Many of the transports seen on this page are capable of operating in both 'pseudo-tram' self-steering mode as well as 'driver steered bus' modes. So as with the other types of guided bus (last two topics on the 'Side-Step Congestion' / Bus priority systems. page) they are able to provide through seamless services - without requiring a change of vehicle - operating in self-steering mode along busy corridors & in city centres and as driver-steered buses to serve the quieter traffic areas. Effectively this means that expensive infrastructure need only be built where it is most needed. Alternatively it is possible to introduce services first and then as required (or funds permit) install infrastructure later. So if a new housing or business estate is being developed it would be easy to reserve a segregated private right of way independent of the public highway (perhaps alongside a dedicated cycle and pedestrian route) and install it when traffic has built up. Until then the new service would use the public highway.
The GLT.
The GLT (Guided Light Transport / Transit) was the first system to feature purpose built vehicles designed around the theme of merging the well proven popularity of the tram with the 'go anywhere' capability of the motorbus. Indeed its promoters - Bombardier - often promote it as 'A Tramway on Tyres'. In 'pseudo-tram' (guided bus) mode tractive effort is via the rubber tyres, with guidance coming from double-flanged rollers which follow a central rail located flush in the roadway. This allows for sharing roadspace with the other traffic or operating along a traffic-free town centre with pedestrians. (Theoretically the single rail makes the GLT a part-time monorail)! Other guided mode possibilities include multiple-unit operation, electric collection via a pantograph (return is via the guide rail), elevated / underground tunnel operation and because the 'rear' end can be fitted with tram-type driving controls - full reversibility. In bus mode the GLT will behave like any other road vehicle, driven from the front and able to roam freely as required. An onboard fossil fuel engine powers the electric drive system, although 100% electric two-wire trolleybus operation is also a design possibility. With the GLT it is possible is for several suburban routes to meet at a station located on the edge of a city centre with the vehicles coupling up (the design criteria is for up to three units at a time) to provide a higher capacity service (up to 20,000 passengers/hour) where traffic is such that single units cannot cope. When operating in this way the GLT will be able to emulate the cost effective advantages also enjoyed by conventional rail systems for one member of staff to operate trains carrying several hundreds of passengers at a time. A Brief History.The GLT idea goes back to 1985, when a pre-developmental prototype was used on a short demonstration track at the UITP exhibition in the Heysal area of Brussels see picture below, left. In 1988 three more vehicles were built to further evaluate the technologies involved. One of these vehicles was single articulated and used on the Brussels tram system to test the new bogies for the Tram 2000 project that was then under development. Being out of gauge it only operated out of traffic hours, when the system had otherwise shut down. The fate of this vehicle is unknown. (See picture below, left). The other two vehicles are double articulated, and are used on the specially built test track which is a converted railway branch line (closed 1980, re-opened for GLT 1988) located between Jemelle and Rochefort, in the Belgian Ardennes. For a few years these vehicles operated a (summer only) public service, running from outside Jemelle railway station to the popular tourist village of Han-Sur-Lesse, travelling via Rochefort where they changed to bus mode for the second part of their journey. Han-Sur-Lesse is already well known to transport enthusiasts because of its unusual diesel trams (see picture on the Trams & Streetcars page) which take passengers to some tourist orientated caves, from which after a 3km guided tour the visitors exit by battery powered boat. About The Vehicles.The GLT vehicles follow a railway based philosophy by using a steel chassis built to withstand 30-tonne end loadings, although to fit all the necessary components means that the underframes layout is more akin to a bus chassis. The bodywork uses the Alusuisse system of aluminium construction. All together the structure is designed for a 30 year life, although in one of their promotional leaflets Bombardier suggest that with a 15 year 'half life' refit (new front, external aspect, interior arrangement, etc.,) it would be possible to obtain many of the visual benefits that will make passengers feel as if they were travelling on a completely new vehicle - without the high expense. The principle of half-life refits is well proven in the public transport industry. For motive power the GLT uses a trolleybus type electric traction system. The two double articulated prototypes are each equipped with two 600v dc 175kw (approximately 240bhp) electric motors (axles 2 and 4 are driven) and one rear mounted 260kw (approximately 350 bhp) 9 litre two-stroke Detroit diesel engine. Driving controls have been fitted only at the front - for reversibility a closed-circuit television system links the front and rear cabs and the vehicles feature a full range of head / tail lights and direction indicators at each end. Maximum speed is 70 km/h, acceleration is 1.2m/s, deceleration 5.5m/s (all axles have ABS and ASR anti - skid systems) gradient is 1 in 7 and because all axles are steered the minimum curve radius is a tight 12 metres. On curves the middle and rear axles always follow the same track as the front axle - this means that if a road was painted white and the GLT made a 'U' turn there would be just one set of tyre tracks visible. It also means that on 'ordinary' road surfaces the GLT will suffer from 'rutting' of the road surface - a common problem with bus lanes - caused by the vehicles' rubber tyres only using the same narrow strips of roadway. This applies to both guided and unguided modes. These vehicles are 24.5m long, 3.3m high, 2.5m wide and weigh 26,000kg empty. Total capacity ranges from 175 (@ 4 people per sqmetre) to 200 (@ 6 people per sqmetre). Seating capacity also varies, with promotional literature quoting figures between 51 and 75. Being prototypes the purpose of these vehicles is to assist development of the technology, and promote the system, so passenger accommodation is not an issue of vital importance. Being a modular system vehicle configurations are variable. In addition to the triple-unit / double articulated vehicle described above other possibilities are 17m twin-unit / single articulated and 42m quad-unit / triple articulated versions. Even longer versions are technically possible, the principle constraining factor being that many countries have different laws relating to maximum permitted lengths of road vehicles, so is very probable that for most European installations only the shorter two sizes would actually be built. How It Operates.Under each axle are two double flanged rollers which lock onto a central guidance rail using patented technology. To become guided these rollers are lowered while the vehicle is driven slowly forward over two short lengths of rail (standing slightly proud of the road surface) which form a 'V' shape to steer the guidance rollers into place. This process takes a little less than a minute. Becoming unguided can take place anywhere as required whether the vehicle is stationary or in motion. This means that if the GLT is sharing the road with other traffic and there is an obstruction - for instance roadworks or a traffic accident - then the service can continue with minimal delay. The special profile guidance rail is built in the centre of a 55cm deep reinforced concrete lane and rests on an elastic footing. For straight track a single lane will require to be 308cm wide, on curves this widens to a maximum of 370 cms. New Vehicle, New Name.The previous GLT vehicles were of an obsolete high-floor design which required passengers to board / alight via steps. By 1997 there was a new 24.5m low-floor easy access version, which is seen here on the Belgian test track (last pictures in the panel on the left). The new vehicles have been renamed as 'TVR', which means Transport sur voie reservée - transport on reserved track. It seems that the rename was to appease the French who were planning to test it in Paris, and their envy of the global supremacy of the English Language. The GLT's designers would have chosen to market it in English because it is an acceptable common language in Belgium which is a bilingual nation where the two linguistic factions - French and Flemish - are constantly at loggerheads. English also has an international marketability that surpasses all other languages, therefore it would have been seen as an ideal marketing tool for a global audience. Some more detailed information about the new TVR vehicles. Length 24,5 m; Width 2,50 m; Height 3,22 m; Seated passengers 41; Total capacity 154 (@ 4 people per square metre); Weight 25,5 tonnes; electric motors (by GEC ALSTHOM) 300 kW; diesel engine 200 kW; guidance from all four axles; all wheels steerable; max speed 70km/h (about 45 mph); max incline 13%; min curve radius 12 m; designed for a 30 year life; lane width required when travelling straight 3 m; and on curves 3,42 m. As part of the development of the TVR the low floor prototype was 'endurance tested' in Paris, the French capital, on a 1.5km section of the Trans Val-de-Marne busway. Part of the route involved electric / guided operation and part fossil fuel / non guided operation. In Paris the RATP is reportedly looking at the TVR for quieter routes in the outer suburbs - to complement its current expansion schemes for the suburban rail, metro and tramway systems. These trials were supposed to last just six months but actually continued for much longer, it seems that there was a problem with severe vibrations whilst operating in guided mode caused by the interaction between the guide wheels and guide rail. Some pundits (rather unkindly) suggested that the vibration issue was so severe that the TVR vehicles could quite literally 'shake themselves to pieces ' long before their design life of 30 years has been reached (Paris not illustrated.) End Of Trials - Into Commercial Service.Back in 1997 the French city of Caen was planning to be the first to install a commercial TVR system, but it was rejected in a local referendum where, with less than a quarter of eligible voters turning out, in reality 'apathy' could be said to have been the real winner. Instead the first commercial TVR installation was in the French city of Nancy, where it was seen to be a logical upgrade to their pre-existing trolleybus system. Another reason for choosing a rubber tyred solution was the better ability of buses to cope with steeper gradients, which on Line 1 in Nancy were as steep as 13%. With the overhead infrastructure already in situ TVR services were expected to commence towards the end of 2000 but testing took longer than originally expected so public services actually began on 11th February 2001. This is over an 11.5km route which features 29 stops. Unfortunately not only was the commencement of services late but there were two accidents within the first month of operation (on 6th & 10th March) which occurred whilst vehicles were changing from guided to unguided mode. Both accidents involved the rear of the vehicles swinging out and sideswiping nearby overhead-wire masts. These were followed by a strike by transport workers questioning whether the technology was safe and as a result all services were suspended for a year whilst investigations and modifications were carried out. That there should be not one but two accidents so soon after the start of services is somewhat surprising because the although the TVR is a new technology it had been thought to have been thoroughly proven safe in many hours of developmental testing at its Belgian test track and during its Parisian demonstration trials. Services were restarted on the 6th March 2002. To help reassure both staff and passengers that the technology is safe all 25 vehicles have been fitted with aircraft-style black boxes which record data such as the vehicles speed, acceleration and braking during the 5 minutes prior to any further incidents (should they happen). Meanwhile, despite the negative vote and problems in Nancy after a 14 year planning saga Caen's TVR service finally opened on 15th November 2002. In Caen the TVR remains in guided mode at all times (during passenger service) and the vehicles are powered via a single overhead wire and a pantograph (as is usual with trams) with electrical return being via the guide rail. Caen's system features 24 vehicles operating over a 15.7km route with 34 stations; it is marketed under the name of "Twisto". As of Spring 2006 it seems that the derailing issue has been resolved, and according to the Nancy transport authorities everything is now operating at "design speeds". The derailments were blamed on the vehicle drivers holding (or resting) on the steering wheel, which had the effect of raising the guide wheel slightly. So a combination of staff retraining, some changes to the guidance system (see below) and engineers changing the linkage between the steering wheel and the guide wheel seems to have solved the problem. To further help ensure that there are no more derailments and that the system remains safe the guidance wheels must now exert a minimal pressure of 750 kgs upon the guidance rail. Unfortunately this high downward pressure creates several problems, including an increase in noise levels, especially at higher speeds and increased abrasion (wear) of the guidance wheel and guidance rail. Furthermore, this effectively reduces the weight borne by the traction wheels, which results in the vehicles sometimes having difficulty climbing gradients when the road is wet and / or slippery from fallen leaves, snow and ice. In this case they must switch to unguided mode, which in Caen means using the diesel engine too, and drive slowly & extra carefully to avoid things such as the overhead wire support poles. Other issues which the TVR has experienced include exploding tyres and that because the wheels follow exactly the same path abnormal wear and tear is resulting in tracks or "rutting" forming in the road surface. At some locations this has resulted in a need for the laying of asphalt to fill the grooves, something which can be done overnight during non-traffic hours. It is very likely that in the longer term short service suspensions will be required for more drastic road surface repairs / renewal. Some pundits are suggesting that repairing the grooves and replacing worn guidance rails in the worst affected locations will need doing annually, and that in the long term a steel wheel tramway (or kerb guided trolleybusway) would have been cheaper. Experience in Service.Some of the information below comes from French language Internet discussion sites with people who live in the relevant cities discussing their transports, and possible future plans. Whilst the vehicles seem nice enough the many problems have negatively impacted on what it was hoped to be able to achieve. In 2001 when Nancy's system first opened the total end to end journey time was 29 minutes but because of speed reductions imposed to improve safety whilst in guided mode it became 36 minutes. At one stage the speed reductions were as low as 30km/h (20 mph) on straight track and 10km/h on (some) curves, but later this was raised to 40km/h (25 mph). A comparison of journey times with ordinary buses has also proven unfavourable - for instance sections of road which ordinary buses can cover in 7 minutes the TVR needs 9 minutes. The information source for the comparison did not state whether the TVR was operating in guided mode - it is assumed that it was - because from personal experience in 2003 it was found that when in normal driver steered mode the TVR was able to be driven without constraint, much like any ordinary trolleybus. Because of the relatively small quantity of work to be carried out the Nancy system was expected to be much cheaper than a steel-wheel tramway. Officially its final cost is quoted as being €156 million which works out at about €14.2 million per km. As a comparison a new steel wheel tramline in the French city of Orléans worked out at €15,5 million per km. It is reported that Bombardier have guaranteed that until 2009 annual maintenance costs will be pegged at a maximun of €2 million. It is also reported that in a final settlement for the problems Bombardier refunded €7.6 million of the total €47.3 million cost of the TVR vehicles. In October 2006 it was reported that Line 1 (the TVR route) carries about 40,000 passengers daily - out of a total of 100,000 daily journeys in Nancy. The original projections were for a daily ridership of 54,000. The average speed of 14.6km/h is lower than other buses services in the city, as well as a traditional steel wheel tramways elsewhere in France. In Caen there were far fewer problems and as a general theme they are reasonably satisfied with their "tram on tyres". Perhaps one gripe which could be levied is that whilst the earlier GLT prototypes were designed to be capable of multiple-unit operation this feature was dropped from the low floor versions - and because of overcrowding at busy times this is something that they would have liked to have been able to do. Caen thought that steel-wheel trams would be too expensive for an average city and instead took a risk in going with innovative new technology. In that way they quite literally became a city-wide test track. It could be said that they paid a financial price for that innovation, with a transport system which had been estimated to cost €113 million ending up costing more like €234 million. The Future - Nancy.Nancy originally planned a three-route 28km TVR network, which was expected to have been completed by 2007. Line 2 was actually originally planned to open in 2001 but it did not happen and the 7 vehicles bought for it ended up being used on Line 1. What had been proposed as Line 3 was renamed Line 2 and at one stage it was suggested that construction would start in 2007 with it opening by 2011. However this did not come to pass. Nancy also had problems with a fleet of new trolleybuses for other services which in the end were returned to the manufacturer never having actually been used in public service. Line 3 is still on the horizon - also as some sort of BRT, and pencilled in for 2015... In October 2006 revamped plans also talked of improvements and extensions for Line 1, although these were more aspirational as no hard facts are known - other than that the TVR is no longer in production. Also being considered was the possibility of using 'tram-train' technology which would copy Karlsruhe, Kassel, and others where local heavy rail services would be converted to light rail (with the tracks still available for other heavy rail trains) and extended as steel wheel trams through city streets. If this does happen then there is a possibility of some locations (eg: near the railway station) featuring the twin rails of steel-wheel trams and the single rail of the TVR along the same formation! This will probably sound very unprofessional, but it does seem that with all the bad luck that Nancy seems to have suffered that something out of the ordinary is going on here. The idea of an entire cities' transports being jinxed sounds ridiculous, yet that is the very impression which has been gained. In early 2010 the talk was that a decision would be made by 2013, with (it hoped) that something would be installed by 2015. That is, if the 2014 elections did not result in plans changing yet again. It seems that converting the TVR route to steel wheel trams is not seen as being viable, so some sort of articulated trolleybus (possibly optically guided - described below) or a Translohr system (also described below) are being looked at as possibilities - with the same technology installed on Line 3. Apparently despite all the woes passenger numbers using the TVR are such that there is a concern whether single articulated trolleybuses would be able to cope with passenger numbers, so double articulated trolleybuses have been mooted. In the meantime, Line 2 will 'probably' use optically guided trolleybuses (but might use the same vehicle technology as Lines 1 and 3) whilst the tram-train will become Line 4. But... its all talk and until decisions are made, contracts with vehicle suppliers signed and physical works begin, so it seems that just about anything could yet come to pass. The Future - Caen.In late 2004 Caen announced its proposals for what it wanted to acheive by 2015, and this included using TVR vehicles to extend the existing 15.7km TVR Line 1 by another 6.9km. The big question for them however was the issue of vehicles, as apparently by then Bombardier had discontinued the TVR from its product range. Some online discussion included the thought that as Nancy has been less than delighted with the TVR and might even harbour thoughts of wanting to be rid of it and its problems (even though it is questionable whether the city could afford to replace it with a steel wheel tramway) so that maybe Caen would be happy to have Nancy's vehicles and after conversion to pantograph operation use them to enhance its Line 1 - plus have a few extra to use as a source of spare parts. Caen's 2015 proposals also included Lines 2, 3, and 4. Ideally Caen would have liked the 11.3 km Line 2 to use the TVR, to complement Line 1. This would have been desirable from many viewpoints including maintenance and fleet management, however as new vehicles were no longer in production so the alternative options looked at included the Translohr (described below) or a trolleybus based system using the Optical guidance system (also describedbelow). The 6km Line 3 and the 5km Line 4 will almost certainly be BRT services, possibly also using trolleybuses and / or Optical guidance. In January 2008 reports spoke of an ever increasing urgency to resolve the situation in Caen, both because of a desire to lengthen existing services and because the existing services were operating at full capacity (especially in the rush hours) and without more vehicles the much needed service frequency enhancements were simply not possible. Reports also suggested that Bombardier might have been prepared to build more TVR vehicles, although they would want a minimum build quantity of 20. Meanwhile on Wednesday 27th May 2009 there was another derailment - the first for many years. A Decision is Made. In December 2011 Caen made a final decision as to how to resolve the situation regarding TVR Line 1. This was to temporarily close it (in 2016) and after an estimated 18 month conversion process it will reopen in December 2018 as a traditional steel wheel tramway. This way they will free themselves from being restricted to just one product manufacturer and be able to select rolling stock from the wide range of tram builders. The estimated cost of this tramway conversion is €170 million, which compares favourably to the estimated €214 million it would have cost to upgrade the TVR. Some local political opposition people have described the TVR as a technical catastrophe. |
Views of production TVR vehicles in commercial service.
 | | |
 | |  |
| The Caen and Nancy vehicles are essentially the same, except for livery, internal furnishing colours and power collection methods. Caen left uses blue based furnishings and a railway-style pantograph, with electrical return being via the guide rail. Nancy right uses red based furnishings and trolleybus-style twin trolleypoles. | ||
 | |  |
| In guided mode the vehicles operate as regular trams (streetcars) and call at stations with fixed platforms. In Caen left they remain in guided mode at all times whilst in passenger service, although for non-revenue journey to, from and within the depôt they operate as driver-steered diesel-electric buses. In Nancy right only part of the system sees guided operation.... | ||
 | |  |
| ... the rest of the time they operate as normal trolleybuses (electric trolleycoach / trackless trolley in American) sharing roadspace with other road users and calling at normal bus stops. | | 'Track' view at one of two locations in Caen where services in guided mode split into two routes. |
 | |  |
| At the time of this visit Montant-Octroi was one of several locations in Nancy where vehicles swap between guided and unguided mode. Subsequent works has seen the guided section extended. | | Internal view of a Caen vehicle from the back looking forwards. |
 | |  |
| At the back the vehicles feature this 'U'-shaped seating area. (Nancy version illustrated) | | Internal view of a Nancy vehicle from the front looking backwards. |
 Videos of the GLT in Belgium and TVR in both Caen and Nancy have been placed on the 'youtube' film sharing site and can be watched (in new windows) by clicking the links below, from where links to further videos can also be found. Each film also includes very brief scenes showing the other two systems.The GLT in the Belgian Ardennes: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xGioRMsf99M, TVR Caen: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YbVcAF3whFw, TVR Nancy: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OmcTt6sGwYU.  Civis, Cristalis, Optical Guidance.Note that by 2011 the Civis and Cristalis buses had been withdrawn from the bus manufacturers' product range, being replaced with more conventional vehicles - some of which follow the same innovative BRT design theme and include the use of optical guidance as an optional extra. Intended for medium sized towns and the suburbs of larger cities the Civis concept was originally for a complete transport package including vehicles, guidance system and street furniture. When launched it was marketed as a Reserved Lane Light Urban Transport System and designed to be suitable for traffic flows of up to 3,000 passengers per hour / per direction. The Civis was originally developed by Renault and Matra, two well established French transport concerns. Since then Matra was bought out by Siemens and Renault's bus and coach division merged with the Fiat-Iveco group's bus and coach division. However the euro-bureaucrats cried foul claiming that the latter merger was anti-competitive (as if there are no other bus builders anywhere globally!!!) and demanded a change in ownership, so since early 2003 Irisbus has been fully owned by the Iveco Group. The traction equipment was sourced from Alsthom. (It is to be regretted that there is no-one with similar powers to cry foul over the euro-bureaucrats not being elected to office, not being democratically accountable, or that because oodles of [British & European] [our] taxpayers' money goes astray within the EU it is many years since auditors have been prepared to 'sign-off' the EU's accounts). | ||
 | |  |
| A 'rigid' (not articulated) Cristalis in Limoges, France. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/ File:Trolleybus_Cristalis_ligne_4.JPG | | Irisbus promotional image of an articulated Bologna, Italy, Trolleybus Rapid Transit (TBRT) Civis. |
About The Vehicles.The vehicles came in two variants which shared essentially the same bodywork and drive systems. The Civis was aimed at the "rubber-tyred tram / streetcar" market and the vehicles feature a pointed front where the driver sits centrally in a railway-style cab. This adds a little to the overall length and is only suitable for 'off-vehicle' fare collection systems which do not need to be supervised by the driver. Orginally it was expected that vehicles which use this configuration would also always use the optical self-steering guidance system, although this is not how things eventually came to pass. The other basic body variant features a more conventional bus-style flat front making these vehicles more akin to state-of-the-art 'second generation' modern buses. These are generally known as Cristalis. For length there were several options including a 12 metre rigid and a 18.50 metre (Cristalis) / 18.75 metre (Civis) single-articulated. Initally a 24 metre double-articulated Civis was also included in the original design specifications but none of these are known to have ever actually been built. All variants are 2.55 metres wide, this being the euro-standard maximum width for buses. Production was mostly based at Rorthais in the centre-west of France, near to Nantes, although the chassis was treated with a full anti-corrosion immersion process (cataphoresis) at the main Irisbus bus plant at Annonay. The structure was fabricated out of stainless steel. Partly because the integral low floor architecture required that most ancillaries be located at roof level the main side framing was very substantial, so as to support the weight. Construction followed an innovative production system whereby the two main sides, front & rear ends plus roof were all constructed as separate sub-assemblies, complete with glazing, wiring and trim, and then, late in the production process, bolted to the chassis and to each other, to make a very strong structure. One of the features carried over from the conventional bus range was the use of main side panels made in a fibreglass material which are both visually attractive and easier to repair in the event of minor bumps and scrapes. The vehicles are electrically operated, either as trolleybuses which collect 750v dc power from twin overhead wires via poles mounted on the vehicle's roof, or as diesel-electric hybrid style buses where a rear mounted 224kW / 300 HP Iveco Euro 3 fossil engine powers an electric generator (alternator). Note that unlike other types of hybrid bus propulsion systems the diesel-electric variant does not include energy regeneration or storage, and although well proven on the railways it has proven to be something of an Achilles Heel when used on buses. The trolleybus variants could also fitted with a low power 66kW / 88 HP diesel alternator APU (auxiliary power unit) which gives them an ability to travel off-wire at reduced speed - many trolleybuses feature an APU as it is useful for emergency (and depôt) use allowing the vehicle to travel away from the power supply around an obstruction (eg: a road traffic accident). Transmission is via 80kw electric wheelhub motors driving the centre (articulated variants only) and rear wheels which feature the extra-wide low profile Michelin 'Super-Single' tyres obviating the need for paired wheels. These state-of-the-art tyres were designed to limit ground floor pressure, save 130kg per axle in weight, reduce rolling resistance (and hence energy consumption) and enable the vehicles' interior to be as wide at the back as at the front. This saves about 40cm in internal width. The main entrance doors are electrically operated. The twinleaf doors open outward and sit very close to the side of the body. When using guidance systems the buses can dock so close to raised compatible kerbs that there is practically no gap. However, for non-guided vehicles there are the usual options of kneeling suspension and ramps. With accurate docking the bus stop platform can be raised up to 27 cm (or 21 cm when the vehicle is kneeled), to provide accessibility to every user. | ||
 | |  |
