AHC: greater trolley coach use today in North America

[1940LaSalle]

The trolley coach, which Mac Sabree and Paul Ward called "transit's stepchild" was largely a creature of the 1930s through the 1950s. At it zenith, dozens of North American cities ran these rubber tired vehicles with two trolley poles. Today, it's down to Boston, Philadelphia, Dayton, San Francisco, Seattle, and Vancouver--and I believe one of Philadelphia's two dormant lines (route 79, Snyder Avenue, just gave up the ghost recently). Toronto ceased TC operation in (I believe 1998), and the preceding big conversion was Chicago to the best of my knowledge in 1971. (On the flip side, because of its high torque from a standing start, the TC is making further inroads in Frisco.)

So: how do we get the TC to hang on to operate where it once commanded a sizable part of the daily transit route miles; e.g., Baltimore, Cincinnati, Chicago, Toronto, Wilmington (DE), and the like?

 

[TheMann]

Toronto gave their up in large part because of the capital costs involved in renewing what was by the end of their operation in 1992 a very old fleet and older infrastructure. The largest portions of the fleet in Toronto were operated in North-central parts of the old city of Toronto, and the extension of the Yonge Subway in the 1960s made then obsolete. The Ossington, Dupont and Weston routes were killed by infrastructure issues.

The best bet to keep Toronto using trolley buses is to have cheap electricity and lots of it, particularly if you can set up trolley buses that are bigger than the 40-foot buses used on most routes. You could also use them to complement the city's streetcar fleet as well. Larger size and cheap power would make them a good go-between between the backbone streetcar and subway lines and the bus fleet.

 

[sloreck]

One way for trolley buses to make a comeback is "hybrid" trolley bus designs. Here you have vehicles than run on overhead power in dense areas, but have large battery backs which allow them to run away from overhead lines. When they get back on main lines, they recharge the batteries as well as use the overhead power to run the bus. This type of design overcomes a couple of the issues with these units.
1. Flexibility - Other than main routes, "side" routes or routes with less frequency can change and this would mean taking dowen and then rebuilding the overhead wires.
2. Esthetics - A lot of areas (like single family housing areas) don't like overhead wires, on the other hand quiet and non-polluting electric buses would certainly be much more acceptable.
3. Cost - Building the overhead wires and maintaining them is costly, by reducing the total mileage of overhead wires this is markedly reduced.
4. "Green" - diesel buses are notoriously "nasty" (just be behind one with the car window open or on a bike). If you put solar panrels over the parking yard for buses, and even on the bus shelters, you not only reduce the carbon footprint but can reduce cost for the transit system using at least some "free" power.

Note you can always put a small gas/diesel engine on these to run a generator if you are concerned about buses running out of juice.

 

[Twin City Lines]

I don't know much of the topography of the other cities with ETBs, but they are perfect for the steep hills of Seattle and San Francisco. However, the hybrid-electric bus (think of a giant Prius) may end up replacing it even there. Also, there is a new technology from China which involves charging stations at the end of the bus line. A trolley-like gizmo is raised to contact the charger for the duration of the layover, but is lowered again for actual bus operation.

 

[Somedevil]

I was just in Nashville and they are using Electric "Green" Buses for there downtown area. I don't know how long they have to sit under the charging station but it connects on top like a trolley.

That's a city that probably would of used these types since there is lots of hills and many short trips with people bar hopping etc.

 

[TheMann]

Sloreck has a good idea, but the I see a potential problem with supplying both enough juice to keep the batteries charged and drive the vehicle, particularly since a big enough bank of batteries to drive the bus any real distance is going to weigh several tons, thus you need extra juice still to drive the bus both on and off of the wires. Solves the flexibility problem but it isn't as simple as it first seems. Adding more current or voltage increases safety hazards (most such systems run on lower-voltage DC power for this reason) and also could increase your maintenance costs.

What may also help from the aesthetics front (and maybe traffic management too) is simply to design streetlights that include outriggers for the wires for trolley buses and/or LRT/streetcar vehicles. If you are able to have the wires be properly hung you can avoid many ugly jumbles of wires, which would make your installation look cleaner.

Also, the use of such buses on streetcar lines as backup units could be thought about, too. On systems like the TTC and San Francisco's Muni Metro, you could have trolley buses run the same routes as the streetcars as extra reinforcements if the streetcars are overcrowded. On a similar vein, you could get diesel-electric buses where the diesel simply runs a an alternator for power (thus all but eliminating drivetrain losses and massively reducing drag from accessories like air conditioning) to drive everything, and have that bus equipped with a pantograph to pick up power when the bus is operating in an electrified area.

 

[sloreck]

The reason you need two wires for these is that, unlike streetcars, the trolley is insulated from the ground (rubber tires not steel wheels and rails). No ground no circuit.

 

[phx1138]

There's another big, if less-obvious, drawback (which, I admit, buses suffer, too): traffic. Speed is limited by intersections. Ideally, a trolly/tram would run above street level.

That said, can you get benefits from early introduction of monocoque construction? IIRC, there were aluminum-bodied cars in the '30s, but they had heavy steel frames, an issue of weight as well as corrosion. Can you overcome both with a steel monocoque?

 

[Kevin C. Smith]

Hybrids/batteries will help bring back TC's but the technology didn't exist in he 60's-70's when systems were giving up their last gasps. To keep them around and come back (to a lesser extent) at the time, I think your best POD is some sort of program pushing new TC development, probably through the Department of Housing and Urban Development (neither DOE or EPA exist in the 60's). If it can last until the oil embargo of 1973, you might be able to engineer a push to get urban transportation off of oil derived fuels, with grants/subsidies for capital expenses, and development of larger/newer coach designs.

 

[sloreck]

If the existing systems last until the oil embargo, maybe more systems not yet "dead" and the embargo lasts longer, this may boost them and help them survive.

 

[phx1138]

You also need to address the underlying racism in at least some places. L.A., frex, expressly wanted to be rid of tram systems because they gave good access by blacks to white neighborhoods... Buses would change that (& did).

 

[La Rouge Beret]

Is a trolley the North American term for a tram?

 

[Taloc13]

There are quite extensive trolley networks in New Orleans and the new loop trolley is opening in st. louis this month.

 

[Ivir Baggins]

Is a trolley the North American term for a tram?

Not quite. Trolleys are standard buses which run on roads but are powered from overhead wires. Trams usually are also powered by overhead wires but run on special tracks akin to rails.

 

[sloreck]

Trolley can be used for rail cars or the electric buses on overhead wires. In the latter case they were often referred to as "trackless trolleys". In American English trolley would be considered the more archaic, though still used term, streetcar is more common (and is in fact the term used in New Orleans). New Orleans was down to one streetcar (rail) route but has expanded this to several some of which recreate old routes. Through the 60s at least New Orleans also had the electric buses/trackless trolleys but those are now all gone.

Until the 50s/60s there were basically four sorts of rail systems for transit in the USA. One was streetcars which ran on overhead wires and either shared road space with cars etc or ran down the median on larger streets. Another was subways, which generally ran on a third rail and might have both ground level and elevated segments. Some systems had a mix (Boston for example) with overhead wire streetcars that also had underground segments as well as heavier dedicated subway units. Third were interurban lines which more or less served the suburbs/smaller towns connecting them to the larger city. These could either be electric on overhead wires or diesel powered many systems had a mix of both. Lastly of course is the standard heavy rail. In most places the streetcars were gone by the late 60s/early 70s, and true interurban lines by the same time, and heavy passenger rail much reduced. Streetcars that survived were mostly those that ran in median strips and/or mixed underground and did not compete for street space with cars and trucks. Interurbans were essentially replaced by highways.

 

[Abuzuzu]

There is a recent development in this area.

