daily menu » rate the banner | guess the city | one on oneforums map | privacy policy | DMCA | news magazine | posting guidelines

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > Infrastructure and Mobility Forums > Subways and Urban Transport

Subways and Urban Transport Metros, subways, light rail, trams, buses and other local transport systems



Global Announcement

As a general reminder, please respect others and respect copyrights. Go here to familiarize yourself with our posting policy.


Reply

 
Thread Tools
Old September 25th, 2016, 02:11 PM   #381
:jax:
Registered User
 
:jax:'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Södertälje
Posts: 1,300
Likes (Received): 538

Quote:
Originally Posted by Svartmetall View Post
Alstom, CAF or the Consortium with Bombardier sound pretty good to me.
They should all be decent, I have no experience with Siemens, but Stadler and Škoda have made good trams recently. I guess that's what 20 years of experience and the fall of AnsaldoBreda does.

Another decade or so and there should be some good Chinese competitors as well.
__________________

Swede liked this post
:jax: no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old September 25th, 2016, 07:13 PM   #382
Yak79
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 1,275
Likes (Received): 2176

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tramwayman View Post
Alstom has absolutely no chance also what the hell are they even offering, their rigid bogie with 25 meter radius citadis? hahaha
A devoted hater like you, who are so zealous in bothering delighting us with your fierce badmouthing posts whenever Alstom is (or could be) mentioned, really should master the knowledge about the object of his contempt; and yet, it'd appear you're ignoring the existence of the Ixège bogie (and other Alstom products, as well) implemented on X05 tramway series. Unlike its “classical” precedent Arpège, which is a pseudo-bogie or truck, it's a real bogie with also a pivoting motor edition (two level rubber suspensions, connected to carbody by bolster with slewing ring).
It might be the worst bogie ever manufactured (in your opinion, at least, for sure), but you can't say anymore they have only rigid/fixed “bogies” to offer.

For references,
the official 2015 bogie catalogue from Alstom, with drawings of the non-pivoting variant* of Ixège motor bogie (pag. 7);
an interesting paper from Czech professor J. Kolář, with drawings of the pivoting variant of Ixège motor bogie (pag.14).


* elicoidal springs as secondary suspension, connected to carbody by rods.
__________________
-
"primo ufficio dell'uomo è perseguire i propri scopi con mezzi idonei, e chi sbaglia paga"

-
- Primo Levi, Se questo è un uomo -

metr0p0litain liked this post

Last edited by Yak79; September 25th, 2016 at 07:27 PM.
Yak79 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 25th, 2016, 08:27 PM   #383
OnTheNorthRoad
Hei
 
OnTheNorthRoad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Oslo
Posts: 613
Likes (Received): 2617

I'm going to miss SL79..


The ansaldos, not so much.

Bombardier (Flexity classic/Outlook) and Siemens (avenio) seem to have models that would look good in the light blue livery. There are many to choose between, so I'm hopeful they will find someting that works this time and looks good as well. Im skeptical about Stadler after the problems they had in Munich and the variobahn model also had problems in Helsinki before Stadler purchased the design.
__________________

tomPunk liked this post
OnTheNorthRoad no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 26th, 2016, 12:06 PM   #384
Tramwayman
Trams the Best!!!
 
Tramwayman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Tbilisi
Posts: 618
Likes (Received): 528

Quote:
Originally Posted by Yak79 View Post
A devoted hater like you, who are so zealous in bothering delighting us with your fierce badmouthing posts whenever Alstom is (or could be) mentioned, really should master the knowledge about the object of his contempt; and yet, it'd appear you're ignoring the existence of the Ixège bogie (and other Alstom products, as well) implemented on X05 tramway series. Unlike its “classical” precedent Arpège, which is a pseudo-bogie or truck, it's a real bogie with also a pivoting motor edition (two level rubber suspensions, connected to carbody by bolster with slewing ring).
It might be the worst bogie ever manufactured (in your opinion, at least, for sure), but you can't say anymore they have only rigid/fixed “bogies” to offer.

For references,
the official 2015 bogie catalogue from Alstom, with drawings of the non-pivoting variant* of Ixège motor bogie (pag. 7);
an interesting paper from Czech professor J. Kolář, with drawings of the pivoting variant of Ixège motor bogie (pag.14).


* elicoidal springs as secondary suspension, connected to carbody by rods.
I am aware of anything that is tram market be sure with that. Have talked with Alstom representatives as well as Systra so I know perfectly how RIGID and OBSOLETE their tramways are, they clearly said that minus 25 meter radii for trams is a problem and in my city we should consider only building trams there where there is no less then 25 meters in a curve. When our transportation company said that their would be an open concurs on buying the best option, they got mad and it was clear that it was unpleasant for them to hear that. They started to talk about Translohr horrible thing when we mentioned curves less then 25 meters at least 18 meters and inclines up to 11%. SO there it is, ALSTOM does not want or can not make any other thing then this CITADIS rubbish. And when they see difficulties they just offer Translohr like if they are the only manufacturer of trams in the world. SO pleas do not come and tell me what Alstom is and what they can. They produce what they produce and their trams can work only on exclusively build trams system for their trams. Why they do not change bodie or any other thing I do not care I am not interested, I care what my city needs and this Alstom can not fullfill clearly. That is why when I rarely see that Alstom wants to take part in some open concrus over existing tramay network is just funny and stupid. Only city they won was Rotterdam and they regret buying this citadis 302 trams, the track destroyer.

I know very well Ixege bogie, and again it is not full pivoting bogie, pivoting on some minor degree does not really give anything, turning radius for X05 trams is the same as for other models 25 meter.

You know better then me that Alstom has no chance for winning this contract with citadis trams. Alstom does not offer any kind of change that is there problem. While Bombardier, CAF or Skoda offer various body changes if necessary.

Last edited by Tramwayman; September 26th, 2016 at 12:18 PM.
Tramwayman no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 26th, 2016, 12:59 PM   #385
metr0p0litain
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 141
Likes (Received): 271

Who is that stupid and wants to build up a complete new network with radii less than 25 m? Welcome to Georgia.
__________________
Metró Budapest and other videos on my YouTube-channel: METR0P0LITAIN
metr0p0litain no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 26th, 2016, 01:59 PM   #386
Tramwayman
Trams the Best!!!
 
Tramwayman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Tbilisi
Posts: 618
Likes (Received): 528

Quote:
Originally Posted by metr0p0litain View Post
Who is that stupid and wants to build up a complete new network with radii less than 25 m? Welcome to Georgia.
Germans are stupid then ok

There are certain technical requirements which Alstom can not fulfill and argue, if they can not fulfill then we just say good buy.

1524mm gauge (to link it with the railway in the future for tram train operation to nearing cities)
2.65m wide cars.
minimal curve radii 18 meters.
maximum gradient 11%.

Systra with Alstom offer:
Project exclusively for Citadis trams 2,40 m wide cars, with 25 meter radii (because of that tram line alignment must be changed and rerouted on nearing central streets taking more lanes from cars instead of historic pedestrianized street, where historical line was running). 1435 mm wide gauge, so for tram train extra track in the future, APS in center (which we do not want, just batteries would go nice), the conclusion is to say good buy to Alstom. They offer APS to tie us with their patent technology so we can not buy any other trams from any other supplier in the future, they thought we here do not know anything about tramway systems and technologies in the world and just stupid people sitting here and fulfilling what Alstom wants and conducts us to do.

Last edited by Tramwayman; September 26th, 2016 at 05:29 PM.
Tramwayman no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 26th, 2016, 08:56 PM   #387
Duesey
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Askim
Posts: 36
Likes (Received): 16

Quote:
Originally Posted by suburbicide View Post
Being the newest, they'll be the last to go. Since the new trams will not be allowed on to T-bane network to go to Bekkestua, they're considering retaining some of the SL95s for this purpose, for the longer term.
Really? Last I've heard they were more expensive in service than the Duewags, and that they are really, really keen on getting rid of them. I understand the point of keeping tram-services to Bekkestua on line 13, though.
Duesey no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 26th, 2016, 11:33 PM   #388
Yak79
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 1,275
Likes (Received): 2176

