not ask
Recliner
2015-09-02 13:58:50 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by h***@yahoo.co.uk
Post by Recliner
Post by h***@yahoo.co.uk
Post by Recliner
Post by Clive D. W. Feather
Post by David
The tram has a lot more capacity for pushchairs and wheelchairs than a
Post by David
bus, which are pluses in their own right (and they also now take bikes
Post by David
off-peak), and much greater capacity than a bus in general (there is a
Post by David
lot of commuter traffic to Edinburgh Park, Gyle Centre, RBS
Gogarburn, >etc). Eventually you get to the stage where you'd need so
many buses to >meet demand that they'd start to become a traffic jam
in themselves, >hence something with higher capacity becomes needed.
I remember being at a talk by someone from TfL or its predecessor. One
topic was the Cross-London tram (King's Cross to Peckham, or something
like that). A listener asked why it couldn't be trolleybuses instead. The
answer was that the service would require 30 trams per hour or 140 trolleybuses.
I wonder why? Articulated long trolley buses can be quite long (though
nothing like the really long multi-section trams, as found, for example, in
Edinburgh).
Zurich and Budapest also come to mind, when discussing multi-section trams.
I think that there are also a few of them in Helsinki.
There are plenty of multi-section trams, though few have as many as the
seven in Edinburgh. Three section trolleys are rarer, and I don't know of
any longer than that.
You haven't been to Budapest in a while, I'm guessing.
There are also a few multi-sections running around Helsinki, IIRC.
Multi-section trolley buses? Those are the rare things. Multi-section
trams are perfectly normal, with five being the norm with modern trams, and
up to seven that I'm aware of.
h***@yahoo.co.uk
2015-09-02 14:04:22 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Recliner
Post by h***@yahoo.co.uk
Post by Recliner
Post by h***@yahoo.co.uk
Post by Recliner
Post by Clive D. W. Feather
Post by David
The tram has a lot more capacity for pushchairs and wheelchairs than a
Post by David
bus, which are pluses in their own right (and they also now take bikes
Post by David
off-peak), and much greater capacity than a bus in general (there is a
Post by David
lot of commuter traffic to Edinburgh Park, Gyle Centre, RBS
Gogarburn, >etc). Eventually you get to the stage where you'd need so
many buses to >meet demand that they'd start to become a traffic jam
in themselves, >hence something with higher capacity becomes needed.
I remember being at a talk by someone from TfL or its predecessor. One
topic was the Cross-London tram (King's Cross to Peckham, or something
like that). A listener asked why it couldn't be trolleybuses instead. The
answer was that the service would require 30 trams per hour or 140 trolleybuses.
I wonder why? Articulated long trolley buses can be quite long (though
nothing like the really long multi-section trams, as found, for example, in
Edinburgh).
Zurich and Budapest also come to mind, when discussing multi-section trams.
I think that there are also a few of them in Helsinki.
There are plenty of multi-section trams, though few have as many as the
seven in Edinburgh. Three section trolleys are rarer, and I don't know of
any longer than that.
You haven't been to Budapest in a while, I'm guessing.
There are also a few multi-sections running around Helsinki, IIRC.
Multi-section trolley buses? Those are the rare things. Multi-section
trams are perfectly normal, with five being the norm with modern trams, and
up to seven that I'm aware of.
So, were you referring to multi-section trams or trolleybusses? I myself
was referring to trams.

I'm not so sure about multi-section trolleybusses, BTW.
Recliner
2015-09-02 14:25:57 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by h***@yahoo.co.uk
Post by Recliner
Post by h***@yahoo.co.uk
Post by Recliner
Post by h***@yahoo.co.uk
Post by Recliner
Post by Clive D. W. Feather
Post by David
The tram has a lot more capacity for pushchairs and wheelchairs than a
Post by David
bus, which are pluses in their own right (and they also now take bikes
Post by David
off-peak), and much greater capacity than a bus in general (there is a
Post by David
lot of commuter traffic to Edinburgh Park, Gyle Centre, RBS
Gogarburn, >etc). Eventually you get to the stage where you'd need so
many buses to >meet demand that they'd start to become a traffic jam
in themselves, >hence something with higher capacity becomes needed.
I remember being at a talk by someone from TfL or its predecessor. One
topic was the Cross-London tram (King's Cross to Peckham, or something
like that). A listener asked why it couldn't be trolleybuses instead. The
answer was that the service would require 30 trams per hour or 140 trolleybuses.
I wonder why? Articulated long trolley buses can be quite long (though
nothing like the really long multi-section trams, as found, for example, in
Edinburgh).
Zurich and Budapest also come to mind, when discussing multi-section trams.
I think that there are also a few of them in Helsinki.
There are plenty of multi-section trams, though few have as many as the
seven in Edinburgh. Three section trolleys are rarer, and I don't know of
any longer than that.
You haven't been to Budapest in a while, I'm guessing.
There are also a few multi-sections running around Helsinki, IIRC.
Multi-section trolley buses? Those are the rare things. Multi-section
trams are perfectly normal, with five being the norm with modern trams, and
up to seven that I'm aware of.
So, were you referring to multi-section trams or trolleybusses? I myself
was referring to trams.
I'm not so sure about multi-section trolleybusses, BTW.
Note that I said, "There are plenty of multi-section trams, though few have
as many as the seven in Edinburgh. Three section trolleys are rarer, and I
don't know of any longer than that."

So I was asking about any trams with more than seven sections (which might
exist, though I don't know of any), or any trolley buses with more than
three (which probably don't exist). 100% low floor, five-section trams are
pretty much the norm on new lines these day.
h***@yahoo.co.uk
2015-09-02 14:37:16 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Recliner
Post by h***@yahoo.co.uk
Post by Recliner
Post by h***@yahoo.co.uk
Post by Recliner
Post by h***@yahoo.co.uk
Post by Recliner
Post by Clive D. W. Feather
Post by David
The tram has a lot more capacity for pushchairs and wheelchairs than a
Post by David
bus, which are pluses in their own right (and they also now take bikes
Post by David
off-peak), and much greater capacity than a bus in general (there is a
Post by David
lot of commuter traffic to Edinburgh Park, Gyle Centre, RBS
Gogarburn, >etc). Eventually you get to the stage where you'd need so
many buses to >meet demand that they'd start to become a traffic jam
in themselves, >hence something with higher capacity becomes needed.
I remember being at a talk by someone from TfL or its predecessor. One
topic was the Cross-London tram (King's Cross to Peckham, or something
like that). A listener asked why it couldn't be trolleybuses instead. The
answer was that the service would require 30 trams per hour or 140 trolleybuses.
I wonder why? Articulated long trolley buses can be quite long (though
nothing like the really long multi-section trams, as found, for example, in
Edinburgh).
Zurich and Budapest also come to mind, when discussing multi-section trams.
I think that there are also a few of them in Helsinki.
There are plenty of multi-section trams, though few have as many as the
seven in Edinburgh. Three section trolleys are rarer, and I don't know of
any longer than that.
You haven't been to Budapest in a while, I'm guessing.
There are also a few multi-sections running around Helsinki, IIRC.
Multi-section trolley buses? Those are the rare things. Multi-section
trams are perfectly normal, with five being the norm with modern trams, and
up to seven that I'm aware of.
So, were you referring to multi-section trams or trolleybusses? I myself
was referring to trams.
I'm not so sure about multi-section trolleybusses, BTW.
Note that I said, "There are plenty of multi-section trams, though few have
as many as the seven in Edinburgh. Three section trolleys are rarer, and I
don't know of any longer than that."
Got it. Having said that, my mate from Poland tells me that trams in
Gdańsk run in sets of three whereas they run in two in Warsaw.
Post by Recliner
So I was asking about any trams with more than seven sections (which might
exist, though I don't know of any), or any trolley buses with more than
three (which probably don't exist). 100% low floor, five-section trams are
pretty much the norm on new lines these day.
Budapest trams have six or seven sections, IIRC.
Charles Ellson
2015-09-02 21:32:47 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by h***@yahoo.co.uk
Post by Recliner
Post by h***@yahoo.co.uk
Post by Recliner
Post by h***@yahoo.co.uk
Post by Recliner
Post by h***@yahoo.co.uk
Post by Recliner
Post by Clive D. W. Feather
Post by David
The tram has a lot more capacity for pushchairs and wheelchairs than a
Post by David
bus, which are pluses in their own right (and they also now take bikes
Post by David
off-peak), and much greater capacity than a bus in general (there is a
Post by David
lot of commuter traffic to Edinburgh Park, Gyle Centre, RBS
Gogarburn, >etc). Eventually you get to the stage where you'd need so
many buses to >meet demand that they'd start to become a traffic jam
in themselves, >hence something with higher capacity becomes needed.
I remember being at a talk by someone from TfL or its predecessor. One
topic was the Cross-London tram (King's Cross to Peckham, or something
like that). A listener asked why it couldn't be trolleybuses instead. The
answer was that the service would require 30 trams per hour or 140 trolleybuses.
I wonder why? Articulated long trolley buses can be quite long (though
nothing like the really long multi-section trams, as found, for example, in
Edinburgh).
Zurich and Budapest also come to mind, when discussing multi-section trams.
I think that there are also a few of them in Helsinki.
There are plenty of multi-section trams, though few have as many as the
seven in Edinburgh. Three section trolleys are rarer, and I don't know of
any longer than that.
You haven't been to Budapest in a while, I'm guessing.
There are also a few multi-sections running around Helsinki, IIRC.
Multi-section trolley buses? Those are the rare things. Multi-section
trams are perfectly normal, with five being the norm with modern trams, and
up to seven that I'm aware of.
So, were you referring to multi-section trams or trolleybusses? I myself
was referring to trams.
I'm not so sure about multi-section trolleybusses, BTW.
Note that I said, "There are plenty of multi-section trams, though few have
as many as the seven in Edinburgh. Three section trolleys are rarer, and I
don't know of any longer than that."
Got it. Having said that, my mate from Poland tells me that trams in
Gda?sk run in sets of three whereas they run in two in Warsaw.
Post by Recliner
So I was asking about any trams with more than seven sections (which might
exist, though I don't know of any), or any trolley buses with more than
three (which probably don't exist). 100% low floor, five-section trams are
pretty much the norm on new lines these day.
Budapest trams have six or seven sections, IIRC.
With one exception, 177.13 ft (about 54m) long according to :-
http://jalopnik.com/the-worlds-longest-tram-got-a-bit-shorter-after-this-cr-1578906703