| Cristalis trolleybus in Milan, Italy, on a priority road which is restricted to public transport, bikers and the emergency services. The leaf motifs represent a type of tree which grows along many of the tree-lined avenues served by these trolleybuses on routes 90/91. The building in the background is the central railway station; the vehicles behind the bus are taxis which had to stop whilst the bus called at a bus stop. | | Scan from Irisbus promotional leaflet showing the inside of a Cristalis; the skylights are a feature of both vehicle ranges. |
 | |  |
| Rear view of a 'rigid' (not articulated) Cristalis in Lyon, France. The rear window is a very welcome feature which too often bus designers leave out. | | Side three-quarter view of an 'articulated' Cristalis on the very busy route No.1 in Lyon, France |
| ||
The Optical Guidance System.Initially the optical 'self-steering' guidance system was called 'Visée', but when Matra (who developed it) was bought out by Siemens they rebranded the technology as 'Optiguide'. When first introduced 'Visée' was claimed to be the first technology to use Artificial Vision in passenger transport. It works by a forward looking video camera detecting the correct path by 'seeing' the contrast between a 'virtual rail' comprising of twin white dashed lines and the darker road surface on which they are painted (typically normal white traffic paint is used), with the image being analysed by a computer to determine the vehicle's position relative to its expected path and then adjusting the steering as required. There are two options for the virtual rail, with this being located either down the centre of the vehicle or offset to the left. Originally developed to enable accurate docking at bus stops, it was soon also thought to be equally competent for full-time vehicle guidance, albeit at speeds of up to 40 km/h (about 25mph), although there were visibility issues when autumnal leaves, fog and snow reduced the readability of the lines painted on the road surface. When used solely for bus stop docking the 'virtual rail' usually extends 50 metres in each direction before and after the bus stop. The design criteria is for a horizontal gap of 6cm (a little under 2½") between the bus and bus stop platform. Although perhaps solely intended for 'rubber tyred' tram-like vehicles optical guidance can be fitted to other types of bus as well - initially most trials used otherwise 'standard' Renault (Irisbus) Agora diesel buses and nowadays some of the other bus designs within the Irisbus family use it too (see below). On the Irisbus stand at the 1999 UITP exhibition in Toronto a short promotional film showed a Renault (Irisbus) Agora bus fitted with optical guidance undergoing trials. Scenes included safe operation in a wide variety of climatic conditions including torrential rain and fog (but not snow), and how easily the driver can safely regain steering control to take emergency action to avoid a potential collision / accident. Interestingly, the film also showed a Civis prototype equipped with O-Bahn / kerb guided bus style guide-wheels while a computer simulation demonstrated it on a mixed mode journey combining both guidance systems. The presence of the raised kerbs would be to help meet safety concerns regarding situations where (for instance) the guidance lines become invisible to the camera - such as in wintry weather conditions - and on slippery roads when safety dictates that all rubber-tyred traffic have to slow down. Originally the raised kerbs and physical guidewheels were stated to only be needed in case the optical guidance system derailed (with there not being any physical contact at other times) but at least one system promoter suggested using the physical system instead (although many years later this has not come to pass). | ||
 | |  |
| Irisbus promotional photograph showing a flat (conventional bus) fronted Cristalis bus on the TEOR route in Rouen. | | Scan from Irisbus promotional leaflet showing "hands free" driving. |
 | |  |
| Agora L on Rouen TEOR line T1 at the "Mont aux Malades" terminus at Mont-Saint-Aignan. Agora buses locate their camera systems at the base of the windscreen just inside the bus. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:10-01-08_228_T1_6.JPG. | | Citelis 18 on Rouen TEOR line at the "Bizet" terminus at Canteleu. Citelis buses locate their camera systems in a visually distinctive way in a roof mounted pod at the front of the bus. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:28-07-08_6108_T3.JPG. |
In To Service.The French cities of Clermont-Ferrand and Rouen were the first to use Civis buses, with both opting to first trial some diesel-electric articulated variants. Clermont-Ferrand chose to trial Civis buses with the tram style central driving position. These were used alongside specially branded optically guided Agora L articulated buses on route No. 14, which used the marketing name of Léo 2000. Perhaps noteworthy is the reasoning behind choosing a rubber-tyred system in Clermont-Ferrand - being the home city of Michelin tyres local prestige demanded a rubber tyred (and not steel wheel) local transport solution. Rouen chose to trial Cristalis buses with the flat front where the driver sits to one side. These were used on the BRT system known as TEOR (Transport est-ouest rouennais / Transport east-west Rouen) which partially opened in 2000. Services had began using a fleet of 38 Irisbus Agora buses but the plan was that eventually these would be replaced by a production fleet of 55 Cristalis buses. Initially just two prototypes were delivered with the first of these commencing public services at 4.30pm on 7th February 2002. However having trialed their diesel-electric Civis / Cristalis buses for several years both cities decided against introducing production versions in to their fleets. Clermont-Ferrand decided pretty quickly that once the leasing period was over it would neither be purchasing the six Civis buses which had already been delivered nor would it be proceeding with purchasing a fleet of Civis buses, citing that this change of plan was for financial reasons. Apparently their trials found that when compared to the diesel mechanical Agora L buses the diesel-electric Civis consumes 30% to 35% more fuel plus the Agoras are only half as expensive to purchase. According to media reports Irisbus suggest that the higher fuel consumption is because of the lack of dedicated busway / bus right of way - such as in Rouen. With roadworks for the Translohr rubber-tyred tram (see below) disrupting traffic flows it was also decided to discontinue the use of the optical guidance, with stated reasons including the frequent need to repaint the road markings for the cameras to follow. Longer term plans in Clermont-Ferrand include converting route 14 / Léo 2000 to become Translohr Tram route B, and whilst financial issues may delay this for a while it has already been rebadged as route B. By way of a contrast Rouen initially confirmed its order for 57 of the high-tech Cristalis buses (including the two pre-series buses) for its TEOR BRT system which when completed had expanded from 12km to 25.5km and from 16 to 41 stations using a total of 66 optically guided buses, of various types. However Rouen changed its plans when Irisbus replaced their Agora bus range with the Citelis, which were also based on 'normal' and not 'rubber-tyred tram' bus aesthetics and included the optional fitting of Optiguide optical guidance as a design feature. Rouen opted to return the two pre-series Cristalis prototypes and purchase optically guided Citelis buses. So by February 2007 their TEOR BRT system was served by 38 Agora L buses and 28 Citelis L buses (making 66 in total) - all with optical guidance. In 2006 Irisbus launched a new BRT bus named Créalis which is based on the Citelis chassis and as with the Cristalis / Civis includes the option of a flat or 'more rounded' front. The latter is called Créalis Neo. For these buses too the optional fitting of Optiguide optical guidance is a design feature. The first line of a planned BRT system using optically guided Créalis Neo buses was expected to open in the French city of Nîmes in 2011, however issues relating to the felling of trees along part of the route have created such an upset that some sources suggest that the entire BRT scheme may fail. If the scheme survives then a second line is likely to open in circa 2017. Unguided Créalis buses are also used on a BRT system in the French city of Maubege, as well as 'ordinary' bus services elsewhere in France. | ||
 | |  |
| Crealis Neo on the T Zen Line 1 BRT service in Essonne, which is a French département to the south of Paris. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/ File:TZEN-L1_Gare-de-Lieusaint_IMG_0267.JPG. | | Bus manufacturers' promotional photograph of a flat fronted Crealis with Optiguide pod on its roof. http://www.irisbus.com/en-us/PRODUCTS/Pages/Crealis.aspx. |
Electric Success.Meanwhile, whilst the diesel-electric Civis / Cristalis buses did not found favour, the electric trolleybus versions proved to be somewhat more successful. Over a period of several years Lyon, France, has upgraded its trolleybus fleet with over 100 Cristalis trolleybuses. Since late 2006 some of these have been used on the first of several TBRT routes. The urban transport authority sees the Cristalis brand of buses as providing an upgrade to ‘ordinary‘ buses - of whatever traction package - and therefore being ideal for routes which need investment but do not justify trams. Lyon is an excellent example of how the different transport modes can all find a place in a large city - in December 2000 it opened two brand new tram routes totalling 41km in length to complement its pre-existing network of trolleybuses (including some brand new ‘midi‘ trolleybuses for route 6 which uses roads unsuitable for full size vehicles), motorbuses, four métro lines and several funiculars. (In total the Métro is 25km in length and the trolleybuses 54km). Even without these planned new investments Lyon already has transport systems that are way, way in advance of just about every British city except London. Furthermore, the combination of these transport means that 70% of Lyon's public transports being electrically operated, helping reduce air pollution and improve the quality of the urban environment. Elsewhere in France cities using Cristalis trolleybuses include Limoges and St Etienne (both using the 12m rigid version) whilst Milan, Italy, uses the 18.5m articulated versions. All these cities already operate trolleybuses; St Etienne & Milan also use trams too. In the mid 2000's the Italian city of Bologna announced plans for a fleet of 49 Civis trolleybuses on a 69 station / 25 km / 4 route TBRT system. Services were originally expected to commence running in 2009, but were delayed and even by June 2011 the future of these plans remain unknown. The idea was for the buses to be optically guided using Optiguide as a full-time guidance system, however after many months of testing the Optiguide system did not achieve safety certification for speeds higher than about 25km/h, (15mph) which is too low to allow commercially viable journey times. With the Civis trolleybuses having been delivered it could possibly end up they will only be used for accurate docking at bus stops (if at all). North American Experience.In 2004 the Civis arrived in North America. Opening on 30th June, the Regional Transportation Commission of Southern Nevada (RTC) is using Civis buses on a high-profile Bus Rapid Transit service known as MAX (Metropolitan Area Express) in Las Vegas, Nevada to link the Downtown Transportation Center with Nellis Air Force Base via Las Vegas Boulevard North - a distance of about seven miles. This is the fourth busiest Citizens Area Transit route and the second busiest residential-based route on their system, with many of the area's residents being low-income service industry workers who depend on transit to get to work. MAX requires ten air-conditioned 18.75m diesel-electric articulated Civis buses; because these European vehicles are so different to anything the American transport operators had seen before the first (demonstration) vehicle arrived in Southern Nevada in August 2002 for extensive testing and evaluation with the others coming later. The RTC describe their MAX buses as looking like a cross between a bus and a bullet train. MAX is a Federal Transit Administration national demonstration project. To help meet stringent "local content" requirements these buses are fitted with locally sourced diesel traction units. In April 2006 discussion on various transport - related Internet chat and advocacy sites suggested that there is disappointment with the vehicles' fuel consumption, which is described as being in the order of 1 (one) litre per km. This is at least partly attributed to their hybrid diesel-electric propulsion system, which is where the fossil fuel motor powers an electric generator which powers the electric motors; it is probable that the vehicles would have been less thirsty had they been series hybrids, which is where the electric motors are powered by on board batteries, with these being charged by a low power fossil fuel engine. However the batteries also impose a weight penalty, plus take up much space - reducing the passenger capacity. In 2006 it was announced that MAX would be expanded - but rather than using the French Civis buses it would employ the 'similarish' British 'StreetCar' buses - see "f - t - r" below - albeit kitted out with a US sourced hybrid electric drive system instead of the straight diesel engines as on the original British variants. The reason for this change is not known, however it is no secret that the Americans are "less than happy" with the French because of the two countries' different views on global affairs. Some sources suggest that at one stage the Americans even tried to cancel the order for the Civis buses - simply based on global politics. Although the British buses will be driver steered at all times this will not be an issue - as apparently experience has shown that sand blowing over the roadway has so frequently left the road markings either compromised or invisible / unreadable that the optical guidance system has now been deactivated. | ||
 | |  |
| Irisbus promotional photograph showing the demonstration Civis vehicle which went to the USA in 2002. | | MAX (Metropolitan Area Express) Civis bus in Las Vegas. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/ Image:CAT_Irisbus_Civis.jpg. |
 | |  |
Transport operator's promotional photographs of a MAX (Metropolitan Area Express) Civis vehicle in Las Vegas. Spanish Expansion.In 2008 a small experimental Trolleybus Rapid Transit (TBRT) system using (initially) three 12m rigid optically guided Cristalis vehicles opened in Castellón de la Plana (Castelló de la Plana in Valencian) which is the capital city of the province of Castellón, in the Valencian Community, Spain. This is located to the east of the Iberian Peninsula, on the Costa del Azahar by the Mediterranean Sea. | ||
The idea behind this new TBRT system is to create what is being called a 'new culture for transport'. Ultimately there is an aim of 90km €600million network, although this will be built incrementally taking until 2019 to complete. The initial line is 2.1km in length, and is being treated as an experimental system, after which further decisions will be made. Although mostly operating as trolleybuses there will be some unwired sections where the buses will operate away from the busway and in diesel-electric mode. (eg: bus garage, city centre). |  Siemens press promotional photograph showing a flat fronted Cristalis trolleybus fitted with Optiguide on the TBRT route in Castellón. | |
Apparently it is intended to use the optical guidance system throughout the busway section of the route - and not just for docking at bus stops.
