This fixation on eliminating track and wire is like a dog returning to its vomit, and the universe of ignorance displayed in that article from both the journalist and the so-called “experts” is abject.
If Graham Currie thinks Melbourne tram tracks are rough he obviously hasn’t been on a bus lately, either that or the ride quality of Melbourne buses is so much better than in Sydney.
In recent years Peter Newman has definitely lost the plot, becoming the shill for whatever shonky transport snake oil is being touted as the bogus solution to a non-existent problem. Tram tracks and overhead wires deliver the best ride and most efficient power distribution compared to any battery and rubber tyre based system. This is fact - a rubber tyre on bitumen or concrete has 7 times the rolling resistance of a steel wheel on a steel rail. Add that to the weight of the batteries that have to be hauled around and the inevitable deterioration of the road surface under those heavily burdened rubber tyres, and we’ll see how much of Peter Newman’s coffee remains in the cup after these things have been running for longer than a couple of years on the same wheel tracks.
Like David Hensher, the Sydney Uni bus shill owned and operated by the Bus and Coach Association, who has no credibility on the subject of trams, Newman has squandered whatever credibility he had by becoming the tout for flim flam crap like this “trackless tram” scam. Way back in 1972 there was an article in Modern Tramway magazine that compared the then-new Runcorn busway in England with recent extensions of the Gotenburg tramway in Sweden. On every criterion the tramway was superior to the busway, from the cost of civil engineering required for infrastructure and carrying capacity, to energy consumption.
In the past, it was often the case that the “trackless tram” marked the beginning of the end for electric, high capacity public transport. Trolley buses generally replaced trams when the cost of track and rolling stock renewal was considered excessive but there was still life left in the traction power infrastructure, and trolley buses were substituted as a cheaper, “more modern” alternative. This saving was often illusory as the roadway had to be strengthened for buses but that cost could be shifted to the road authority. When the tramway power system needed renewal it was then scrapped and diesel buses substituted. This would also be the case with these solutions-in-search-of-a-problem, when the shiny newness rubs off they would be exposed as what they are - a bus on a road, nothing else. Just a bigger version of the battery buses that will inevitably replace the IC powered buses, and always inferior in every way to a tramway with rails and OHW.
Tony
> On 2 May 2021, at 10:19 am, TP historyworks@...> wrote:
>
> That's a terribly confused article and seems to be a grab bag of all the issues that have been discussed over recent years. Is it about new trams or new electric buses? It leaps from one to the other. There isn't much chance now of any "trackless trams", or any future transport vehicles at all, coming from China. The shortlisted manufacturers are both tram manufacturers. The closest either of them comes to buses is that CAF owns the Polish bus manufacturer Solaris. Alstom's prior interest in rubber-tyred "trams" is no longer.
>
> The ability of a tram to go around tight curves has nothing to do with its length.
>
> I wouldn't call the X class lumbering. It's acceleration figures come close to a Tatra's!
>
> That description of a 25 metre tram sounds exactly like the new Brisbane "metro" buses. Melbourne would be the only major tram city in the world buying trams of less than 30 metres length.
>
> As for the whole power supply discussion.... Regenerative braking eh? That's a new invention I haven't heard of before.
>
> Tony P
>
> On Sunday, 2 May 2021 at 09:40:48 UTC+10mick...@... http://gmail.com/ wrote:
> Which bridges needed to be strengthened for E-Class trams?
>
> Did this actually happen, or is this yet another fantasy that seem to be commonplace in Timna Jacks' transport articles?
>
> On Sunday, May 2, 2021 at 9:32:01 AM UTC+10dugm...@... <applewebdata://1A202351-221E-4F46-93AD-11C7889A3F60> wrote:
> Hi all
>
> Is the trackless bus still operational in china or did it go the way of the elevator bus
>
> Doug my cancer is in check
>
>
>
>
>
> From:tramsdo...@... <> tramsdo...@... <>> On Behalf Of Yuri Sos
> Sent: Sunday, 2 May 2021 9:20 AM
> To:tramsdo...@... <>
> Subject: [TramsDownUnder] Trackless trams for Melbourne
>
>
>
> Here we go again with a push for electric buses.....
>
>
>
> https://www.theage.com.au/national/victoria/melbourne-s-next-generation-trams-could-be-trackless-with-rubber-wheels-20210422-p57ldr.html#comments https://www.theage.com.au/national/victoria/melbourne-s-next-generation-trams-could-be-trackless-with-rubber-wheels-20210422-p57ldr.html#comments
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TramsDownUnder" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email totramsdownunde...@... <>.
> To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tramsdownunder/1792a3ae770.289b.895c179a4d9ad52a807e8e673e185c90%40gmail.com https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tramsdownunder/1792a3ae770.289b.895c179a4d9ad52a807e8e673e185c90%40gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer.
>
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TramsDownUnder" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email totramsdownunder+unsubscribe@... mailto:tramsdownunder+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tramsdownunder/2837c38e-d0f0-4dcb-8a26-bbb5ffe71aa6n%40googlegroups.com https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tramsdownunder/2837c38e-d0f0-4dcb-8a26-bbb5ffe71aa6n%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer.