New Era Hi-tech Buses
Experience in many towns and cities both in Europe and in North America has shown that steel-wheel on steel-rail railways (and especially light rail - modern trams and streetcars) are the most popular and successful of model choices for enticing motorists out of their cars; but not every conurbation is large enough to justify such systems, plus no matter the size of the city there will still be transport corridors where 'some improvement' over traditional buses is required but the traffic flow does not justify investing in (steel-wheeled) rail transport. In Europe as a whole there is reported to be over 150 cities that are too small to justify fully fledged steel-wheel tram systems but where some sort of higher capacity bus-based transport could be a viable alternative. If other cities elsewhere globally are included too then these new transports potentially could have a very large market for them.
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.
Views of production TVR vehicles in commercial service.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
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 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.
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:-
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.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
No comments:
Post a Comment