And In Britain?
In August 2004 a Civis vehicle was demonstrated in Manchester as possibly being the type of vehicle which could be used on the proposed Leigh - Salford - Manchester Quality Bus Corridor. If built this BRT (Bus Rapid Transit) system will feature an 8km segregated guided busway between Leigh and Ellenbrook using the trackbed of a disused railway which would link up with a further 12km of bus priority measures along the East Lancs Road (A580) and the A6 into Manchester city centre. However, whilst optical guidance might possibly be used for bus stop docking on the street section of the route its more likely that the physical kerb guided system will be used on the ex-railway line. Although believed to still be 'desired' by late 2008 there seems to have been little active progress on these proposals, and December's 'no' vote for road user congestion charging means that government finance for many 'desired' public transport investments in Manchester is now likely to be withheld.
In late 2005 it was announced that there would be trials of optically guided self-steering buses in the English city of Cambridge, and if successful it was proposed that by the end of 2006 a fleet of 22 buses would be so equipped. However these would have been ordinary buses, for which it was anticipated that the cost of fitting of the optical guidance equipment would be £25,000 per bus, plus, for the painted lines a few thousand pounds (paid by the highway authority). In an attempt to try and overcome the negative image of bus travel among car users the interior of the self-steering buses was advertised as going to be upgraded with leather seats, TV screens and - for vehicles which operate longer distance services - wireless broadband internet. However, it seemed that there were no plans for electrification, which would have dispensed with the noisy, bone shaking fossil fuel engine & its exhaust fumes - these also being significant reasons why people who have a choice often choose to avoid bus transport.
Perhaps the principle reason for investigating optical guidance is that would have allowed bus lanes to be 1.5m (5') narrower than those used by driver-steered buses. This was seen as being especially beneficial when travelling through pedestrian zones and narrow streets in city centres, where driver-steered buses are disliked because of a perceived danger that the driver will suddenly veer off course. However, it seems that no-one considered investigating whether local people would have appreciated the use of motor buses in pedestrianised zones, as they would introduce new sources of tail pipe air pollution.
In the longer term it was also proposed that Cambridge might use dual-equipped buses which could use kerb-guidance on a proposed kerb guided busway (which construction began in 2007), and then use optical guidance when travelling on the public highway.
It is very important to note that some of the Cambridge proposals detailed above would have depended on the obtaining of the very important safety certification for the optical guidance, and by no means is it certain that this would have been granted. Already in Britain one high-tech electrical self-steering system has been refused permission for use on buses carrying fare-paying passengers, even though it is safely used elsewhere. This was the magnetic / under-road guidance system trialed on London's Millennium Dome busway in 2000. More information can be found on another page.
Issues with gaining the safety certification may explain why as of September 2006 no information on these proposals had been forthcoming, and as the bus operator did not have a follow-on press release on its web site it was assumed that the proposals were quietly shelved. However this is not so, as in spring 2010 plans were announced to use optical guidance technology on new BRT services in Sheffield. More about this can be read at this press release (link opens in a new window)
http://www.stagecoachgroup.com/scg/media/press/pr2010/2010-03-24.
http://www.stagecoachgroup.com/scg/media/press/pr2010/2010-03-24.
2011 Update
By 2011 the Civis and Cristalis buses had been withdrawn from the bus manufacturers' product range, being replaced with more conventional vehicles - some of which follow the same innovative BRT design theme and include the use of optical guidance as an optional extra.
In 2011 the bus builder Solaris announced a BRT variant of its Urbino city bus which features a tram-style sloping front and integral Optiguide camera.Other features include the use of super-single in the centre axle, transclucent articulation bellows, illuminated ceiling panels, LED floor lighting and high-resolution screens showing real-time routing & connections information located at ceiling level plus above the doorways.
The Translohr.
The Translohr is being marketed in a range of modular low floor vehicle configurations designed for passenger flows between 2,000 and 5,000 per hour/direction. To achieve this the vehicles come in several variants:-
- STE3 - three passenger modules totalling 25 metres in length.
- STE4 - four passenger modules totalling 32 metres in length.
- STE5 - five passenger modules totalling 39 metres in length.
- STE6 - six passenger modules totalling 46 metres in length.
- 2x STE3 units - totalling 51 metres in length (including the couplings).
Translohr vehicles can be between 2.2m and 2.65m wide (as per local requirements) and are bi-directional - with driving cabs at both ends of the vehicle. They have a low floor just 25 cm (approximately 10 inches) above the ground.
Passenger seating can be varied according to requirements too, although there are four pre-designed seating 'formats' - sit/stand, wide or extra wide - other options include installing the seats at right angles to the bays to improve passengers' visibility of the town (transverse seating) or longitudinally to increase (standing) passenger capacity. Another design possibility is for special fittings for bicycles. Total passenger capacity of the vehicles depends on length, width and seating configurations but is claimed to be between 80 to 250. Translohr publicity material suggests that as ridership increases it would be relatively easy to increase passenger capacity on STE3 / STE4 / STE5 vehicles by adding extra modules - up to a maximum length of 6 modules, which equates to the STE6 variant. For really heavily trafficked routes another possibility is for multiple unit operation, although in many countries there are laws restricting the maximum length of vehicles which operate within the street environment.
Translohr vehicles are supported on a series of single-axle bogies that each have a set of twin guidance rollers located at both the forward and aft ends of the bogies. These rollers form a 'V' as they lock on to a guiderail which is located flush with the road surface. They are mounted at 45 degrees to the road surface and at 90 degrees to each other. Linkages from the roller assembly provide the steering function by connecting to the road wheels. (See imagebelow) Translohr vehicles have a turning circle of 10.5 metres.
Because the rail profiles are different the GLT/TVR and Translohr tracks are not compatible.
The Translohr is marketed as a tramway and it is intended / expected that at all times the vehicles will remain in guided mode with power coming from an overhead wire via a roof-mounted pantograph and the electric return being via the guide rail. However a design possibility allows for tractive effort without the overhead wire. How this would be achieved depends on local circumstances / requirements. (eg, short distances to be travelled could be powered by flywheels and batteries whilst longer distances might require fossil fuel engines). There are two traction motors providing a total output of 400 kW.
At one time other variants of Translohr vehicles were also proposed, these being the ST and the S. One especially noteworthy feature of the S vehicles is that they were designed to be capable of working away from the guidance rail, with electrical power coming from trolleybus-style twin overhead wires. Other variants which are no longer being advertised was a possibility for vehicles which were uni-directional with a definite 'front' and 'back' and the STE2 comprising of two passenger modules totalling 18 metres in length.
Where?
Initially four European cities chose to install Translohr rubber-tyred tramway systems...
- Clermont-Ferrand [France] with 22 STE4 vehicles,
- Mestre-Venice [Italy] with 20 STE4 vehicles,
- L'Aquila [Italy] with 10 STE3 vehicles,
- Padua [Italy] (Padova in Italian) with 14 STE3 vehicles
Subsequently the Italian city of Latina also opted to install a Translohr system, using 15 STE3 vehicles.
Perhaps noteworthy in the reasoning behind choosing a rubber-tyred system in Clermont-Ferrand is that it is the home city of Michelin tyres, so local prestige demands rubber tyred (and not steel wheel) local transport solutions.
Because of local politics the marketing of the Padua project has variously used the term Metrobus, Metrotram and Sistema Intermedio a Rete (SIR), with the local politicians initially wanting to hide all references to trams and then the opposite.
Reasons why L'Aquila chose a rubber-tyred solution include that the town centre is on a hill and the roads which will be used are both very steep and very narrow, so that there is no space for private rights of way and it was felt that steel wheel trams would not be suited to the inclines. Apparently the first phase (Ospedale S.Salvatore-Centro) will be 7,5 km in length and follows a route which will not serve the railway station - to which a local person made the following comment "certainly it is not a good example of integrated system....".
