Jump to content

martin607

Member
  • Content Count

    171
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Recent Profile Visitors

1,462 profile views
  1. Not sure whether this should go here or on the incidents thread, but Translink twitter and the alerts page indicates major disruption to southbound trolleybuses on the 4/7/10/14/16 plus the 50 because of "trolley wires down". Frustratingly they don't say exactly where but it is probably southbound either on the Granville Bridge or approaches. Buses diverted in various ways to go mostly via the Cambie Bridge. There was also a diesel shuttle instituted between downtown and Granville at Broadway. Did anybody see this or even better get any photos of the downed wires? The problem seems to be resolved but services may take time to get back to normal patterns.
  2. Forgive my ignorance but what is SSP? Do you have a link please?
  3. Update on the trolleybus fleet. By mid-May the highest numbered New Flyer XT40 to enter service was 5836, which would mean only another 48 remain to be delivered and enter service. Meanwhile the active ETI fleet was down to 65 shared as follows: Portrero 20 and Presidio 45. At the present rate of XT40 deliveries, the whole ETI fleet could be gone by about October.
  4. Given the different rhythm of battery bus operation (regular charging breaks etc.) I wonder how the scheduling department is planning for the introduction of the BEBs on the route 100. Do they have two different sets of paddles for the different types of bus? Or do they just have one set of working timetable and put the BEBs out on any run and see how they cope? Either way there could be a risk that over the day the service becomes disjointed, for example if battery buses fall behind with their charging requirements. Of course, that is one of the reasons for doing a 2.5 year trial.
  5. Why the criticism? This is general information about the system's operation, so what's wrong with putting it here? Most posts on TComm thread seem to be about specific buses, runs etc. Returning the 4 and 7 to trolley operation is a much wider event and IMHO can rightly be called "general" and go in this thread.
  6. Depending on the seat layout, the maximum load on a 12 m trolleybus is 78 passengers but I have seen 73 suggested. Either way the BEB seems to have a shortfall of about 12 passengers (about 16%) compared with either diesel or trolleybus.
  7. From my observations worldwide, it is normal that BEBs have a restricted passenger capacity because of weight regulations. The shortfall seems to be around 15% to 20% e.g. the Marcedes e-Citaro in Germany or the Solaris BEB version of the Urbino, made in Poland.
  8. I wonder how accurate the positioning of the bus needs to be, in order to connect with the pantograph coming down from the charging unit. In some countries they install a small hump in the paving so the driver can "feel" when they've reached the right place to park and charge.
  9. Thanks for the information. I understand your point about the road layout. There are a few of points that I would comment on. - Yes both models use the same motor which is rated at 250kW (or maybe 240kW) . That is ample power for an articulated bus even on hills. I believe the same size motors were used to achieve economies of scale. On the standard 12m models, the power is governed, otherwise passengers might be thrown on the floor. - Electric motors last a long time with little maintenance - there are plenty of examples of trolleybuses lasting 30 years with the same traction motor. They cope well with periodic overloads like climbing a hill, though obviously if there is a permanent overload there could be problems ( a sort of meltdown?). - the snow issue is, as I understand it, mostly because only the rear axle is powered. Ideally both the centre and rear axle would be powered as happens in countries like Switzerland. This gives better adhesion in snow and ice. - There could also be problems with the electric motor having too much torque when attempting to start. - is there an additional issue that the electrical supply on the southern end of the Victoria route is a bit weak. They would probably have to install a new substation to improve the power supply feeding that end of the route and the link along to the Canada Line station. - At one time planners suggested that savings in deadhead hours would make the extension of both the Fraser and Victoria lines worthwhile. I'm not sure about that, presumably the present deadhead is along 41st and then Oak or Granville to VTC. Would there be much of a saving?
  10. I don't understand your comment about the steep hill. Why would that be a problem for trolleybuses?
  11. Maybe they won't need to do that for special events. One scenario is that TL will buy battery-trolleybuses with In Motion Charging as well as a fleet of battery electric buses. In which case detours will be handled by the trolleybus having say 20km off wire range. That is one of the downsides of using opportunity charging. The BEBs can only run on routes where there are chargers at the terminals. Overnight charging is more flexible on routing but has the downside heavy battery weight and possible range problems in cold weather.
  12. The recent board meeting also included references to the future Marpole Transit Centre, which will accommodate both battery buses and diesel electric hybrids. Completion is due in 2023. Sounds like they won't be using VTC for the battery bus fleet at least initially.
  13. Never say "never". Who knows what will happen in the future? Politicians move on; real life experience of battery buses on trial may show some limitations in operations or economics, etc. Trolleybuses aren't the same as you remember from your youth, the technology has moved on. The latest models are battery-trolleybus hybrids with In Motion Charging, combining the energy efficiency of mains electric with the flexibility of the battery bus. Cities like Berlin and Stockholm think battery buses are fine for medium loads but believe these new style trolleybuses will be needed on the heaviest duty routes.
  14. Thanks. Two points that are refreshing to read: 1. Gillig have waited till they are are confident of the product before bringing their battery bus to the market. 2. They have avoided using the Altoona based energy consumption of 1.7 kWh per mile and used the much more realistic figure of 2.3 kWh per mile. This figure lines up with what the Federal Transit Administration found during the trials of the Proterra buses in Seattle. Who knows, by waiting to be the fourth entrant into the market, maybe Gillig will compete well with the early entrants.
  15. If you mean the best battery-electric buses, I would suggest that New Flyer seems the most reliable. For example in the tests in New York they seem to have performed well, while the Proterra trial buses were withdrawn. Proterra seems to do well in some places e.g. Seattle but not so impressive in other places e.g. in Philadelphia it took them six months to get their first few buses into service. Now if you mean electric buses of all categories, I would nominate the Swiss Trolley Plus, a battery -trolleybus built by Hess with a cutting-edge electric traction package from ABB.
×
×
  • Create New...