Tbus

[Aaronj09]

You seriously think they haven't thought this through? Governments don't usually fund things unless they think it's good value for money. They aren't going to pump hundreds of millions of pounds into a scheme that will make the situation worse.. get real.

[10123]

Okay then please enlighten me, how are they going to solve the congestion issue?

[spacemansam]

I would like to know this too. As a daily commuter on the number 1, the only way I see the tbus avoiding the congested headingley part of the otley road is building completely new stretches of road parallel but not next to otley road. There are houses businesses and schools at either side and just no room to widen it!

[Electric_City]

The NGT will have more segregation than the normal buses. For example, there's a new stretch of road planned round the back of the Arndale Centre. Obviously the entire route won't be segregated (the cost would be prohibitive) but it will make a difference to journey times by allowing the trolleybuses to jump the traffic queues at certain locations, meaning less time spent in jams.

The main reason for the segregation is to improve the reliability of journey times.

In addition, the trolleybuses have better (and smoother) acceleration/deceleration than diesels, which will enable them to more easily make up any time lost whilst waiting in traffic.

[Electric_City]

I don't have much up-to-date information about the segregation (some sources are saying it's now down to 40 percent, due to cutbacks in funding) but these were the plans back in 2006:



Most of the ordinary bus lanes there were meant to be shared with other buses, but some would have been NGT-only. In addition, the separate busway sections (in green) were just for the NGT too.

One change that has been made is that there is now a preferred proposal to build a Southbound section for the NGT along Monument Moor, rather than just have a bus lane alongside the road:



Below is the 2006 plan for the Southern section:



..this has now changed a lot though - instead of going along the main road, the preference is to go alongside the railway, then up Balm Road and Penny Hill, before rejoining the main road near the new flyover.

[10123]

Thanks for posting!

Turns out my gripes with the tbus are very much apparent. Arndale --> Hyde Park route will remain as congested as ever, not going to help having having a tbus running down. Also what is going to happen with lorries that use that route?

And Aaaron no need to get your knickers in a twist.

[Electric_City]

Well that will depend on how many people decide to use the new park and rides. The more that use them, the less traffic will be on the road.

However, as Leeds No.1 has said, the main reason for introducing systems like this is to increase capacity, rather than reduce congestion.

[Mister City]

Some people are never happy. If it were rejected you'd be complaing. Now that it's been approved you're still complaining!!!

Yes, a tube system would be ideal for Leeds but that's never going to happen in our lifetime so stop complaining and make the most of what we have been given.

[SalsaShark]

Originally Posted by 10123

Turns out my gripes with the tbus are very much apparent. Arndale --> Hyde Park route will remain as congested as ever, not going to help having having a tbus running down. Also what is going to happen with lorries that use that route?

I disagree - if the southbound trolleybus goes behind the Arndale Centre and doesn't re-join the A660 until Headingley Hill (as originally planned) then that's going to bypass the major bottleneck through the centre of Headingley.

Yes, it'll still get stuck then at the Hyde Park Corner junction... but it'll still be much faster than taking the regular bus that's had to go through the centre of Headingley.

Plus if the TBus does offer a good service for commuters and offers a decent park-and-ride solution, it may reduce the congestion by encouraging more commuters onto public transport.

[Leeds No.1]

The most recent plans I saw at the NGT roadshow showed that north of the A660 roundabout thing near Weetwood, and over the ring road, NGT would be segregated on a busway along the central reservation. This would be in both directions. It also showed NGT continuing straight over the roundabout without going round it, presumably becoming traffic light controlled to allow this.

[oyster]

Given the timescales, would it not be in Optare's interest to diversify and figure out how they could supply trolleybuses? I've no idea, but I wouldn't have thought the difference between a standard (or standalone electric) bus and a trolleybus was that great? Just glue on a pantograph, right?

Does anybody know what the interior layout of trolleybuses elsewhere is generally like? As much as it's nice to get a seat, I would have thought a layout more akin to trams (or indeed London Overground trains) would be more befitting - i.e. wide open corridors with plenty of standing room and some seats at the side. It's only a short journey so sitting down isn't a massive deal, the capacity will be greater and, most importantly, it will make them feel much less bus-like. I wonder how long each trolleybus will be - the render in City Square shows a bus with two bends in it, which I would have thought would be desirable capacity-wise, as well again being perceived as not so bus like, but bendy buses don't seem to be in vogue these days.

One thing's for sure, I hope they look after the network unlike the overgrown guided bus lanes elsewhere in the city. And from a user and designer's point of view, I hope the system is well branded with glossy maps, website, livery, "station" furniture, and payment systems, which will hopefully be akin to an Oyster type system by then.

I wonder which private company will win the franchise and whether or not it will be Metro branded. Time will tell.

[Leeds No.1]

I suspect it will be at least part-Metro branded, if not fully.

The busiest stops are predicted to be the P&R sites, Headingley Centre, Headingley Hill and City Square. With the exception of the P&R sites, those journeys are not very far so I hope standing room is maximised. I expect them to be similar to the ftrs though.