The Translohr is also being actively marketed in Asia and there is a test / demonstration track (0.5km in length) in Osaka, Japan. However the first Asian system is in China, where a 30km Translohr line is planned in the city of Tianjin, which is East of Beijing. This is being built in several stages, with the first being an approximately 8 km test line. Known as the 'Dongting Street Test Line' it starts at the TEDA (Tianjin Economic-Technological Development Area) Station of the light railway, extend northwards along Dongting Street and through the Tianjin new economic and high tech development zone (Tanggu District), ending at the university town with 14 stations along the way. In the initial stage of operations, eight locally built STE4 vehicles are being used, each having three carriages and a maximum speed of 70km/h.
| | |
 | |  |
| The Translohr guidance system is based on a pair of wheels mounted at 45 degrees to the road surface and at 90 degrees to each other running on a specially profiled rail embedded flush in the road surface. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:TranslohrGeleiding.png | | The Translohr uses lightweight trackage with a very distinctive specialist profile, as seen in this image taken during the construction of the Clermont-Ferrand system. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Rail_section.JPG. |
 | |  |
| Above and below - four views of the Translohr sourced from Lohr Industries promotional material. The view above left shows the wheel units which feature single-axle bogies that each have a set of twin guidance rollers located both in front and behind them. The view above right shows a STE3 vehicle operating in battery electric mode on the Duppigheim test track. | ||
 | |  |
| Translohr vehicles on demonstration - Clermont-Ferrand left and the Japanese test track right. | ||
 | |  |
| The inaugural run of the Padua Translohr with tramcar No.03 at the Santo tramstop. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/ File:APS_03_Padova_Santo_070324.jpg | | An internal view - note the upholstered perches on the articulations. |
In To Service.At one time it was expected that both the Clermont-Ferrand and Padua systems would open for passenger services in the autumn / winter of 2005 but the systems were not ready. Padua did manage to open a short 2.5km section of route before municipal elections in 2004, and this was even visited by the Italian Prime Minister. But this was only a 'showpiece' opening and the line remained closed to full passenger services. With only part of the system ready, only two Translohr trams delivered and operating out of a temporary depôt, September 2006 saw the commencement of a limited service in Padua. Initially only part of the first route was opened, something which caused some concern as it includes a 675 metre unwired section and there is an element of uncertainty as to whether the "shortened" section which has opened will be long enough to recharge the traction batteries for when travelling in battery-electric mode. Clermont-Ferrand had a 'grand opening' on Saturday 16th October 2006, with free services operating at low speed (30km/h - 20mph) over a portion of the system which did not include the location of a derailment a few weeks earlier (see below). Then the system closed again, although it has since reopened and the system is in full operation. In Clermont-Ferrand the Translohr operates under railway legislation. The significance of this is that had they operated under road vehicle legislation then they would have been limited to just 25 metres in length. The Tianjin line was inaugurated on the 6th December with full services beginning on the 10th May 2007. | ||
 Image by Raphael Frey. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/ File:Tramway_Clermont-Ferrand.jpg | |  In Place Avenue des Etats-Unis. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/ Image:Tramway-clermont-ferrand-2.jpg |
| Above and below: Translohr vehicles in public service in Clermont-Ferrand, Puy-de-Dôôme, France. | ||
 Place de Jaude. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/ Image:Tramway-clermont-ferrand-de-haut.jpg | |  In Place Avenue des Etats-Unis. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/ File:Tramway-clermont-ferrand-1.jpg |
Derailments.Part of the purpose of testing is to look for weaknesses and overcome them. So the fact that some may be found should not be automatically seen as a problem. According to official Translohr publicity "There is no possibility of derailment, even under very poor conditions of adhesion." However, there have been some teething issues, and trials these included a few derailments! Because of this some pundits rather unkindly suggested that the Translohr system is about as un-derailable as the many claims that the Titanic would be unsinkable. There might be some significance in that whilst the GLT / TVR in Nancy and Caen now exerts a downward pressure of 75 KG on the guide rail the Translohr trams only exert 10% of this. In Clermont-Ferrand the derailment which occurred on 2nd October 2006 (during pre-opening trials / staff training) was found to have been caused by debris left on the track after a car accident. As a result of this incident the safety official decided not to allow the Translohr to start full commercial service a fortnight later, as originally planned. Instead there was a delay whilst detailed investigations on the incident could be completed. However although passenger services were prohibited test runs were allowed, although initially these excluded the section of track past the site of the derailment. Padua has suffered a string of minor derailments. The first of these was on the 2nd October 2006 and involved a Translohr tram leaving the (temporary) depôt. Following this Padua's Translohr trams were modified with "the mounting of a new device on every vehicle which removes dirt from the rail, and, if it detects an obstacle, it brakes with the emergency brake.". On 5th May 2007 Padua experienced a more serious derailment where there was both an injury and damage. The incident itself saw the last wheel unit derailing with the rear section of a tram sideswiping a traffic signal, which was actually fortunate because it protected many pedestrians from harm. Unfortunately however a number of glass windows were damaged and one pedestrian was temporarily hospitalised as a result of his injuries. Apparently this derailment was blamed upon issues with the road surface. It seems that a stone sett worked loose and made its way into the vehicle's articulation, and although it was not blocking the guidance rail the unfortunate chance of the tram passing over a point in the trackage somehow resulted in a partial derailment. Although the automated obstacle detection system was activated it seems that it was not possible to prevent the incident. Some reports suggest that there is at least an element of culpability on the part of the tram driver, with suggestions that he / she ignored a warning signal. Other reports suggest that this could be because the warning system often activated without valid reasons. It should be noted that at the time these notes were written (15th May 2007) the information on this accident was based on unofficial reports, so may need revision at a later date. Another derailment occurred on 11th July 2007. No-one was hurt but the service was interrupted for a while, with different sources suggesting 90 minutes - a couple of hours. It is possible that somehow the malfunctioning of a point was to blame for this incident. There was yet another derailment on the 31st October 2007, with a tram derailing at a junction in the track and the point / switch / turnout not being set properly for the correct route. It seems that the cause of the problem might have something to do with a radio controlled junction actuation system which is being blocked or otherwise suffering from some kind of interference, as apparently there have previously been problems at this specific location. The delays from this incident were relatively small - approximately half an hour. Apparently the same day also saw a delegation from Shanghai, China, visiting to look at the Translohr system with a view to using it in their home city. Tianjin had its first derailment on 20th August 2007 with two wheel units becoming derailed and the vehicle swinging out to completely block a three lane roadway. | ||
 | |  |
| Padua's Translohr tramway includes a city centre unwired section where the trams are powered by batteries. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/ File:Translohr_tram_padova_senza_pantografo.JPG | | Padua Translohr tramcar number 14 being towed by the emergency vehicle after the derailment of 29th October 2007. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/ File:APS_57%2B14_Padova_Stazione_FS_071029.jpg |
 | |  |
| Switching tracks at the stop outside the railway station. Note how the articulation covers open up when negotiating curved track. | | Two pass near the Eremintani stop, with there being a very healthy crowd waiting on the platform. |
 | |  |
| A view of the crossover seen being used above showing a Translohr point (turnout / switch in American). | | In contrast to the GLT/TVR and ordinary trams, the Translohr requires special equipment which maintains continuous guidance where rail routes intersect. |
 | |  |
| The articulation covers open out when turning sharper curves - this view shows the outside of the curve. | | This view of a Translohr tram negotiating a busy junction close to the main railway station also shows the inside of the curve. |
 | |  |
| These images come from near the Eremintani stop where the line runs alongside the edge of the road / close to a footpath and show provision for an uninstalled crossover. Whether this is uninstalled because of changes to the original plans (perhaps as a cost cutting exercise) or that it is intended to install this at a later date but provision was made during the construction phase (as a cost saving exercise) is unknown. Left: It is to be presumed that the indentation in the footpath is required for the vehicle's wheels to expand over the swept path followed by vehicles travelling straight. Right: This better shows the uninstalled crossover... as well as an access cover on the section of road surface used by the vehicle's wheels and (next to it) what looks like a break (ie: damage) to the road surface - both of which will result in a lessening of the vehicle's ride quality. | ||
 | |  |
The side of the drivers' cab, showing the CCTV camera to help for him / her with door closing (a feature which is often found on trams), and the notice on the vehicle's passenger doors. French Success.On the 27th of August the opening of the last of section Clermont-Ferrand's first line saw it finally reaching its planned ultimate first stage length. Even though the system has been in operation for less than a year extensions are being proposed. The first of these will be a modest 1.7km in length, although more are being planned. Passenger-wise the system is proving to be very successful, with the original anticipated daily ridership of 35,000 passengers per day being proven to have been a significant under-estimate. Instead by August 2007 it was carrying 42,000 passengers per day - and as a consequence of this higher ridership plus the planned extension another six (6) Translohr trams were ordered from Lohr Industries for delivery in June 2008. On a less happy note one of Clermont-Ferrand's vehicles was wrecked in a fire on Boxing Day 2009, with the cause being attributed to the brakes on one axle seizing. More locations - in France and Asia.Two Translohr systems have been proposed for the Paris / Île-de-France area, linking Saint-Denis with Garges-Sarcelles and Châtillon with Viroflay. The former will feature 16 stops and be 6.6km in length. To be known as Line T5 it will use 15 Translohr STE3 format trams and is scheduled to open in 2011 (although some sources say 2012). The latter will follow a radial route 14km in length (including a 1.6km underground section) through the city's southern suburbs. There will be 21 stops, including two underground. It will use a fleet of 28 Translohr trams which will be of the longest STE6 format - making this the first fleet of such vehicles. To be known as Line T6 services were initally expected to start in 2010, which then slipped to two stages in 2011 and 2012, and now to 2014. In October 2008 construction began of a 9km Translohr Tramway in Zhangjiang, which is to the south-east of Shanghai, China. The inital plans were for 12 STE3 Translohr vehicles serving a route which extends from Zhangjiang High-tech Park Station of Metro Line 2 to Jinqiu Road, on a route which serves 15 stations and crosses seven river channels - requiring the building of one bridge and renovation of 10 further bridges. According to Xu Daofang, a chief engineer of tram engineering who works for the Shanghai Transportation Engineering Society, Zhangjiang is a good place to implement the city's first tram line because "it is not as busy as the city centre and construction will not affect many people". The first 9 Translohr trams arrived in February 2009 and the line opened on 31st December 2009. The choice of Translohr tramway technology was influenced by a desire to minimise 'track noises', with the rubber tyres being perceived as being more likely to make meeting this desire possible than than steel wheels. In addition, it was felt that rubber tyres would be better able to cope with the hilly terrain in the local area. Other locations known to be interested in Translohr ssytems include Medillin, Columbia (South America) where a system using 11 STE3 Translohr trams is hoped to be opening in 2014; Strasbourg in France and Bamako - the capital city of the African nation of Mali. | ||
 | |  |
| Translohr tram in Shanghai. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Zhangjiang_Tram.jpg | | Translohr in Binhai New Area (aka Tanggu), Tianjin http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:New_Tram_in_Tianjin.jpg |
More photographs of the Tianjin Translohr can be found on the Gakei.com website at http://gakei.com/tsn/tsnt.htm (Link opens in a new window)More Italian Happenings.In 2010 Padua suffered two more derailments. The first occurred on 13th January and although no official statement was made it seems that the tram derailed at a junction / on pointwork. Human error is suspected as the cause. No-one was hurt. The second derailment occurred on 26th April and it seems that a tram travelling at 25km/h approaching a junction and expecting to travel 'straight ahead' encountered a point which was set for turning right, a manouevre which requires a much lower speed of around 5km/h. Sources suggest an electrical issue affecting the point had resulted in it being set in the wrong direction. Again, no-one was hurt. What is also perhaps very relevant here is that had a normal 'duorail' tram encountered a similar situation it too would almost certainly have also derailed, as the centrifugal force would have been too great to permit it to make the turn at the higher speed. The Padua system is expanding, with there being another five routes (SIR 2 - SIR 6) either proposed or actually under construction. Fleet expansion will include some STE4 trams in addition to the STE3 trams currently being used. Things do not seem to have gone at all well in L'Aquila. Reports suggest that with work well underway and some of the Translohr trams having already been purchased the project has been delayed by a combination of route changes, a lack of money, financial irregularities with respect to some of the contracts and that some European Union regulations with respect to the awarding of major construction contracts had not been followed - resulting in a court ordering that work stops for an investigation. The earthquake of 2009 which caused much destruction in the city has also 'not helped' and may yet prove to have been the 'final straw'; in other words it remains to be seen whether the L'Aquila Translohr tramway will be completed - or cancelled. Construction in Latina only started in late 2009 and it is expected to be 2012 before the system carries its first fare paying passenger. The first section of the Mestre (Venice) Translohr tram opened on 20th December 2010. When completed there will be two lines operating a 'T' shaped network. Before that however an underpass has to be built to permit trams on Line 1 to get past Mestre railway station and reach trams on Line 2, which is the route that will serve Venice, as well as provide better interchange with local bus services. Further extensions are also planned, including seeing trams reach Marco Polo airport and an underwater link below the lagoon. According to this web page, April 2009 saw four cyclist accidents in just three days on the Translohr route in Mestre. The page also references many bicycle and scooter accidents from Padua (when that line was new), and suggests that the issue could be related to wet rails (in rainy weather) being very slippery. However it is also suggested that when wet some footpaths were also slippery... http://chatillon.ecologiesolidaire.fr/post/2009/05/01/4-accidents-en-trois-jours-a-cause-du-Translohr-de-Mestre-Venise (Link opens in a new window). | ||
 | |  |
| http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Tram_mestre7.JPG | | http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Tram_translohr_favaro3.JPG |
| These four images showing the Mestre-Venice Translohr trams are by Luca Fascia | ||
 | |  |
| http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/ File:Translohr_favaro_veneto4.JPG | | http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/ File:Translohr_a_mestre_venezia_venice_tram.JPG |
Another French Derailment.