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tramwayman View Post
I am aware of anything that is tram market be sure with that. Have talked with Alstom representatives as well as Systra so I know perfectly how RIGID and OBSOLETE their tramways are, they clearly said that minus 25 meter radii for trams is a problem and in my city we should consider only building trams there where there is no less then 25 meters in a curve. When our transportation company said that their would be an open concurs on buying the best option, they got mad and it was clear that it was unpleasant for them to hear that. They started to talk about Translohr horrible thing when we mentioned curves less then 25 meters at least 18 meters and inclines up to 11%. SO there it is, ALSTOM does not want or can not make any other thing then this CITADIS rubbish. And when they see difficulties they just offer Translohr like if they are the only manufacturer of trams in the world. SO pleas do not come and tell me what Alstom is and what they can. They produce what they produce and their trams can work only on exclusively build trams system for their trams. Why they do not change bodie or any other thing I do not care I am not interested, I care what my city needs and this Alstom can not fullfill clearly. That is why when I rarely see that Alstom wants to take part in some open concrus over existing tramay network is just funny and stupid. Only city they won was Rotterdam and they regret buying this citadis 302 trams, the track destroyer.

I know very well Ixege bogie, and again it is not full pivoting bogie, pivoting on some minor degree does not really give anything, turning radius for X05 trams is the same as for other models 25 meter.

You know better then me that Alstom has no chance for winning this contract with citadis trams. Alstom does not offer any kind of change that is there problem. While Bombardier, CAF or Skoda offer various body changes if necessary.
Instead of making the braggart, you should take in some account that hearsay counts less than factual evidence and documents: even under a bona fide anknowledgment (wich I concede you without any difficult), in an oral communication something can easily go missing or be misunderstood.

Wathsoever they may have told you:
  • The relationship between modern low-floor tramcars and legacy tramway systems (and more generally, with demanding track geometry) is inherently stormy, due to the mechanical concept and rigid dynamic beaviour of these kind of vehicle (cd. multiarticulated). It's a fact that leaves aside who the manufacturer was: almost every city buyed those models for its preexisting networks has experienced some share of tribulations (track wear, structural weakness, uncomfortable running, noise, etc.). It's something concerning also (but not only) Citadis since they're 100% low-floor, and not because Alstom's products being obsolete or particulary rigid¹.
    Until recently, the only way to overcome this was opting for a partially low-floor configuration with conventional bogies, at least for the end elements: a solution not offered by Alstom (due to its own commercial reasons, until proven otherwise), therefore usually they don't partecipate to some tenders - at least, when the partial low-floor is explicitly requested or not strictly ruled out.
  • Also in Rotterdam, those trams you are speaking about have the Corège “bogie” (see Alstom catalogue, pag. 5), a direct derivative from the Arpège one, i.e a typical solution for 100% low-floor aka multiarticulated vehicles : they're track destroyer just like all the tram in their class are, more or less.
  • The presence of a bolster with slewing ring mean a bogie can actually rotate, therefore it's really pivoting. When you speak about some minor degree, it's either:
    - a mixup with the non-pivoting variant of Ixège (which has actually only a limited rotation degree relative to the carbody);
    - some geometrical constraint of the carbody itself restricting the bogie rotation angle.
    Anyway, the freedom of bogies is only one of the parameters that affect the minimum radius in a tramcar.
Quite a lot of thing you seem to ignore/misunderstand, for someone who claim to be aware of everything!


Quote:
Originally Posted by Tramwayman View Post
...
There are certain technical requirements which Alstom can not fulfill and argue, if they can not fulfill then we just say good buy.

1524mm gauge (to link it with the railway in the future for tram train operation to nearing cities)
2.65m wide cars.
minimal curve radii 18 meters.
maximum gradient 11%.