[carpsio]

Originally Posted by Aaronj09

You seriously think they haven't thought this through? Governments don't usually fund things unless they think it's good value for money. They aren't going to pump hundreds of millions of pounds into a scheme that will make the situation worse.. get real.

I think the NGT should be good, but your apparently blind faith in the general judgement of the wisdom of governments is rather touching I'm guessing you are unfamiliar with the groundnut scheme or the R101 for example. You could add Concorde or the Chunnel to that list.

I recommend reading "They Meant Well" (free PDF download here) for a chilling insight.

Personally, I'm glad that we're finally getting something, but don't be surprised if it comes in over time, over budget and doesn't deliver the benefits we hope it will

[Aaronj09]

Not fair comparisons really.. this new government is pretty money-conscious, especially outside of London where nothing matters. I don't put blind faith into the government, but I'm not one of those cynical people who thinks it can do no good ever.

[carpsio]

Originally Posted by Aaronj09

Not fair comparisons really.. this new government is pretty money-conscious, especially outside of London where nothing matters. I don't put blind faith into the government, but I'm not one of those cynical people who thinks it can do no good ever.

Me neither: government is necessary and probably the best/only way to deliver large scale infrastructure schemes (I change my mind on this sometimes). Perhaps fairer direct comparisons in more recent times would be the Chunnel, HS1 and perhaps the mooted HS2. Maybe they're deemed necessary, but it's almost certain that the benefits are overstated and the costs understated routinely by governments because... well... that's what governments do.

Anyway, a pint to us getting something more interesting than more buses!

[blackdog]

The key advantage of trains/trams over buses is reliability and predictability. If I turn up at 8:30 at the stop then I get in to work for 9:00 every morning (or 90% of mornings at least). Buses just don't provide that as they often come early/late or not at all in some cases, particularly in rush hour.

Tbus should improve reliability over buses to some degree but I do worry that if it is not sufficiently segregated from traffic it will just be no more than an electric powered ftr.

[lazygamer]

Originally Posted by blackdog

The key advantage of trains/trams over buses is reliability and predictability.

Don't catch many peak time trains on the Harrogate line do you?

But seriously, even if this was still a tram proposal rather than a trolleybus I doubt it would have much more segregation as it would be one of the first things to go if the budget spiralled out of control. There would also be much, much more disruption due to track laying.

I think some of the proposed stops in the City Centre are great ideas, the Cookridge Street and Civic stops (are great for the civic quarter of Leeds and keeps it away from the congestion alongside the Merrion and St Johns Centre.

I have concerns over the proposed Trinity stop, simply because it's on the already crowded Boar Lane, but I'm not sure what you could replace it with. It also appears to show the route then travelling down Lower Briggate (which is currently one way in the northerly direction) - presumably the Trolleybus will be an exception to the rule with a dedicated lane.

[Leeds No.1]

In fairness though, the Harrogate line is still more reliable than most bus routes, which almost all run a few minutes behind or ahead of schedule. A bus timetable is more of a guide of an estimated arrival time.

[riclam]

Originally Posted by oyster

Given the timescales, would it not be in Optare's interest to diversify and figure out how they could supply trolleybuses? I've no idea, but I wouldn't have thought the difference between a standard (or standalone electric) bus and a trolleybus was that great? Just glue on a pantograph, right?

Does anybody know what the interior layout of trolleybuses elsewhere is generally like? As much as it's nice to get a seat, I would have thought a layout more akin to trams (or indeed London Overground trains) would be more befitting - i.e. wide open corridors with plenty of standing room and some seats at the side. It's only a short journey so sitting down isn't a massive deal, the capacity will be greater and, most importantly, it will make them feel much less bus-like. I wonder how long each trolleybus will be - the render in City Square shows a bus with two bends in it, which I would have thought would be desirable capacity-wise, as well again being perceived as not so bus like, but bendy buses don't seem to be in vogue these days.

One thing's for sure, I hope they look after the network unlike the overgrown guided bus lanes elsewhere in the city. And from a user and designer's point of view, I hope the system is well branded with glossy maps, website, livery, "station" furniture, and payment systems, which will hopefully be akin to an Oyster type system by then.

I wonder which private company will win the franchise and whether or not it will be Metro branded. Time will tell.

I suspect any trolleybuses will more resemble the ftrs built by Wright. Optare dont currently produce any buses that would be suitable as such and I doubt ashok leyland the owners of optare would be interested nut you never know.....the trolleybuses will be sourced from.abroad or at least the motors and running gear

Essentially they are similar though the roof would require strengthening for the booms not pantagraphs as fitted to trains.

It will certainly be interesting to see who.operates them indeed.

[Suburban Knight]

weren't there plans for the little row of shops on Hyde Park Corner to be demolished as part of this? I'm a bit concerned about that - those are peoples livelihoods and useful for the community!