The Sydney Morning Herald last year claimed they had the world's
longest at 67m but the image suggests they are actually 2x5 coupled
sets :-
http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/sydneys-trams-to-be-the-worlds-longest-20141203-11ztba.html
Recliner
2015-09-02 22:21:33 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Charles Ellson
Post by h***@yahoo.co.uk
Post by Recliner
Post by h***@yahoo.co.uk
Post by Recliner
Post by h***@yahoo.co.uk
Post by Recliner
Post by h***@yahoo.co.uk
Post by Recliner
Post by Clive D. W. Feather
Post by David
The tram has a lot more capacity for pushchairs and wheelchairs than a
Post by David
bus, which are pluses in their own right (and they also now take bikes
Post by David
off-peak), and much greater capacity than a bus in general (there is a
Post by David
lot of commuter traffic to Edinburgh Park, Gyle Centre, RBS
Gogarburn, >etc). Eventually you get to the stage where you'd need so
many buses to >meet demand that they'd start to become a traffic jam
in themselves, >hence something with higher capacity becomes needed.
I remember being at a talk by someone from TfL or its predecessor. One
topic was the Cross-London tram (King's Cross to Peckham, or something
like that). A listener asked why it couldn't be trolleybuses instead. The
answer was that the service would require 30 trams per hour or 140 trolleybuses.
I wonder why? Articulated long trolley buses can be quite long (though
nothing like the really long multi-section trams, as found, for example, in
Edinburgh).
Zurich and Budapest also come to mind, when discussing multi-section trams.
I think that there are also a few of them in Helsinki.
There are plenty of multi-section trams, though few have as many as the
seven in Edinburgh. Three section trolleys are rarer, and I don't know of
any longer than that.
You haven't been to Budapest in a while, I'm guessing.
There are also a few multi-sections running around Helsinki, IIRC.
Multi-section trolley buses? Those are the rare things. Multi-section
trams are perfectly normal, with five being the norm with modern trams, and
up to seven that I'm aware of.
So, were you referring to multi-section trams or trolleybusses? I myself
was referring to trams.
I'm not so sure about multi-section trolleybusses, BTW.
Note that I said, "There are plenty of multi-section trams, though few have
as many as the seven in Edinburgh. Three section trolleys are rarer, and I
don't know of any longer than that."
Got it. Having said that, my mate from Poland tells me that trams in
Gda?sk run in sets of three whereas they run in two in Warsaw.
Post by Recliner
So I was asking about any trams with more than seven sections (which might
exist, though I don't know of any), or any trolley buses with more than
three (which probably don't exist). 100% low floor, five-section trams are
pretty much the norm on new lines these day.
Budapest trams have six or seven sections, IIRC.
With one exception, 177.13 ft (about 54m) long according to :-
http://jalopnik.com/the-worlds-longest-tram-got-a-bit-shorter-after-this-cr-1578906703
The Sydney Morning Herald last year claimed they had the world's
longest at 67m but the image suggests they are actually 2x5 coupled
sets :-
http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/sydneys-trams-to-be-the-worlds-longest-20141203-11ztba.html
Yup:
"Sydney's 67-metre trams will be two vehicles coupled together,
manufactured by the French conglomerate Alstom.
A similar system is used in the Moroccan city of Casablanca, where two
Alstom Citadis vehicles are coupled to run as 65-metre trams. The
Jerusalem light rail system also runs 65-metre-long trams.
When asked to nominate other cities that could have longer trams than
Sydney's, Transport for NSW also suggested Tunis, the Tunisian capital,
which also couples two Alstom vehicles together."

