The major variable in the question of new trams is the actual
length/capacity of the individual unit.

You should be looking at a working life of say 40 years and specify your
new tram accordingly.  (Hint: This requires an appreciation of passenger
demand long term.  Sydney's original tram planners learnt an early
lesson with the 'tiny' C class being replaced with the large capacity O
class well before the life expiry of the Cs.)

Dublin is a case of interest having gone from initial tram lengths of 3
modules to 5 modules, 7 modules and now 9 modules.

Experienced operators are avoiding the extra costs and less effective
utilisation of vehicle footprint by turning away from coupled set
operations.

Greg

On 25/04/2019 11:58 am, Prescott wrote:
> It's hard to know what they mean by "next generation tram". Perhaps

> they mean that Chinese trackless bus! The E is the current design

> most-adopted for systems requiring trams with swivelling bogies and is

> available from most of the major manufacturers. The Skoda 15T would be

> a better tram (not least for having a full complement of six doors and

> a wider aisle), but otherwise I can't see any design issue with the E

> that's been superceded by newer designs. There aren't any, nor is

> there any sign of further signficant development in basic low-floor

> tram design - where there is now a stable range of design options -

> anywhere on the horizon. Maybe it's no more than political waffle.

>

> Tony P

>