An Estonian essay on public transportation development

[chornedsnorkack]

See:
http://www.mediafire.com/?ikag4fgkgfgj7pt

I have quite some comments, but will take my time writing them down. Meanwhile, any comment from you?

[bebrs12]

I'm interested in this, but can't download . Is it only in Estonian? It would make sense if you Google translate on your own and check for mayor errors.

[Tin_Can]

Link doesn't work Says that 'No servers available with requested data' or smth like that...

chornedsnorkack,maybe you could find some other site for hosting this file? It's title looks promising

[chornedsnorkack]

Originally Posted by Tin_Can

Link doesn't work Says that 'No servers available with requested data' or smth like that...

Unfortunately, I get that same error. The link worked when I posted it :-(

[Rebasepoiss]

I downloaded it while it was still available. Any good ideas where to upload it? And yes, it's in Estonian.

[ssh]

I managed to download it as well. The essay (written in Estonian) is available here. (direct link)

[chornedsnorkack]

Originally Posted by ssh

I managed to download it as well. The essay (written in Estonian) is available here. (direct link)

Thanks a lot!

Now the first comment:

Eraldi teema on rahvusvaheline rongiliiklus, mis Eesti kaarti vaadates saab toimuda ainult
lõunasuunal ehk Tallinnast Riia ja Kaunase kaudu Varssavisse.

From map, and concerning technical/economic feasibility, there is no reason against international rail traffic in eastern direction. In fact, it is the only traffic that happens. Political favourability of this is another matter.

Sobivaim rööbastranspordikontseptsioon oleks ulatuslik standardrööpmelaiusega moodsa trammi (modern tram, näiteks Stockholmi Tvärbanan ja Nockebybanan) võrgustik või süsteem, mida tähistatakse
prantsuskeelse nimetusega pré-métro (näiteks Brüsselis).

Precisely what advantage, technically, does wider gauge give to trams? How successful is the 1520 mm Riga tram network compared to the 1000 mm Helsinki tram network?

[Rebasepoiss]

I think that the gauge is not so much of a problem because it's narrow but because it's sub-standard - 1067mm - which means there are no off-the-shelf trams available. The current tram network is in desperate needs of repairs and IF we ever start building a proper tram network(or a fast light-rail), we could as well change the gauge. When focusing on fast light-rail(Lyon, Porto, Dublin) and not the traditional tram or streetcar (Helsinki), a wider gauge is definitely helping: more space for passengers, better stability at speed etc.

[bebrs12]

Ok, I transgoogled the paper, and got something The information of benefits of trams are not fully correct. The location of way - elevated, underground or street level with right-of ways can be implemented booth for trams and buses so that is not an argument for choosing tram over bus. I see three advantages for trams:
1. Bigger car capacity as trams can be even with 4 or 5 sections while buses only with 3 (~200 pax). Paradoxically, but big car capacity is needed rarely - unless the driver's expanses are very big or trams already run every 20sec, it is better idea to put more vehicles on line and cut intervals rather than increase the capacity of each vehicle;
2. Bit higher max speeds than buses - useful if there is long nonstop sections in the route;
3. Trams may need less space in street cross-section so being useful in old towns and other compact environment.

[chornedsnorkack]

Originally Posted by Rebasepoiss

a wider gauge is definitely helping: more space for passengers, better stability at speed etc.

The space for passengers depends on loading gauge, not track gauge. And loading gauge is not very strongly dependent on track gauge - Japan, Queensland and Western Australia run big trains on 1067 mm, while Great Britain has narrow trains on 1435 mm.

Adding space for passengers inside trams means taking space away from vehicles outside the trams - whether or not the track gauge is changed.

[Tin_Can]

Interesting reading,although nothing totally new.

Everything was ok,until this:

Trollid tuleks uute rööbastranspordiiliinide valmimisel Tallinnast kaotada.

Wtf? Trolleybus network is quite good & already working solution in Western Tallinn. Getting rid of them and replacing all trolleybuses with trams is expensive & useless (why change smth already working into smth what is very similar,but has higher maintenance costs etc)

Btw,I wonder if anyone has ever thought of extending trolleybus network? I'm talking about adding new line or extending already existing lines to Kakumäe & Tiskre along Rannamõisa road. It's already quite dense urban area,which is served by only few bus lines (basically 21 & it's variations,21A & 21B) It might be good idea developing Western direction PT,as it would allow local people to select PT instead of cars (and endless waiting in traffic jams)

[chornedsnorkack]

Originally Posted by Tin_Can

Wtf? Trolleybus network is quite good & already working solution in Western Tallinn. Getting rid of them and replacing all trolleybuses with trams is expensive & useless (why change smth already working into smth what is very similar,but has higher maintenance costs etc)

Btw,I wonder if anyone has ever thought of extending trolleybus network? I'm talking about adding new line or extending already existing lines to Kakumäe & Tiskre along Rannamõisa road. It's already quite dense urban area,which is served by only few bus lines (basically 21 & it's variations,21A & 21B) It might be good idea developing Western direction PT,as it would allow local people to select PT instead of cars (and endless waiting in traffic jams)

Excellent idea! And Harku seems quite populous as well....

The advantages of trolleys are not just lower maintenance costs.

A tram may have preferred right of way over the crossing surface traffic, but this does not mean they obey. If there is an obstacle ahead of a tram, it is completely helpless; a trolley can move a few metres sideways to pass around.