At the present time the cause is not known, however in the afternoon of 10th January 2011 a TransLohr tram in Clermont-Ferrand derailed and crashed (sideways) against a concrete wall, with one woman being hurt. This was the system's first derailment since entering full public service.
Phileas.
In Holland a fleet of 12 distinctively-styled 'experimental prototype' buses were built for the 15km Phileas system which links Eindhoven Central Station with its airport and Veldhoven, serving the Westcorridor development zone. Most of the fleet are 18m in length with a single articulation although there is one 24m double-articulated variant too. The concept also allows for even longer 26m double articulated variants - for use where local laws permit vehicles of this length.
Phileas has been partially funded by the Dutch government, local governments in Eindhoven & surrounding areas and the private sector.
Electric propulsion.
Most of the first generation Phileas buses featured a gas powered, 'series' style, hybrid-electric drive system whereby an LPG engine operated at a constant speed providing power for both the electric motors and the NiMH storage batteries. All wheels except the front wheels are motored. The vehicles also regenerate their braking energy into the batteries which have been designed to allow up to 3km of inner-city operation with the LPG engine switched off. The use of this type of hybrid drive was claimed to reduce fuel consumption by up to 30% compared to an LPG powered motor bus of comparable size.
By way of a further refinement (and experimentation) one vehicle was also fitted with a flywheel which provided the energy required to start from rest, with the LPG engine then taking over. To further boost fuel efficiency the flywheel is recharged by regenerative braking whilst decelerating.
To reduce the costs and the weight of the vehicles, plus to cure overheating problems with the LPG engines, the second generation Phileas buses use the GM Allison 'parallel' style hybrid-electric driveline, and after experience in service (see below) the original fleet has also been converted to this drive configuration. One consequence of this is that solely the rear wheels are motored. To avoid too much duplication the differences between the series and parallel hybrid systems is looked at in greater detail on the Hybrid buses page.
About the Phileas buses.
To increase fuel efficiency the construction of Phileas buses includes extensive use of lightweight materials such as aluminum and plastic. Modular construction means that some aspects of vehicle configuration can be adjusted to suit a transport operators perceived requirements (eg: door positioning). Internally all seats and stanchions are mounted in the buses' inside walls - this is claimed to make extra space for (shopping etc) bags to be stored under the seats as well as simplify internal cleaning. Phileas buses are fully air-conditioned.
A unique feature is the all-wheel steering. This allows the Phileas buses to move sideways (crab-like) and at bus stops helps ensure very precise docking with a gap between vehicle and platform of just 5cm (2"). Because bus stop platforms are of the same height as the buses' floor these features should help to improve access for special needs people and speed the service by helping to reduce dwell time when calling at bus stops. Passenger capacities are around 140 in what is now the 18.5m version, 170 in what is now the 24.5m version and 185 in the 26m version.
Pioneering Guidance Technology.
Next to the dedicated vehicles the core of the Phileas system is its pioneering guidance technology based on magnetic beacons. This is known as Frog - this being an acronym for Free Ranging On Grid navigation technology. Phileas buses are just one of several bus services to use Frog - the others include the ParkShuttle bus at Amsterdam Schipol airport and Rivium plus a former experimental installation in the (French) Antibes.
Frog is a commercial product of an Utrecht-based company called Frog Navigation Systems, who also trade as 2gethere.
Frog features magnets which are embedded (at 4m intervals) in the concrete road surface. These are read by the on-board computer system which has also been programmed with details of the route to be followed. The computers also monitor wheel revolutions; this provides precise location information and helps the computer guide the buses both along the correct route and into bus stops. The promoters of Phileas claim that in adverse weather conditions - such as snow and ice - Frog will provide a more secure system than the Optical guidance system used by the French Civis (etc.,) buses.
Frog also provides vehicle location data for electronic "real time" information systems - not just for passengers waiting at bus stops but also for in-vehicle passenger information announcements & displays and for "off-system" users - such as mobile phone and Internet based information services.
Phileas and Frog combined offer three driving options:-
- In automatic mode the computers control acceleration, braking and steering / guidance. However at bus stops the human driver controls the doors.
- In semi-automatic mode the computers control steering and the human driver does everything else.
- In manual mode the human driver does everything, just like a regular road going bus.
The testing of the Frog guidance system on the Phileas buses has been dogged with challenges. Apparently these include finding that it suffered from electrical interference - such as from traffic signals. There have also been some issues with driver alertness - especially when the vehicles are operating in automatic mode. Part of the issue here is that it is intended that automatic mode will be used even when Phileas vehicles are operating on the normal highway (which is shared with other traffic) and subject to pedestrians who do not want to be told that to cross the road they must wait for the "cross now" symbol at specified crossing points which may be "out of the way" for where they are going... nor want to miss a bus at a bus stop simply because a traffic signal says that it is unsafe to cross the road.
The images below date from August 2006, and as is shown, not enough Phileas buses were available to operate all the journeys on the airport service. On speaking with some local people it was found that whilst the buses themselves were fine there were still issues with the three high-tech computer systems not being able to work together. The rest of the buses were off the road at the maintenance facility.
| | | ||
 | |  | ||
| Crossing a traffic signal controlled junction whilst on the reserved lane BRT (bus rapid transit) busway. | | The double-articulated vehicle. Image sourced from the promoter's promotional material. | ||
 | |  | ||
| Promotional material suggests that Phileas buses operate on bus routes 401 (Airport) and sometimes also 402 (Veldhoven) however on the day these photographs were taken services on route 401 were being shared between two Phileas buses and two regular motorbuses. | | An airport-bound bus arrives as the Bredalaan bus stop. The green strip on the bus stop platform is actually a row of LED's (light emitting diodes) which change colour and provide various animations as buses approach, leave, etc. | ||
 | |  | ||
| The on-board ticket machine. | | Phileas buses feature several pairs of wide plug style doors. Note the passenger information display above the doors and the LPG sticker on the door to right. | ||
 | |  | ||
| Internal view looking towards the front. | | Internal view looking towards the back. The lack of rear window is most noticeable. | ||
August 2007 Update.The following information comes from an Internet discussion group, having been submitted by someone with local knowledge. "In Eindhoven the Phileas buses operate on two routes, No. 401 between the central station & the airport and No.402 to Veldhoven, which is a suburb. These two routes require eight buses to operate, however after more than three years testing of the Phileas system (including GPS guidance) it is still quite usual for there to only be (at most) four Phileas buses available for service, with standard articulated motorbuses providing the rest of the service. The remaining Phileas buses are unavailable due to maintenance, testing, malfunctioning etc. The owner of the Phileas buses (public authority SRE) is now negotiating with APTS to replace the LPG engine with diesel engines (similar to the variants being supplied to Douai) plus make some other "adjustments" to improve the vehicle's reliability. Apparently for reasons of safety and other complexities the guidance system has never been / will never be fully deployed, instead Phileas buses are operated by the driver as normal unguided buses. Public transport officials in The Netherlands qualify the Phileas system as a "fiasco", in a similar way to the TVR in Nancy and Caen. In addition it was reported that several months previously the company Frog/2getthere had gone into bankruptcy, although attempts were being made to do a restart with at least some of the former workforce so as to prevent the total loss of the specialist knowledge and experience with guided systems. Passenger experience.From a passenger's point of view despite its austere looking interior Phileas does provide the significant 'step change' in improved passenger ambiance that defines it as being more than a motorbus. The LPG engine is very quiet, and is only noticeable by passengers travelling right at the back of the bus. Apart from that the general ambiance is more like that of a trolleybus. Acceleration is very smooth, and at times, brisk. The brakes are ferocious, so standing passengers must hold tight! Benefiting from very good suspension the vehicles quite literally float over any unevenness in the road surface, so that it is only just about felt. However the soft suspension also means that standing passengers gain the impression of it leaning a quite a bit on bends - it is perhaps just as well that the vehicles are only single deck buses. Vehicle rebuild.On 15th December 2007 with the Phileas buses still suffering from such severe technical problems that only three vehicles were available for service, nine of the Phileas buses were withdrawn from Eindhoven for rebuilding by the vehicle manufacturer. The rebuild saw the LPG engines being replaced with diesel engines and conversion from 'series' to 'parallel' type hybrid operation. However, the batteries (which had been reported to often failing) were not replaced. Fitting the new engines has resulted in the buses being lengthened by 40cm a little under 16" at the back, which had some unanticipated repercussions when, upon their return to service in December 2008, it was found that at some road configurations the longer rear overhang was now over-riding the footpath and creating a safety hazard of a moving vehicle actually hitting a pedestrian! These works were estimated to cost €4.500.000, this being €500,000 per bus. Guidance Abandoned.With technical issues still continuing September 2008 saw the decision being taken to formally abandon the use of the Frog automatic guidance system, except for docking at bus stops. According to media reports the vehicles would quickly accelerate to their 80km/h (50mph) top speed and then stay at that speed, and if was not for the driver slamming on the brakes they would even sail straight through red traffic signals and other road intersections. In addition to the issues with potential collisions these emergency-type stops were also unpopular with the passengers, who often would be badly thrown around - or worse. Other times the buses would just stop and restart at locations where nobody wants to get on or off. Angry passengers would often blame and swear at the driver, not understanding that the system was supposed to able to operate automatically - and not as if under the possession of a maniacal demonic spirit. As was explained above, the Phileas system which cost more than €80 million to create has become known (by the Dutch people) as a "Phileasco", this being a merging of the words 'Phileas' and 'fiasco'. Other Phileas Bus Systems.Korea.In 2005 an agreement was signed to create and market a Korean version of Phileas, where it is estimated that there could be a market for as many as 600 Phileas buses. The Korean Phileas version is being developed in co-operation with Hyundai KRRI, and includes the introduction of a series fuel cell propulsion system. Douai, France.On 7 July 2005 a contract was signed for the introduction of a Phileas bus system to link the French city of Douai with the nearby community of Guesnain. To be called "Tram 2007" the contract consisted of twelve 18m second generation Phileas buses which use the diesel-parallel type of hybrid propulsion system and would be delivered by the end of 2007. At some stage however the proposed fleet changed to ten 18m single articulated and two 24m double articulated Phileas buses. Phase one of what is projected to be Line 1 is 12km in length, and features 39 stations approximately 400m apart. As some of the proposed bus stops/stations use island platforms the buses feature doors on both sides. The project also includes reducing so called 'visual clutter' by burying existing overhead wires (telephones, electricity). The system was expected to cost around €117 million, and serve approximately 70.000 inhabitants. In the peak hours services will operate at 10 minute intervals, carrying a maximum of 900 travellers per hour. It is being marketed as a rubber tyred tramway using the name of 'Evéole'. Although the buses will initially operate in 'driver steered' mode it is intended to implement the guidance system as soon as possible after