Leeds NGT/ Trolleybus

[Electric_City]

Just been given the go ahead:

http://www.dft.gov.uk/news/press-rel...ress-20120705b

So, after a long protracted saga, it looks like the Leeds 'New Generation Transport' (NGT) Trolleybus system has finally got funding (although personally, I won't believe it till I'm actually riding on it!).

There are two distinctive features to this proposed system:

a) The promoters want to use electric Trolleybuses (obviously), rather than diesel buses.

b) The routes will be more than 50 per cent segregated from other traffic, partly by dedicated rights of way and partly by use of bus lanes.

[Electric_City]

TROLLEYBUSES

One thing I have noticed over the years is that most people in this country (and this includes many transport officials) know very little about trolleybuses and what they are capable of. For this reason I would ask that members read the following information before they form an opinion on the matter. I know this is a series of long posts and I apologise for that (and for regurgitating some bits of previous posts) but it's important that people don't paint themselves into a corner by jumping to conclusions.

1) Trolleybus systems are installed in hundreds of places all over the world. Vehicles, components and infrastructure items are available either custom made or off the shelf from a variety of manufacturers, including MAN and Siemens in Germany, Hess in Switzerland, Skoda in the Czech Republic and Van Hool in Belgium. In recent years, new systems have been installed in places such as Rome, Landskrona (Sweden) and Venezuela.

New 'Viseon' Trolleybus for Riyadh University:




2) The Trolleybus works by drawing its power from overhead cables, rather like an electric tram. The difference is that, whereas the tram usually gets its power from only one large cable, with the current escaping through the rails and into the earth, a Trolleybus uses two, smaller, wires, drawing the current from one and returning it via the other.

3) The outdated switching systems which sometimes led to de-wirements in the old days are now superseded by more advanced equipment. The network in Wellington, New Zealand, for example was updated like this a few years ago.

4) Modern Trolleybuses have an auxiliary power supply (such as a small diesel generator), which allows them to run off wire for modest distances. This is particularly useful where there are major route blockages or where work is being carried out on the electrical supply system.

5) Modern Trolleybuses can engage and disengage from the wires without the driver leaving the cab.

Rome, Italy - disengaging and running off-wire:

... incidentally, I like the destination sign on that last bus - it looks like it's saying: "go Labia EXPRESS" - you have to admire the spirit of those Italians!

Nancy, France - re-engaging with overhead wires, which typically takes about 15 seconds (short clip):


Rome, Italy - re-engaging (short clip):


6) Where there are lesser obstructions, the Trolleybus can overtake without disengaging from the wires.

Lyon, 21st Century:


Adelaide, 1961:




7) The Trolleybus is more energy-efficient than the diesel bus and so creates less greenhouse emissions - even with a fossil fuel power supply.

8) The Trolleybus creates no on-street pollution.

9) The Trolleybus has better acceleration and deceleration than the diesel bus and can therefore keep to a tighter schedule.

10) The presence of overhead wires creates a sense of 'perceived permanence of service' for the public. This means that, because the route isn't going to be shut down or moved any time soon, people can rely on the service and make more concrete plans about home purchases and siting of workplaces.

11) Trolleybuses are very popular with the public in places where they are used.

[Electric_City]

THE ROUTE NETWORK

12) Not so much of a 'network', now that the proposed route has been cut back (due to less funds being available than was first planned). The route is essentially two arms of what was originally going to be a three-arm system. Which basically means that now it's just a single route (if you see what I mean).

13) Obviously, the promoters will be wishing to expand the system further, as and when funds become available.

14) Because of the fact that the system has a lot of segregation, some people will be tempted to label it a 'Bus Rapid Transit' (BRT) network. Strictly speaking, by definition, BRT should be entirely, not partly, segregated but I doubt whether most people will be concerned with that.

15) The main reasoning behind having segregated sections is to improve the reliability of journey times.

16) There will be two Park and Ride sites - one at the Southern end of the system near Junction 7 of the M621 and another at Bodington where the A660 Otley Road intersects the A6120 Outer Ring Road.