Systra with Alstom offer:
Project exclusively for Citadis trams 2,40 m wide cars, with 25 meter radii (because of that tram line alignment must be changed and rerouted on nearing central streets taking more lanes from cars instead of historic pedestrianized street, where historical line was running). 1435 mm wide gauge, so for tram train extra track in the future, APS in center (which we do not want, just batteries would go nice), the conclusion is to say good buy to Alstom. They offer APS to tie us with their patent technology so we can not buy any other trams from any other supplier in the future, they thought we here do not know anything about tramway systems and technologies in the world and just stupid people sitting here and fulfilling what Alstom wants and conducts us to do.
What Alstom was then willing to offer is one thing, what Alstom can actually fulfill is quite another:
- Alstom (in joint-venture with its partner TMH) has built four tramcars, based on Citadis platform² for the 1524 mm St. Petersburg network (cfr. here);
- Alstom X05 longer models have both 2,40 and 2,65 m width as off-the-shelf version (see official X05 brochure), which means also the 24 m long 205 vehicle could virtually be build so wide since the series is modular;
- 18 m radius curves are challenging (on the edge of the “out of question”) for any 100% low-floor modern tram, and moreover something rare even in a legacy network (outside the depot);
- an 11% gradient ascending slope is impossible to negotiate for any standard modern tram, only a custom-made fully adherent vehicle with more powerful motorization (like the Bombardier Mountainrunner for Linz) can do it; something that virtually also Alstom could develop, if they wanted.

Given that they have in hand a product (Translohr) that can achieve the last two severe requirements as it is, without any further R&D, I find perfectly logical they tried to place it, even insisting, instead of assuming the risks of a tailor-made model (which in any case would have been both more expensive for buyer and less profitable for the seller). Plus, after your glorious goodbye³ to Alstom, the Tbilisi tram project is AFAIK at the standstill yet: maybe because (among other reasons) there isn't exactly a crowd of manufacturers eager to fulfill your city requirements?

Since municipal authorities weren't satisfied by Alstom and Systra, they did well in getting rid of them, but nevertheless the assigned requirements are severe and certainly quite uncommon: is this peculiarity, rather than a supposed unsuitability on the Alstom side, that made the case.


¹ misrepresenting this, without regard about technical evaluations, means only being biased against a particular brand;
² with another model of pivoting bogie, Ipomos (see Alstom catalogue, pag. 6);
³ and not good buy (which, in this context, mean somewhat the right opposite);

PS. There's a lot of thing I'm unaware of, I not understand well or I make mistake about, maybe in this post too, but I'm an humble enthusiast (moreover, a mere human being) and I never claimed of knowing everything.
Plus, my deepest apologies to the other forumers for this clearly OT excursus.
__________________
-
"primo ufficio dell'uomo è perseguire i propri scopi con mezzi idonei, e chi sbaglia paga"

-
- Primo Levi, Se questo è un uomo -

metr0p0litain liked this post

Last edited by Yak79; September 26th, 2016 at 11:43 PM.
Yak79 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 27th, 2016, 12:51 AM   #389
Tramwayman
Trams the Best!!!
 
Tramwayman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Tbilisi
Posts: 618
Likes (Received): 528

Quote:
Originally Posted by Yak79 View Post
Instead of making the braggart, you should take in some account that hearsay counts less than factual evidence and documents: even under a bona fide anknowledgment (wich I concede you without any difficult), in an oral communication something can easily go missing or be misunderstood.

Wathsoever they may have told you:
  • The relationship between modern low-floor tramcars and legacy tramway systems (and more generally, with demanding track geometry) is inherently stormy, due to the mechanical concept and rigid dynamic beaviour of these kind of vehicle (cd. multiarticulated). It's a fact that leaves aside who the manufacturer was: almost every city buyed those models for its preexisting networks has experienced some share of tribulations (track wear, structural weakness, uncomfortable running, noise, etc.). It's something concerning also (but not only) Citadis since they're 100% low-floor, and not because Alstom's products being obsolete or particulary rigid¹.
    Until recently, the only way to overcome this was opting for a partially low-floor configuration with conventional bogies, at least for the end elements: a solution not offered by Alstom (due to its own commercial reasons, until proven otherwise), therefore usually they don't partecipate to some tenders - at least, when the partial low-floor is explicitly requested or not strictly ruled out.
  • Also in Rotterdam, those trams you are speaking about have the Corège “bogie” (see Alstom catalogue, pag. 5), a direct derivative from the Arpège one, i.e a typical solution for 100% low-floor aka multiarticulated vehicles : they're track destroyer just like all the tram in their class are, more or less.
  • The presence of a bolster with slewing ring mean a bogie can actually rotate, therefore it's really pivoting. When you speak about some minor degree, it's either:
    - a mixup with the non-pivoting variant of Ixège (which has actually only a limited rotation degree relative to the carbody);
    - some geometrical constraint of the carbody itself restricting the bogie rotation angle.
    Anyway, the freedom of bogies is only one of the parameters that affect the minimum radius in a tramcar.
Quite a lot of thing you seem to ignore/misunderstand, for someone who claim to be aware of everything!