And extending trolley lines seems much easier than extending tram lines. Remember when Viru Keskus was built and the trolleybus line was moved to Rävala puiestee and Teatri väljak? Putting up the electric posts and the contact lines was done in a few weeks. Without ripping up the pavements and disrupting surface traffic. Rebuilding tram lines (Narva maantee and Tartu maantee widenings) is much harder.

The big advantage of a tram over trolley (and bus) is the lower rolling friction of steel wheel on steel rail.

[Wover]

Originally Posted by Tin_Can

Btw,I wonder if anyone has ever thought of extending trolleybus network? I'm talking about adding new line or extending already existing lines to Kakumäe & Tiskre along Rannamõisa road. It's already quite dense urban area,which is served by only few bus lines (basically 21 & it's variations,21A & 21B) It might be good idea developing Western direction PT,as it would allow local people to select PT instead of cars (and endless waiting in traffic jams)

I don't think many people would take a bus there if you look at how large the houses are :p.

Also, the road is kind of narrow and has treebranches above it.


Then again, if the bus would also serve the open air museum, it might attract more users.

[chornedsnorkack]

Originally Posted by Wover

I don't think many people would take a bus there if you look at how large the houses are :p.

How many people currently do take buses 21 and 4?

What is the point of bus number 4? Why does it go to Õismäe?

Which bus routes in Western Tallinn are most heavily loaded and best candidates to be replaced with trolleybus?

[Rebasepoiss]

Originally Posted by chornedsnorkack

The space for passengers depends on loading gauge, not track gauge. And loading gauge is not very strongly dependent on track gauge - Japan, Queensland and Western Australia run big trains on 1067 mm, while Great Britain has narrow trains on 1435 mm.

Wrong. You can't compare high floor trains with low floor trams(or light rail vehicles). All the countries mentioned above have trains which have floors high enough to be situated above the bogies. In that case, the track gauge really doesn't make that big of a difference.
But if you look at low floor trams, the narrowest space in the interior is defined by the space between the wheels. Therefore, if the gauge is narrower, the width between the bogies is also smaller which makes moving around in the tram a lot more complicated.

[René Kedus]

Munahoiatus, kuldmunad!

[ssh]

Originally Posted by Tin_Can

Wtf? Trolleybus network is quite good & already working solution in Western Tallinn. Getting rid of them and replacing all trolleybuses with trams is expensive & useless

Helsinki did this and I wouldn't say it turned out bad for them.

Having varied forms of public transport creates more confusion for commuters. Western Tallinn is a complete mystery to me because I don't know a single thing about trolley lines, I just don't have any regular business with them. I also don't like the discomfort of having to switch over from Hobujaama to Kaubamaja every time I want to make a trip westward.

Trolleybuses are almost synonymous with ugly, poorly planned sleeper districts. But as the city matures into a normal one, the tram network should follow suit. So far Tallinn has misunderstood this simple concept and has done everything the exact opposite.

[Tin_Can]

Originally Posted by Wover

I don't think many people would take a bus there if you look at how large the houses are :p.

Also, the road is kind of narrow and has treebranches above it.


Then again, if the bus would also serve the open air museum, it might attract more users.

I'm not talking about Tiskre & Kakumäe area rich people (I doubt that they are willing to give up their late model MB's & BMW's to trolleybuses ) I'm talking about houses further west of Kakumäe Selver supermarket. Some of them are 3-5 storey residential buildings with many people and bad PT connection with Downtown.

In future Kakumäe area definitely gets more urban and Rannamõisa road will be rebuilt. This would give excellent chance of installing overhead cables for trolleybuses & building bus stops.

[Tin_Can]

Originally Posted by ssh

Helsinki did this and I wouldn't say it turned out bad for them.

Having varied forms of public transport creates more confusion for commuters. Western Tallinn is a complete mystery to me because I don't know a single thing about trolley lines, I just don't have any regular business with them. I also don't like the discomfort of having to switch over from Hobujaama to Kaubamaja every time I want to make a trip westward.

Trolleybuses are almost synonymous with ugly, poorly planned sleeper districts. But as the city matures into a normal one, the tram network should follow suit. So far Tallinn has misunderstood this simple concept and has done everything the exact opposite.

Why it's a mystery? There are only 9 lines,so it's not very hard to memorize which line goes where (and most of them go either to West,to central train station or to Kaubamaja) However you pointed out serious flaw in Tallinn PT - there aren't many bus,tram or trolleybus lines which would go from West to East or vice versa. It's really annoying to switch PT in Downtown each time you need to cross city

[Rebasepoiss]

Originally Posted by ssh

Trolleybuses are almost synonymous with ugly, poorly planned sleeper districts. But as the city matures into a normal one, the tram network should follow suit. So far Tallinn has misunderstood this simple concept and has done everything the exact opposite.

Well, the thing is that most Estonians associate trolleybuses with Eastern Europe and commieblock districts but the facts show that this isn't actually true. Trolleybuses are used in several economically advanced countries such as Italy(in 13 towns), Norway(Bergen), Switzerland(in 13 towns) etc.

But still, I wouldn't mind the closure of trolleybus lines 2 and 3 if they were replaced by a light-rail line, for example. And a suburb of 60,000 people could definitely use a fast light-rail line.