17) The proposed timetabling for the scheme (as released February 2011) is displayed in the graphic below, although this will now have changed yet again because of further delays in government funding, so is therefore indicative only:

[martin2345uk]

Great news. I admit I'm a tram fan, but possibly only because I've never seen a trolleybus in operation before.

Any details on what parts exactly will be segregated? Will that involve basically just building roads that will be closed to other traffic?

[MK Tom]

Excellent news! But they're not starting until 2016? Why such a huge wait? Leeds is like the biggest city in the universe to not have any form of mass-transit... it needs this now really, not half a decade down the line. Still, better that than never!

[R.K.Teck]

This is what Glasgow's segregated priority route 'Clyde Fastlink' should be instead of "just a bus."

Glad to see Leeds get permission for a new transport network!

[Engels]

Good luck to Leeds with this but a couple of questions:

Do the lower costs of electricity vs a modern diesel hybrid really off set the higher capex costs of the infrastructure , more expensive vehicles and opex costs of future maintenance?or is this a more expensive system that is justified by other factors such as higher modal shift?

What are the benefits of a trolley bus system vs traditional bus lanes or bus rapid transit with dedicated lanes again using modern hybrid diesel electric buses?

Is there a business case somewhere I can download? (Link?)

NB points 8, 9 and 10 noted but are these benefits significant and measurable against what I expect are considerable upfront costs

[Electric_City]

Originally Posted by martin2345uk

Great news. I admit I'm a tram fan, but possibly only because I've never seen a trolleybus in operation before.

Any details on what parts exactly will be segregated? Will that involve basically just building roads that will be closed to other traffic?

The segregation issue is a thorny one, since cutbacks in funding have led to a reduction from the original plans. Currently, I suspect this is still being worked out.

Some of the segregated sections will be new roads, exclusively for the NGT vehicles and some will simply be bus lanes.

[Electric_City]

Originally Posted by MK Tom

Excellent news! But they're not starting until 2016? Why such a huge wait? Leeds is like the biggest city in the universe to not have any form of mass-transit... it needs this now really, not half a decade down the line. Still, better that than never!

They have all the legal hoop-la to do first, including a TWA and a Public Inquiry - takes ages.

I must admit to being quite angry that this scheme has been kicked down the road several times by successive governments, in some cases, simply for political expediency. It could have been up and running by now if ministers had simply got their fingers out and done the right thing.

[Electric_City]

Originally Posted by R.K.Teck

This is what Glasgow's segregated priority route 'Clyde Fastlink' should be instead of "just a bus."

Glad to see Leeds get permission for a new transport network!

There's always the possibility of an upgrade, if funds become available. Currently around £800,000 per km (for the extra infrastructure), plus the extra cost of the buses.

[Electric_City]

Originally Posted by Engels

Good luck to Leeds with this but a couple of questions:

Do the lower costs of electricity vs a modern diesel hybrid really off set the higher capex costs of the infrastructure , more expensive vehicles and opex costs of future maintenance?or is this a more expensive system that is justified by other factors such as higher modal shift?

What are the benefits of a trolley bus system vs traditional bus lanes or bus rapid transit with dedicated lanes again using modern hybrid diesel electric buses?

Is there a business case somewhere I can download? (Link?)

NB points 8, 9 and 10 noted but are these benefits significant and measurable against what I expect are considerable upfront costs

I don't think it's just the cheaper cost of fuel. Trolleybuses are normally expected to last much longer than ordinary ones, and therefore work out cheaper in the long run. As I said to R.K.Tech, the extra cost is only about £800,000 per km for the electric infrastructure (plus about one-and-a-third times as much as a hybrid for the cost of each bus).

The main costs of this system come from the new roads/ segregation and various other extras.

The current government calculated the Benefit Cost Ratio of this system to be around 2.1 to 1 - the local transport authority put it much higher than this.

The future of hybrids is a little uncertain at the moment. No-one really knows exactly how long the batteries are going to last for, and swapping them out for new ones is going to be very expensive. At any rate, they still use diesel engines and, unlike trolleybuses, still create pollution on the street. Given the number of studies coming out against diesel pollution of late, it's difficult not to conclude that hybrids are the public transport equivalent of the low-tar cigarette - they just kill you more slowly.