What Alstom was then willing to offer is one thing, what Alstom can actually fulfill is quite another:
- Alstom (in joint-venture with its partner TMH) has built four tramcars, based on Citadis platform² for the 1524 mm St. Petersburg network (cfr. here);
- Alstom X05 longer models have both 2,40 and 2,65 m width as off-the-shelf version (see official X05 brochure), which means also the 24 m long 205 vehicle could virtually be build so wide since the series is modular;
- 18 m radius curves are challenging (on the edge of the “out of question”) for any 100% low-floor modern tram, and moreover something rare even in a legacy network (outside the depot);
- an 11% gradient ascending slope is impossible to negotiate for any standard modern tram, only a custom-made fully adherent vehicle with more powerful motorization (like the Bombardier Mountainrunner for Linz) can do it; something that virtually also Alstom could develop, if they wanted.

Given that they have in hand a product (Translohr) that can achieve the last two severe requirements as it is, without any further R&D, I find perfectly logical they tried to place it, even insisting, instead of assuming the risks of a tailor-made model (which in any case would have been both more expensive for buyer and less profitable for the seller). Plus, after your glorious goodbye³ to Alstom, the Tbilisi tram project is AFAIK at the standstill yet: maybe because (among other reasons) there isn't exactly a crowd of manufacturers eager to fulfill your city requirements?

Since municipal authorities weren't satisfied by Alstom and Systra, they did well in getting rid of them, but nevertheless the assigned requirements are severe and certainly quite uncommon: is this peculiarity, rather than a supposed unsuitability on the Alstom side, that made the case.


¹ misrepresenting this, without regard about technical evaluations, means only being biased against a particular brand;
² with another model of pivoting bogie, Ipomos (see Alstom catalogue, pag. 6);
³ and not good buy (which, in this context, mean somewhat the right opposite);

PS. There's a lot of thing I'm unaware of, I not understand well or I make mistake about, maybe in this post too, but I'm an humble enthusiast (moreover, a mere human being) and I never claimed of knowing everything.
Plus, my deepest apologies to the other forumers for this clearly OT excursus.
First of all Alstom and Systra biggest problem here was that when thay tell you TRAMS ARE IMPOSSIBLE TO MAKE THIS AND THAT, they judge all the trams according to what they produce, if they does not produce something then TRAMS DON T DO THAT, trams do not negotiate 18 meter curves, they do not accend 11% inclines, etc. So they kinda demonised tram at the end in favour of translohr.

Problem with Systra and Alstom is that, even knowing requirmenets they made a project only for citadis trams and only for 2.40m wide carbody. This was quite an unpleasant move, they told us that 18 meter radii and 2.65m wide carbody is impossible (impossible for them they always forget to say). SO they just generally said what the do not or can not do, no one can, which is a big lie and a very non professional move from them, instead of offering solutions and modifications, they say either you build a translohr or you dont have tramway system at all.

Skoda 15T you know it perfectly, pivoting bogies, jacobs middle bogies, 15 meter minimal radii, any width offering any track gauge offering, and the floor is truly 100% low, not like Alstom one having huge podiums under the seats, as may other manufacturers offer as pseudo 100% low floor.

And of course we placed at least 70% low floor, and pivoting bogies.

There has not been an open concurs yet, because tram project is on stand still cause of political issues, project and will form another government, it changed and the new one does not want to make the same just it is because form another government, well you know opposition parties having their stupid games meanwhile project stands.

Alstom and Systra stood on that what they do not make, no one makes, come on guys lets build translohr, it is quiter, better, ride comfort is better, the last one was the most funny and ironic. and the guy the representative of Systra, you could just see on his face how mad he was that oh in the municipality they have people which can argue about this terms, they really expected us to say yes on anything, they even started introducing translohr, when we made it clear that there would be only steel wheel tramways system with an option lines as a tram train, (and they still come and offer rubber tire rubbish). More irony from them?