the buses themselves are operating troublefree. Apparently in Douai the guidance system is seen as a very valuable tool and was actually one of the main reasons to order the Phileas bus system. The first Phileas bus arrived in Douai on 18th November 2006. It was expected that once the full fleet had arrived and the staff had been trained passenger services would commence in the first quarter of 2008, however by September 2007 this time frame had slipped to the end of June 2008, whilst by mid-April 2008 this had slipped even further - to September 2008. Initially the delay was understood to be because of late delivery of the fleet of buses, although the slippage to September has been attributed to a need for the Phileas system (which is new to France) to achieve its safety certification. By September 2008 and with the safety certification still not having been obtained it was announced that the first public services were unlikely to commence before the summer of 2009. By early 2009 the year 2010 had been seen as a suggested date! It seems that the Eindhoven abandonment of the automated guidance system creates a 'big problem' for Douai, as this was one of the system's unique features which so attracted the various officials to it. In many ways Douai is also paying the price for using something 'new', so testing will be much more thorough than with a system which uses 'known' technology that exists elsewhere. At the time of this update (February 2009) it still remains to be seen whether 'Evéole' will achieve permission to use the automated guidance system at all. It could be that it will only be permitted for bus stop docking, with buses being manually steered elsewhere. A visitor to Douai in September 2008 reported using a regional bus service which for much of its route within Douai uses the road which is to become the Phileas route. He noted that the busway consists of a wide swathe of concrete six or seven metres wide in the middle of the road, totally unused, while city and interurban buses have to share one narrow lane in each direction with all the other traffic. He added that the driver of the bus he was travelling on got fed up of having to line up behind all this, so as that bus didn't have to serve all the city bus stops he simply pulled out onto the middle of the road and zoomed down the centre of the empty busway, overtaking everyone - cars, vans, buses, the lot. However, another visitor expressed surprise that such was possible, as when he visited the area he saw the busway being used by local people as a car park. Meanwhile, despite nothing having even opened to passenger service extensions and a second line are already being planned for the Douai Phileas 'Evéole' pseudo (ersatz) tram. Line 2 will be 5.2km in length and link the Centre Hospitalier de Dechy with Line 1 at Place Carnot in Douai. An un-named line will also extend 5.2km from Douai (Place Carnot) to Frais Marais Templerie via the town of Waziers. Plus there will be two extensions of Line 1 - these being from Gesnain via the interchange point in Masny to Douai (3.3km) and the interchange point in Masny to d'Auberchicourt (2.4km). These extensions will feature 24 stops and have been costed at €124.8 million. Work is provisionally expected to commence late in 2009 with completion in 2012. Open - at last!The 'Evéole' BRT system finally opened to fare paying passengers on Sunday 8th February 2010, with the buses operating in driver steered mode. Istanbul, Turkey.In late summer 2007 a BRT system using some Phileas buses opened in Istanbul, Turkey. Initially this was planned to use a mix of other buses with 50 parallel hybrid double articulated Phileas buses 26 metres in length which have a 'normal' capacity of approximately 230 passengers each. These buses have doors on both sides. Much of the route is single track alongside the E5 freeway, and this BRT system was expected to cost around €60 million. As the Phileas buses were not available when the system opened initial services used two of the Dutch Phileas buses (one each, single and double articulated) plus other buses. The new Phileas buses were introduced as soon as they became available. In Istanbul things have not gone too well for Phileas, with reports suggesting that by summer 2009 most of these almost brand new buses had already had to be taken out of service with major problems which include difficulties in climbing steep hills and breakages to the vehicles' suspension system. The issue has been exasberated by broken down buses causing severe problems on the single-track nature of their dedicated right of way, blocking it so that other buses are unable to pass. The matter is so serious that it has even been discussed in Parliament and plans to buy 50 more Phileas buses have been put on hold. Apparently the hill climbing issue is that the buses are designed to climb a 2.5% gradient at 40km/h, but the people of Istanbul see this as being too slow / are used to other buses doing so more quickly. Local speculation talks of the Phileas buses being more suited to flat countries like Holland than locations where heavily loaded vehicles are required to climb even gentle hills. The problems with the suspension could have been caused by overcrowding. Buses normally have a maximum capacity limit on the number of passengers allowed to travel; these vehicles were designed to carry up to 230 passengers - or possibly as many as 280 at busy times, but reports from British visitors suggest that for large parts of the day (and over long distances) they are 'packed like sardines' with possibly as many as 350 passengers onboard. Italy (x2), and Israel beckon...
In Italy a trolleybus Phileas service is under construction which will link Porta Nuova station in the city of Pescara with Porto Allegro in the nearby town of Montesilvano. Initially for Line 1 there will be six 18 metre single articulated Phileas trolleybuses with a capacity of between 145 and 155 passengers each. The route will be approximately 8.1 km in length, with 17 stops and a target end to end journey time of about 20 minutes - this being about half the present day journey time. Most of the route will be on private rights of way, with 30 road crossings where the automatically driven Phileas trolleybuses will benefit from traffic signal priority. 4.8km of the route will use a former railway right of way known as Strada Parco. The overhead wire support poles will be 6 metres in height and of an award winning decorative design. They will be located 30 metres apart and also double up as street lighting supports, reducing the need for other street furniture. This service was first proposed in 1992, and construction has been dogged by disagreements, but at the time of writing (summer 2010) opening has been tentatively projected for 2012. However, timescales may yet slip even further - and as some aspects of what is being proposed are locally controversial so there might yet be some late changes to what finally transpires. The system has been given an official name of Filò and a website lauched at http://www.filo-pe.it (link to external site opens in a new window). Also in Italy a 10km former railway route between the coastal towns of Rimini and Riccione will be converted into a TBRT (trolleybus rapid transit) line which will use nine Phileas guided buses. To be known as Trasporto Rapido Costiero (TRC) it seems that this installation will include tunnel operation, where guidance will be a positive safety feature. This line will be in addition to the existing street-based trolleybus services linking these towns. Scheduled to open in 2011, the Haifa, Israel Metronit BRT system is planned to use as many as 100 double-articulated Phileas buses on a three-route system, for which an extensive network of bus priority lanes are being built. | ||||
 | |  | ||
| A large banner put up in Kiryat Eliezer, Haifa, advertising the Metronit. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Metronit.JPG. | | Example of completed BRT right of way, ready for the Metronit - and until then used by existing bus services. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Metronit_track.jpg. | ||
Fuel Cell Hybrids.In or around late 2010 / early 2011 four hydrogen fuel cell hybrid 18 metre Phileas buses will be entering service. Two will feature supercapacitors and are destined for the Dutch city of Amsterdam whilst the other two will use batteries (type not specified) and are destined for the German city of Cologne (Köln). "f - t - r".In the autumn of 2004 one of the major British transport operators (FirstGroup) and a major British Isles-based bus builder (The Wright Group) announced plans for a new concept in bus travel. Known as 'f-t-r' this heralds the introduction of a brand new UK-sourced high-tech (looking) bus which has been designed somewhat along the lines of a rubber-tyred tram and is called 'StreetCar'. At 18.75m (62ft) in length the "StreetCar" buses are slightly longer than ordinary (British) bendy buses, and feature two doorways through which passengers can board or alight. To help create a high-quality environment for the passengers and driver they use an advanced stiffened structure to address what the automotive industry describes as NVH (Noise, Vibration, Harshness). However despite all the other niceties under the skin (as described below) the StreetCar vehicles are still bog-standard motorbuses, being powered by a reduced-emission Volvo diesel engine and using a drivetrain based on the successful Volvo B7L model - albeit with the radiator, which is normally fitted just above the engine, having been relocated to the roof. Effectively this means that under the very sleek and sophisticated looking skin these buses are based on standard diesel bus mechanical components. So it could be said that the StreetCar buses are more of a styling exercise or a fashion statement than a genuinely innovative attempt to re-invent the motorbus as a rubber-tyred electric tram. It is understood that the people involved with the creation of the StreetCar wanted to reduce potential teething issues by using proven tried and tested mechanical components - and that the creation a hybrid electric version is under consideration. This would be most fortunate, as it would then create the possibility for conversion to 100% zero emission two - wire electric (ie: trolleybus) operation. Inside the StreetCar passengers benefit from a choice of conventional seating, perches to provide support for those who prefer to stand, a lounge-style area at the rear and open standing areas for people making short journeys. To help to reduce solar gain there are tinted, double-glazed windows. To create a pleasant draught-free environment the windows are sealed and instead the vehicles feature a sophisticated heating, ventilation and air-conditioning system. Both the passengers and the pilot (as with aircraft StreetCar drivers are is known as "pilots") should also benefit from the noise absorption materials which have been fitted throughout the vehicle, providing what are described as new levels of sound-proofing. To further help create a modern ambiance there is concealed lighting, backed up by LED spotlights. Accepting that people do drop litter, the interior has also been designed with ease of cleaning as a high priority. Real-time passenger information is provided by two screens and a sophisticated computerised system developed by the bus builder in conjunction with specialist third parties ensure that different systems such as CCTV, automatic vehicle location and passenger information can interact. Real-time information systems are also used to provide traffic signal priority and is clever enough to be able to do this only if the StreetCars are running late. As with trams, but unusually for a bus, the StreetCars feature totally-enclosed full-width driving compartments separated from the passengers by a full-height partition with tinted glazing. The pilots’ workstation features ergonomically-designed controls. StreetCars feature deep front windscreens, to give the pilot a good view of the road ahead. A public address system allows two-way communication between pilot and passengers. f-t-r is more than just vehicles. The design brief for the f-t-r system was / is to create a new idiom in British bus transport by merging "the best from the bus in terms of affordability, accessibility and flexibility with the best from the tram in terms of image, dedicated infrastructure and perceived reliability." The concepts designers took "an integrated approach, tackling issues such as frequency, service quality, ticketing, vehicle design, infrastructure, engineering and route management." Passengers using 'f-t-r' services (bus routes) are encouraged to buy tickets off-vehicle - for instance some types of travel tickets can be bought at local shops which are part of the "PayPoint" system, and using the M-Ticket system 10 ride tickets can be texted to pre-registered mobile phones. These are displayed as barcodes so that they can "read" and validated on boarding the StreetCar buses. Cash fares can also be bought from the on-board ticket machines, however these only accept the exact money (ie: do not give change) and fares paid cash are slightly higher than the other payment options. f-t-r has a stated aim of attracting 10% of car journeys off the roads its serves within five to six years - increasing public transport usage on those same corridors by 30%. It is conceivable that in time f-t-r services using the StreetCar buses could be rolled out to any and many of the British towns and cities where the FirstGroup operates bus services Where first?At a glitzy razzmatazz public launch in March 2005 it was announced that the first 11 of the £200,000 (the price then) vehicles