[citybus]

Good news that this has provisionally given the go ahead. What I would worry about is that the segregated parts might take the bus away from where the passengers actually are. I hate it when you see these guided busways routed through concrete wastelands and low density housing areas where the street layout has been designed so that every adult might as well buy a car rather than take the fancy bus.

And here's hoping they give traffic light priority to the trolleybus, it's a laugh seeing the Cambridgeshire guided bus waiting at red lights for minor roads with no traffic.

[reading general]

Great news. I'm hoping this is the beginning of a revolution across the country.
Permenant infrastructure that is cheaper than trams. Always said this is the technology smaller cities and towns should use Perhaps one day we will see the return of the trolleybus in Reading thanks to Leeds, although i would prefer the regular on street running like the original systems.

[NCT]

For a city the size of Leeds it ought to have at least a tram system. I hope it won't be too hard to convert the trolleybus system to trams at a later date.

Trolleybuses are still a fantastic technology that could be more widely rolled out in major cites across the country to replace buses on high-frequency routes. The technology is mature and cheap and the infrastructure (basically a few substations and some wires) can be set up in no time really.

[reading general]

Plus routes can continue running in the meantime while wires and substations are set up. Routes can be converted one at a time as money and vehicles become available.

[DBadger]

Originally Posted by NCT

For a city the size of Leeds it ought to have at least a tram system. I hope it won't be too hard to convert the trolleybus system to trams at a later date.

Trolleybuses are still a fantastic technology that could be more widely rolled out in major cites across the country to replace buses on high-frequency routes. The technology is mature and cheap and the infrastructure (basically a few substations and some wires) can be set up in no time really.

And nicked.

What is the capacity like on one of these? I.e. how many double deckers would each one replace? Looks significantly longer than an omnilink bendy.

[NCT]

Originally Posted by DBadger

And nicked.

What is the capacity like on one of these? I.e. how many double deckers would each one replace? Looks significantly longer than an omnilink bendy.

a I see it the only difference between a bus and a trolleybus is the energy source, since the advantage of a trolleybus is largely environmental (at the point of use). For any road-based system I'd still prefer vehicles with low footprint and lots of seats, i.e. double deckers. Anything larger and faster than that then one ought to looking at rail-based solutions.

Counting the number of windows on the vehicles in the second post I'd say they are standard 18-metre long vehicles.

[Electric_City]

Originally Posted by NCT

For a city the size of Leeds it ought to have at least a tram system. I hope it won't be too hard to convert the trolleybus system to trams at a later date.

I don't think the size of the city is the key here, rather it's the population density on the proposed routes. The higher the population density, the more justification there is for spending the relatively large amounts needed for a tram. As one poster has intimated, low population density is the norm for most British provincial cities. Thus, in many situations, trolleybuses make more sense.

[Vulcan's Finest]

Originally Posted by NCT

a I see it the only difference between a bus and a trolleybus is the energy source, since the advantage of a trolleybus is largely environmental (at the point of use). For any road-based system I'd still prefer vehicles with low footprint and lots of seats, i.e. double deckers. Anything larger and faster than that then one ought to looking at rail-based solutions.

Yes I would agree with that. As a passenger I find buses of any kind a fairly unpleasant way of getting from A to B. An electric trolleybus removes the irritating noise & vibration of the diesel engine (and sometimes smelly fumes as well). However the lurching of a bus on four rubber wheels just isn't pleasant full stop. Steel wheels on steel rails give a much better ride and waste less energy due to lower friction.

[Electric_City]

The ride depends upon the quality of the surface and of the handling qualities of the vehicle. This applies to both rail and road. We've all had our fair share of bad rail journeys, I'd guess. Try some of those Amsterdam trams, for example.

At least the trolleybus has a smoother acceleration and deceleration than a diesel, which I believe is an important factor, over and above the environmental considerations.

The concept of lower 'friction' (normally referred to as 'rolling resistance') is a red herring in this context. If you were talking about a large train with few stops travelling a considerable distance, then rolling resistance would be a factor.

However, in the urban environment, with lots of stopping and starting, then such considerations evaporate every time you use the brakes (even with regenerative braking). I have this on the highest authority from a highly-experienced transport engineer/ lecturer.