To lie to municipalities just to sell the rubbish product that no one wants to buy.

We care what we build in our city and what we pay for, they do not. THat is why group of enthusiasts also encouriged municipality to invite consultants from other countries to work on the tram technical project, some independent german experts engineers who saw the project, said instantly, it is a standart track planning system from Alstom what Systra uses, obsolete catenary system offered from Alstom, single wire system just to look beautifull but expensive in operation, expensive APS systm which no one needs, bad depot track alignement with all dead end tracks. SO the German specialists now have to change all the project, depot design, track alignement in many parts, curves, and widen the profile fro 2.65m wide vehicles. They also sad that 18 meter radii yes is challenging but no problem, pivoting bogies no problem for many manufacturers, 11% inclines yes need full motorisation and strong braking system but again nothing impossible there.

Systra had already problems with some cities, offering STANDARD rubbish as always, like in Riga they offered regauging the network from soviet 1524mm to 1435 and buy Citadis trams hahahahahahahahhaa Riga said a big good bye to them and bought Skoda trams.

The consultant from Systra who worked on this also worked on our project and he tells me that Skoda 15T trams are like tanks and are not 100% low floor and Riga payed such a lot of money in them, and in 2 weeks he went back to Riga cause he lives there and then he texts me in facebook oh I checked Skoda trams and they are 100% low floor I was mistaken sorry. The guy lives there and did not even knew that, how can we even talk about a professionalism of this persons.

That is why they were not happy when municipality made it clear that there would be an open concurs on making a project and also buying rolling stock.

Systra wanted their project to be the one and only so we would buy either citadis trams cause no other tram passes there, or we make a translohr system.

Lets see what happens when tram project will resume cause there already talks.

I never was a Alstom hater, or Systra hater, but after having this very unpleasant relationship with them I am pretty sure this two are the worst non professionals who a city might invite to build a tram project.

Systra also estimated 25 mln euros per km.

Germans 10 to 12 at most. a big difference-

Last edited by Tramwayman; September 27th, 2016 at 01:25 AM.
Tramwayman no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 27th, 2016, 12:12 PM   #390
metr0p0litain
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 141
Likes (Received): 271

I think, you need a swiss army for your requirements...

__________________
Metró Budapest and other videos on my YouTube-channel: METR0P0LITAIN

subbotazh liked this post
metr0p0litain no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 28th, 2016, 11:17 PM   #391
suburbicide
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 423
Likes (Received): 247

Construction of the 22 km Follo line from Oslo Central Station to the suburb Ski 22 km south of Oslo is well underway. Four TBMs have been assembled midway at Åsland and started boring earlier this month. Outside the access tunnels at Åsland, a 20,000 m2 concrete segment factory with three production lines has been built and started production. The massive construction site at Åsland also consists of crushing plants, conveyors and other auxiliary installations.

The tunnelling south of Oslo central station has been going on for a year. The inbound Østfoldbane tunnel is almost complete (the section nearest Oslo central station is constructed using drill & blast and drill & split methods.)

Progress near Oslo:


Recent video summarising the project:


Video showing assembly of the TBMs:
__________________

dimlys1994, :jax:, Verji, Registered_User liked this post
suburbicide no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 4th, 2016, 05:20 PM   #392
metr0p0litain
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 141
Likes (Received): 271

Hello,

I'm searching for detailed information about the third rail used on the Oslo T-Bane network, something similiar to this drawing with dimensioning:



I would also like to know who is the supplier for the third rail holder. Unfortunately I couldn't figure it out:



As far as I know, Oslo T-Bane uses third rails with STR40-profile. I would be very thankful if somebody can help!
__________________
Metró Budapest and other videos on my YouTube-channel: METR0P0LITAIN
metr0p0litain no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 29th, 2016, 01:04 PM   #393
suburbicide
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 423
Likes (Received): 247

Found some recent "cab view" videos from the Oslo metro:

Misty ride on Line 1 Frognerseteren-Bergkrystallen: The western branch "Holmenkollen line" is the oldest one of what now comprises the Oslo T-bane. The first section opened in 1898. It's the only part that still has level crossings and short platforms.