I see that the DLR is exploring options for new stock, and is considering
getting single multi-section units 84m long, rather than the current
approach of coupling three 28m two-section units together. OK, it's more
like a train than a tram, but it uses tram technology.
Sam Wilson
2015-09-02 14:34:55 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by h***@yahoo.co.uk
Post by Recliner
Post by Clive D. W. Feather
Post by David
The tram has a lot more capacity for pushchairs and wheelchairs than a
Post by David
bus, which are pluses in their own right (and they also now take bikes
Post by David
off-peak), and much greater capacity than a bus in general (there is a
Post by David
lot of commuter traffic to Edinburgh Park, Gyle Centre, RBS
Gogarburn, >etc). Eventually you get to the stage where you'd need so
many buses to >meet demand that they'd start to become a traffic jam
in themselves, >hence something with higher capacity becomes needed.
I remember being at a talk by someone from TfL or its predecessor. One
topic was the Cross-London tram (King's Cross to Peckham, or something
like that). A listener asked why it couldn't be trolleybuses instead. The
answer was that the service would require 30 trams per hour or 140 trolleybuses.
I wonder why? Articulated long trolley buses can be quite long (though
nothing like the really long multi-section trams, as found, for example, in
Edinburgh).
Zurich and Budapest also come to mind, when discussing multi-section trams.
I think that there are also a few of them in Helsinki.
Nice has 5-section and 7-section trams, very similar to the Edinburgh
ones except that they have the ability to travel short distances on
battery power.

Sam
--
The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in
Scotland, with registration number SC005336.
h***@yahoo.co.uk
2015-09-02 14:41:53 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Sam Wilson
Post by h***@yahoo.co.uk
Post by Recliner
Post by Clive D. W. Feather
Post by David
The tram has a lot more capacity for pushchairs and wheelchairs than a
Post by David
bus, which are pluses in their own right (and they also now take bikes
Post by David
off-peak), and much greater capacity than a bus in general (there is a
Post by David
lot of commuter traffic to Edinburgh Park, Gyle Centre, RBS
Gogarburn, >etc). Eventually you get to the stage where you'd need so
many buses to >meet demand that they'd start to become a traffic jam
in themselves, >hence something with higher capacity becomes needed.
I remember being at a talk by someone from TfL or its predecessor. One
topic was the Cross-London tram (King's Cross to Peckham, or something
like that). A listener asked why it couldn't be trolleybuses instead. The
answer was that the service would require 30 trams per hour or 140 trolleybuses.
I wonder why? Articulated long trolley buses can be quite long (though
nothing like the really long multi-section trams, as found, for example, in
Edinburgh).
Zurich and Budapest also come to mind, when discussing multi-section trams.
I think that there are also a few of them in Helsinki.
Nice has 5-section and 7-section trams, very similar to the Edinburgh
ones except that they have the ability to travel short distances on
battery power.
Sam
The Translohr in Padova also travels short distances on battery power.

IIRC, the planned Translohr extension between Mestre and Venice will
require vehicles to operate on batteries on the causeway across the
lagoon. I don't know, however, what the projected optimal speed on it
would be.
h***@yahoo.co.uk
2015-08-30 16:10:10 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Something similar, called Pomorska Kolej Metropolitalna, entered revenue
service in Poland on 30 August:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pomorska_Kolej_Metropolitalna
David
2015-08-31 17:48:09 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
https://twitter.com/bordersrailway/status/608042907162046466
The platforms are 164 metres long, apart from those at Galashiels and
Tweedbank, which are 221 and 228 metres, respectively.
Thanks - I hope ScotRail will be running longer trains on the opening
day, then, just in case.

David.
David
2015-09-06 21:55:41 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by David
https://twitter.com/bordersrailway/status/608042907162046466
The platforms are 164 metres long, apart from those at Galashiels and
Tweedbank, which are 221 and 228 metres, respectively.
Thanks - I hope ScotRail will be running longer trains on the opening
day, then, just in case.
ScotRail obviously did plan for high numbers today, just in case. The
trains we caught were 6-coach cl. 158 Express Sprinters, we also passed
the cl. 170 Turbostar with the promotional Borders Railway branding
travelling in the opposite direction.

