Re: Re: Trackless trams for Melbourne

What I was going to say that the next step up (requiring two extra modules
because of the extra bogie on one end) would be a 40+ metre tram, too long
for Melbourne.

Tony P

On Monday, 3 May 2021 at 16:49:12 UTC+10 TP wrote:

> That would be a very untidy extension with a mixture of lengths, some

> requiring two bogies, and random door placements.


> Tony P


> On Monday, 3 May 2021 at 15:55:36 UTC+10 Matthew Geier wrote:


>> On 3/5/21 3:50 pm, TP wrote:

>> > The layout of this short 26 metre version of the E class would not be

>> > amenable to adding additional modules later because of the need to add

>> > an additional bogie to support the centre of the two module vehicle.

>> > It would look like this:

>> >

>> An extra module can be added easily. It just has one bogie like the

>> leading module in the illustration. You could have 'n' number of modules

>> all with one bogie, except the last one. I'm not sure how stable this

>> configuration would be, it may need some creative yaw damping.


>> I note that in the UK there have been a spate of yaw damper mounting

>> point cracks on railway rolling stock, two different CAF builds and the

>> Hitachi IEC trains have suffered yaw damper problems.