Line 2 Østerås-Ellingsrudåsen



Line 3 Kolsås-Mortensrud. The western (Kolsås) branch was completely rebuilt in recent years. The number of stations was reduced and the line grade separated. Much of the eastern branch got significant upgrades this year, including new tracks and track bed, new platforms and new artwork painted on the stations.



Line 4 Vestli- Bergkrystallen. Including the most recent station, Løren.



Line 5 Sogsnvann-Vestli, via the "ring line".

__________________

dimlys1994 liked this post
suburbicide no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 29th, 2016, 01:13 PM   #394
suburbicide
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 423
Likes (Received): 247

"Cab view" videos of a couple of Oslo tram lines:

Line 13 Bekkestua- Grefsen. The first two stations this tram runs on metro tracks.



Line 18 Ljabru-Rikshospitalet. Single-track operation for part of this line due to maintenance works.

__________________

dimlys1994, Ashis Mitra liked this post
suburbicide no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 11th, 2017, 04:42 PM   #395
suburbicide
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 423
Likes (Received): 247

Some recent pictures from the construction of the Follo line. Alledgedly it's the only tunneling project in Europe with 4 TBMs going. The TBM-bored part is 10 % complete.













Sources:
http://www.at.no/anlegg/2017-02-08/F...ret-25261.html
http://www.bygg.no/article/1303446?i...e89069-1303464
__________________

:jax:, dimlys1994, Registered_User, Verji liked this post
suburbicide no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 12th, 2017, 11:44 PM   #396
bongo-anders
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Køge
Posts: 5,180
Likes (Received): 3597

Well the Copenhagen metro had 5 TBM's at work at one time and 6 in total.

Now we only have the very last TBM at work before all the drilling is done.
__________________

suburbicide, Verji liked this post
bongo-anders no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 20th, 2017, 11:57 AM   #397
Ashis Mitra
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Kolkata
Posts: 2,426
Likes (Received): 1141

Oslo metro is always an unique style of its layout. Unlike most metro systems, around the world, which are either crisscross, or stand alone line with each other, Oslo’s system is like a bus or tram or suburban train style layout, that is many branches from a main route, with a sharing common route. It currently has 5 lines— Line 1, 2, 3, 4 & 5— the network is mostly overground. All lines pass through a common tunnel, so it is possible to easily run any line’s train to any line, simply like a suburban train or tram network, although metro routes don’t run in such a way. Due to mostly over-ground, it runs through open valley, hilly area, field, almost like a suburban train. From photos I saw it is wonderful to run a metro rail on a snowy hill, especially in winter. The whole atmosphere is then covered by snow, and tracks, 3rd rail, all was covered by snow, and a journey through a pine forest via metro is completely unimaginable from Kolkata, my city.

Line 2 was partly converted from a suburban rail line (or light rail?) to metro (western section). For this reason on early days there were such metro trains with had both panto-graph and third rail shoe to use on both type of power supply. But it was earlier converted to metro line, and always separated from surface by fencing, and overpasses.

Another very interesting line is line 3. It was also partly converted from a suburban rail (or light rail?) line to metro (western section). Formerly this portion also used overhead wire (because the origin was a suburban rail line), but later it was changed to 3rd rail (to be a standard metro). For this reason on early days there were such metro trains with had both panto-graph and third rail shoe to use on both type of power supply. From Bekkastua to Jar, the metro tracks also used by tram cars. It was possible because both has same gauge. Trams doesn’t stop on metro stations due to tram’s low floor, it some times used as a loop line as tram stops. Similarly metro doesn’t uses tram stops due to high floor and length of car. It directly ignore the tram stops. In this common portion has both 3rd rail and overhead wire, which is used by respectively metro and tram. I never saw such mixed portion anywhere in the world, and in my city Kolkata, it is absolutely a fairly tale.