The trains we caught were moderately busy (I'm guessing 250 - 300
people), every station from Eskbank outwards was being well-used.
Obviously this was curiosity value for the new train service but
hopefully a sign that it will be well-used on an ongoing basis.

We were very impressed that Borders Council had arranged to have a
number of tourist welcoming staff at Tweedbank station with maps and
leaflets about local places of interest, and also a marquee selling
very reasonably priced cakes, breakfast rolls and drinks(!). For a part
of Scotland that for a long time has been a blank spot on the map for
many, this was a very good way to start to encourage day trippers to
come to the area.

There is also an ongoing 'market' within Waverley Station (weekends for
the rest of the month) with food and craft stallholders from the
Borders. These are innovative and very welcoming promotional activities
that I've not seen at previous route openings - somebody definitely had
their thinking hat on for these!


The weather was absolutely glorious all day and we had a very nice walk
in the sunshine alongside the River Tweed to Melrose, where we had
lunch and ice creams in a cafe.

We are already starting to plan return journeys which were not
previously possible, such as a cycling round trip: train to Berwick,
cycle up the Tweed valley, train back to Edinburgh..


Hopefully the railway will be become a useful transport alternative to
people in the Borders once again. The real test will be to see what
level of commuter traffic builds up over the coming months.


David.
Jack Campin
2015-09-06 23:42:13 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
We used it from Newtongrange to Brunstane. The ride itself was
fine. Problem was, the ticket machines were a shambles. Lots of
people couldn't get them to work - the user interface offered the
wrong choices and disregarded user selections, and the card reader
didn't work with Marion's (pretty normal) Visa debit card. So we
got on expecting to pay on the train. But nobody came by to ask
(we didn't see any staff on the train) so we got a free ride.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
e m a i l : j a c k @ c a m p i n . m e . u k
Jack Campin, 11 Third Street, Newtongrange, Midlothian EH22 4PU, Scotland
mobile 07800 739 557 <http://www.campin.me.uk> Twitter: JackCampin
Claudio Calvelli
2015-09-07 06:02:50 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Jack Campin
Problem was, the ticket machines were a shambles. Lots of
people couldn't get them to work - the user interface offered the
wrong choices and disregarded user selections, and the card reader
didn't work with Marion's (pretty normal) Visa debit card. So we
I found the machines in Haymarket doing the same, long queues of people
getting to the machine, giving up, and going to the ticket office. The
"buy on the train" option obviously won't work there.

No idea if the card reader would work as I didn't manage to get that
far. In fact, I managed to decide there wouldn't be any point waiting
in the (very long) queue at the ticket office and likely missing the
train, so decided to travel another day.

I do hope they never replace the ticket machines at Waverley.

C
The Real Doctor
2015-09-07 09:44:55 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
The real test will be to see what level of commuter traffic builds up
over the coming months.
Years.

Some people will transfer at once, but commuting by road (bus or car)
from Galashiels and south to Edinburgh is so bloody awful that not many
people do it. So while it will be interesting to see how many people
switch to commuting by train, the bigger effect is likely to be longer
term as commuters start moving into the area served by the railway.

Ian
August West
2015-09-07 10:04:42 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by The Real Doctor
The real test will be to see what level of commuter traffic builds up
over the coming months.
Years.
Some people will transfer at once, but commuting by road (bus or car)
from Galashiels and south to Edinburgh is so bloody awful that not
many people do it. So while it will be interesting to see how many
people switch to commuting by train, the bigger effect is likely to be
longer term as commuters start moving into the area served by the
railway.
A few months ago, I seriously considered buying a house on the edge of
Galashiels, on the strength of the arrival of the line.

In the end, I went to Dunbar instead.
--
Warning: dates on calendar are closer than they appear
The Real Doctor
2015-09-07 10:16:34 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by August West
A few months ago, I seriously considered buying a house on the edge of
Galashiels, on the strength of the arrival of the line.
It's probably too late now, but houses in Galashiels bought when the
line was given the go-ahead will, I am sure, have been excellent
investments.

Ian

The Real Doctor
2015-09-03 09:47:30 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by David
A group of us are planning on heading out on the opening day for a trip
to Galashiels and a wee walk in the countryside. We're just a bit
concerned that the trains are perhaps likely to be extremely busy,
perhaps with standing room only (there will be some small children in
our group).
The trains will be rammed all day.

Ian
Loading...