will be delivered to the city of York in January 2006 and will run on route No.4, which travels on the route from the University to Acomb via the main railway station. After training, etc., passenger services began in May 2006. First Impressions.Whilst the StreetCar buses have certainly "turned heads" the much hoped-for gloss has been tarnished by teething issues. Perhaps the most significant of these has revolved around the ticketing system - as mentioned above it is understood that the people involved with the creation of the StreetCar wanted to reduce potential teething issues by using tried, tested, and proven viable components, but for a bus where paying the driver was a physical impossibility something different had to be devised. Unfortunately whilst the adopted solutions could and should have been successful its implementation was less than beneficial. Part of the problem was local dismay at the flat fare of £1.50 instead of the graduated fares of £1, £1.50 and £2 that the bus company charged on most of its other services in York. However also a significant cause for complaint was the slowness of the ticket issuing process. It seems that the single machine located behind the Pilot were very slow and at busy bus stops the queue of passengers waiting to pay often extended on to the footpath - delaying the services as if they were "pay driver" buses. Whilst some off-vehicle ticket sales were available for period tickets a far better solution would have been to adopt the well proven European system whereby local shops sell single and discounted multi-ride tickets which can be validated using separate readers fitted on the buses (near the doorways) which are independent of the ticket machine. Alternatively the busiest bus stops could have been equipped with ticket machines, although it is understood that because of vandalism and theft issues there was a desire to avoid street-based ticket machines. Another gripe was that the ticket machines only took exact money - they neither accepted paper money nor gave change. When a couple with a £5.00 note wanted to travel they were unable to do so as they had no way of paying. At the university bus stop a lady was overheard telling her friends and relatives who had come for her graduation that these buses were "an absolute nightmare - you can only go on them if you have exact change."Whether the same lady would use a car park "pay & display" machine that also refuses to give change is not known. In October 2006 some media reports were suggesting that FirstGroup officials had recognised that the ticket machines seem to have proven to be f-t-r's Achilles Heel and were even considering replacing them with (human) conductors on a full-time basis. Unoffical briefing also suggested that an unexpected 'problem' was the variability in boarding times depending on the proportion of passengers with passes or paying cash. In May 2007 it was announced that 20 customer service hosts (aka: 'bus conductors') would be recruited to replace the disliked ticket selling machines. This puts the York StreetCar on par with several of the British tram systems which also use human conductors instead of machines to collect the fares. Not evenings / Sundays.In the spring of 2009 it was announced that as a cost saving measure, during the evenings (after 7pm / 19.00) and all day Sundays and public holidays f-t-r services in York would be operated by conventional buses which consume less fuel and can be operated without the added cost of the bus conductor. | ||||
 | |  | ||
| StreetCar buses outside York station. | ||||
 | |  | ||
| ftr bus stop flag. | | The StreetCar buses feature wide twin leaf plug doors which, at the front of the bus, open to a circulating area and the ticket machine. Seen outside York station with its decorative flower planters | ||
 | |  | ||
| A passenger's eye view from the rear section looking forwards. On the articulation top bulkhead and to the right of the vehicle number (ftr 19011) can be seen one of the two passenger information display screens plus (in the larger image) the "stopping" message indicating that the bus has been requested to call at the next bus stop. | | The "better bus" theme even extends to the ceiling with diffused fluorescent lighting and fashionable LED downlights. | ||
 | |  | ||
| Rear looking internal view showing how the low floor only partially extends towards the back of the bus, plus some overseas tourists who were happy to be photographed sitting on the sideways facing seats opposite the rear doorway. | | Forward looking internal view showing the pushchair / wheelchair space on the left. On the right the white square on the Pilot's cab bulkhead is actually one of the two passenger information display screens. | ||
NextIn October 2006 it was announced that Leeds would be the second city to host f-t-r services using the 17 of the StreetCar buses - also on route No.4. In an attempt to reduce the impact of any possible teething issues it was decided that they would be slowly introduced alongside ordinary buses, a process which began in January 2007 and resulted in it taking a number of months for the route to become 100% f-t-r. As with several of the British tram systems fares are being collected by conductors / customer service hosts. Whether f-t-r services in Leeds will also be extended to bus routes which use the kerb-guided busway remains to be seen. (Leeds not illustrated). After Leeds the next service to use the pink and purple livered StreetCar buses was expected to be a high profile BRT (Bus Rapid Transit) route serving Swansea (South Wales), however instead with the opening of the Swansea system having been delayed (see below) January 2008 saw four of the spare Wrightbus StreetCars being allocated to the 'train2plane' services linking Luton Airport with Luton Airport Parkway railway station, operating as feeders to the cross-London 'Thameslink' railway service which FirstGroup renamed 'First Capital Connect' when they won the Thameslink railway franchise. At the same time, and because of the higher cost (and quality) of the StreetCar buses, fares were introduced on the previously free bus shuttle, although as a concession railway passengers benefit from discounted rates. | ||||
 | |  | ||
| StreetCar buses on the 'train2plane' service outside Luton Airport Parkway railway station. | ||||
| A StreetCar bus seen on the 'train2plane' service 'en route'. The white trees seen in the background do not represent a new variety of tree (those sort of changes are still a few years away / will be after 2012) but are because despite the brilliant sunshine it was a freezing cold day and there was a 'day frost'. |  | |||
The Swansea Metro (Metro Abertawe).In Swansea f-t-r services are being marketed as the Swansea Metro (Metro Abertawe in the Welsh language). Costing £14 million this is the first f-t-r service to include sections of specially built private right of way in addition to bus lanes, shared use of the public highway - including High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lanes - plus, where required, other bus priority measures. This includes the Landore Express Bus Route. Located just to the north of the railway station this is specially built bus-only road that is about a mile in length. To ensure that only permitted vehicles are able to enter it is fully enclosed. On one side the busway runs alongside the railway, whilst on the other side there is a walkway / cycleway which is physically separated from the busway by a high fence. At both ends opening gates allow permitted buses to enter / leave. These include StreetCar buses and buses from certain other bus services, such as a park+ride service. The Swansea Metro is a partnership between the City & County of Swansea and First Cymru Buses. It is being funded by the Welsh Assembly Government and the European Objective One programme. With the StreetCar buses ready for delivery (for staff training) in late 2007 public services were originally expected to commence in 2008, but delays with the roadway works (which includes the creation of 'quality bus stops' complete with shelters) saw the scheme being delayed until mid 2009. The first StreetCar bus entered service on 1st June with the rest of the 10-vehicle fleet (nine for regular services plus one spare) entering service 'one at a time' over a period of weeks. In September 2009 there was a formal opening ceremony. Curiously, as with York and Leeds the Swansea Metro just happens to be No.4 in the local bus numbering scheme. It will be left for people with an interest in numerology to investigate the significance of this. In keeping with the bi-lingual status of Wales, all signage is in both English and Welsh, although being in South Wales the English language is usually displayed first. Not evenings / Sundays.As with York in Swansea the use of StreetCar buses is to be restricted to weekday and Saturday daytimes, with single person operated buses used at other times. | ||||
 | |  | ||
| Passing through the electrically powered gates to leave the "Landore Express Bus Route". | | In the city centre the Swansea Metro benefits from a true BRT style private right of way which is restricted buses only (plus some local access, for permit holders only). | ||
 | |  | ||
The Swansea Metro includes some light rail style stops with modern shelters and (at some locations) dedicated bus priority traffic signals too. In some countries (eg: Holland, Switzerland) buses sometimes follow similar style dedicated signals as the trams, however in this image we see that they have been provided with a green pictogram of a single-deck bus. Even More???Several other British cities are reported to be interested in f-t-r services and StreetCar buses, however what happens next / where is next might depend as much upon on funding as anything else. For more information visit... * the website of the transport operator http://www.firstgroup.com/ftr/projectambition/index.php, * the bus manufacturer http://www.wrightbus.com/site/default.asp?CATID=32, * the dedicated f-t-r website http://www.goftr.com, * a detailed local government report about the Swansea Metro http://www.swansea.gov.uk/metro, * a page on the Bath & North East Somerset (local govt.) website about the bid for funding for a package of transport improvements which will include a BRT service using StreetCars http://www.bathnes.gov.uk/bathpackage (links to external sites which open in new windows.) What the f-t-r concept lacks. | ||||
For all its merits and attempts to be like a 'rubber tyred light rail vehicle' in its initial form the StreetCar buses and f-t-r concept avoid one of the most appreciated features of light rail, ie: instead of vehicles having tail pipes emitting noxious exhaust fumes they are electrically powered. However thanks to a professional CAD (computer aided design) draughtsman from the Electric Tbus Group - www.tbus.org.uk (external link opens in a new window) one StreetCar bus has become much more city (and environmentally) friendly. Indeed, a f-t-r TBRT (Trolleybus Rapid Transit) system would be 'just the ticket' for many British urban areas. Trolleybuses, electric buses, air pollution and why so called "cleaner" diesel (aka "less dirty") buses could be worse that buses which give off visible smoke are looked at on the Electric Buses page. The StreetCar goes to the USA (and Canada).In June 2006 it was announced that the Regional Transportation Commission (RTC) of Southern Nevada is to purchase 50 StreetCar buses, with two further options each for an additional 50 buses. These would be used on two new Metropolitan Area Express (MAX) routes serving downtown Las Vegas and out to Boulder City. Known as 'StreetCar RTV' (Rapid Transit Vehicle) these buses feature the same core vehicle design as the initial batch of British StreetCars, but use a chassis produced by Swiss manufacturer Hess plus a diesel hybrid drive system based on a Cummins ISL engine developed in conjunction with the ISE Corporation of California and Siemens Energy & Automation in Georgia. |  A Swansea Metro StreetCar which has been converted to 100% electric traction (and painted blue rather than purple). Image modified by a professional CAD (computer aided design) draughtsman from the Electric Tbus Group - www.tbus.org.uk | |||
 Inside the StreetCar RTV. | ||||
| These StreetCar RTV images were sourced from promotional images on the Wrightbus website http://www.wrightbus.com/site/default.asp?CATID=49 - note that page (which opens in a new window) includes some very large images (over 9mb each). | ||||
 | |  | ||
The StreetCar RTV. Note that whilst the British StreetCar buses feature two pair of passenger doorways per vehicle the RTV version features three pair of passenger doorways. Services using 50 StreetCar buses in Las Vegas began in March 2010. Two routes are served - ACE Gold Line and ACExpress - with the buses being painted in a distinctive gold and blue livery. These are being operated as true high-quality BRT services, featuring facilities such as prepaid ticketing from vending machines (through a system known as Ticket Now), limited stop service, dedicated bus-only lanes, and bus stops with level-platform boarding. It took just a fortnight for the new services to be exceeding ridership expectations, with them carrying over 30,000 people per day - this being far in excess of the original estimations of the originally predicted 4,000 - 6,000 passengers a day. Also in 2010 one of the Las Vegas StreetCar RTV buses was demonstrated in Victoria, British Columbia, Canada as a possible choice of vehicle for a projected rapid transit system which will use either buses or light rail. Earlier than expected British expansion... | ||||
 | |  | ||
No comments:
Post a Comment