Line 5 was also partly converted from a suburban rail line (or light rail?) to metro (northern section). For this reason on early days there were such metro trains with had both panto-graph and third rail shoe to use on both type of power supply. But it was earlier converted to metro line, and always separated from surface by fencing, and overpasses. This is also an interesting line, because it completely encircle the city center circular metro route, both clock wise and anticlockwise route. I think this is the best and busiest route of the entire metro system. It is also shared with line 4 continues its journey towards Vestli, but the difference is line 4 uses Loren, and line 5 uses Hasle.
Ashis Mitra no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 20th, 2017, 07:09 PM   #398
Ingenioren
Registered User
 
Ingenioren's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Oslo
Posts: 5,605
Likes (Received): 584

It's planned to stop running trams on the tram-metro section of Kolsåsbanen, in 2024 the trams will terminate at Øraker. There is 400m distance between Øraker and Bjørnsletta metro station so transfer will not be ideal..
__________________
I want to see some construction!

Ashis Mitra liked this post
Ingenioren no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 20th, 2017, 07:42 PM   #399
suburbicide
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 423
Likes (Received): 247

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ashis Mitra View Post
Line 2 was partly converted from a suburban rail line (or light rail?) to metro (western section). For this reason on early days there were such metro trains with had both panto-graph and third rail shoe to use on both type of power supply. B
I don't think what is now line 2 (western terminus Østerås) and line 5 (north-western terminus Sognsvann) ever had trains that used both pantograph and third rail shoe.

Prior to the early 90s, there were no east-west through-running trains, all trains terminated at Stortinget station. It was practically two different rail systems. In 1993, the Sognsvann branch was converted to metro standard with third rail and east-west through-runnning was introduced on this line (using the same trains that was used on the eastern network). At this time the section between Stortinget and Majorstuen had both overhead wire and third rail.

In 1995 the Østerås-branch (line 2) was converted to metro standard with third rail, and east-west through running was introduced. At the same time (or maybe it was a few years later?) they started through-running on line 1 and 3 as well, using trains equipped with both third rail shoe and pantograph. At this point they removed the overhead wire between Stortinget and Frøen/Smestad. Of course, eventually line 1 and 3 were converted to third rail and the entire system is now third rail.
__________________

Ashis Mitra liked this post
suburbicide no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 20th, 2017, 09:35 PM   #400
Ashis Mitra
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Kolkata
Posts: 2,426
Likes (Received): 1141

After reading many websites I’ve recently saw some matters, which arise some questions and curiosity. Here I’m writing.

1) The running of Oslo metro on outside as a surface metro was happened because line 1 was partly converted from a suburban rail line (or light rail?) to metro (northern section). For this reason on early days there were such metro trains with had both panto-graph and third rail shoe to use on both type of power supply. This is very unique route because the entire northern portion is on surface, and with many level crossings, simply like a suburban rail line or light rail line. Formerly this portion used overhead wire (because the origin was a suburban rail line), but later it was changed to 3rd rail (to be a standard metro) but, level crossings of former suburban rail line and metro with panto-graph remained. For this reason, this line is still not completely segregated, and level crossing gates become closed when a metro train come. The central section is a standard metro with mostly underground section up-to Helsfyr. In peak hours some metro-cars of line 1 continues its journey towards Bergkrystallen, shared with line 4. So I think line 1 is a hybrid line, and the most interesting line of Oslo metro network. Is the section between Frognerseteren and Frøen is fenced? If not I think it is very dangerous for man and animals to suddenly come on metro track and get electrocuted by touching the 3rd rail. Please write some details about the security.

2) I heard on peak hours some trains on line 1 also shared with line 2 and run up-to Ellingsrudåsen. Is it true that line 1 train run on both line 2 and line 4 in peak hours?

3) Line 4 semicircles the city center circular metro line by outside anti-clockwise loop. This is the latest metro link portion of Oslo metro via Loren. I heard the southern portion of line 4 was converted from a light rail line, is it true? Please post some details.

4) I heard about Fornebubanen is a project to build a branch from Majorstuen via Skøyen and Lysaker to the redevelopment area on Fornebu, the area of Oslo's former airport, but I could not find it on any map. Please write some details about this extension with its opening date and a map.

5) Line 2 may be extended from Ellingsrudåsen to Akershus Universitetssykehus, and possibly on to Lillestrøm (Ahusbanen). Please write some details about this extension with its opening date and a map.
Ashis Mitra no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Tags
oslo

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Related topics on SkyscraperCity


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 11:47 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us | privacy policy | DMCA policy

tech management by Sysprosium