The overhead wire structure is a non-starter for multiple reasons.
The new approach is to use a battery powered conventional bus and wireless recharging that transfers electric power from an electrical coil mounted flush with the road surface and a second electrical coil mounted underneath the bus. Because electrical power is transferred wirelessly between the coils, the bus can get a partial charge at the makeup stop. A makeup stop is an extended stop that occurs once every whihc allows schedule re-synchronization and whihc offers the driver a few minutes to make a bathroom stop, have a smoke or have something to eat.

The makeup stop charge is a partial charge but a full charge is not needed. If the makeup stop charge makes up for the electricity used for one circuit of the bus route, combined propulsion as well as heating or air conditioning, the bus can be operated 24/7/365 with no need to take the bus out of service for an overnight charge.

Shuttle buses operating between two or more points can charge wirelessly while picking up or discharging passengers.

There are a number of these wireless bus charging systems currently installed in the USA, Europe and Korea and several dozen systems in the planning or installation phase.

In the USA this trend is driven by progressively tighter Federal emission standards. Essentially all municipal bus company buses are purchased with Federal money and the Feds are close to refusing funding for conventionally powered buses.

Something similar is happening in the EU driven by the need to reduce or eliminate transportation section carbon dioxide emissions however I am not familiar with the details in the EU.

For sake of full disclosure I mention here I am an electrical engineer employed to work on the tempering wireless charging technology.

 

[Simon]

There's another big, if less-obvious, drawback (which, I admit, buses suffer, too): traffic. Speed is limited by intersections. Ideally, a trolly/tram would run above street level.

If they're fully segregated on their own raised tracks above street level then aren't you effectively moving away from it being a trolley coach and not better off making it a proper rapid transit system, like the raised sections of Chicago's L, which can carry more passengers?

 

[sloreck]

The reality is you can't have an elevated system in a dense part of an urban area (an el) that is not already up and running. In New York, several elevated tracks were taken down in the 50s and 60s, some partially replaced by additional underground lines some not. The elevated sections still in use, and there are there are quite a number, are in the lower density of the outer boroughs - very limited in one part of northern Manhattan. Elevated mass transit segments, such as parts of the D.C. Metro system, that are more recent, go through areas that are not so dense. In a dense area like Manhattan as an example, folks don't like an elevated railway that shadows the street and tends to project noise up several floors on adjoining office or apartment buildings. These were reasons why the 6th Ave & 2nd Ave El came down.

 

[phx1138]

If they're fully segregated on their own raised tracks above street level then aren't you effectively moving away from it being a trolley coach and not better off making it a proper rapid transit system, like the raised sections of Chicago's L, which can carry more passengers?

The reality is you can't have an elevated system in a dense part of an urban area (an el) that is not already up and running. In New York, several elevated tracks were taken down in the 50s and 60s, some partially replaced by additional underground lines some not. The elevated sections still in use, and there are there are quite a number, are in the lower density of the outer boroughs - very limited in one part of northern Manhattan. Elevated mass transit segments, such as parts of the D.C. Metro system, that are more recent, go through areas that are not so dense. In a dense area like Manhattan as an example, folks don't like an elevated railway that shadows the street and tends to project noise up several floors on adjoining office or apartment buildings. These were reasons why the 6th Ave & 2nd Ave El came down.

Yeah, elevating's a major cost factor, even allowing there's space to do it in downtowns without doing significant demolition (which is improbable), & allowing you can overcome citizen resistance to putting streets into shade... (Not to mention the noise.)

So, you upgrade the cars so they're more efficient & faster (when they can be) & live with the limits... Or build subways. (That's why Boston got subway instead of *el; opponents published a "photoshopped" pic with a notional el rwy, &...)

Or you have buses & live with the bad service & segregation...

 

[1940LaSalle]

We've gotten rather far removed from the original premise, so let's return. I started this thread focusing on conventional / classic trolley coaches; i.e., the double overhead wire rubber tired vehicles and how to make their use more prevalent today instead of having them found only in six North American cities.

I saw the objections to the aesthetics of twin wire overhead, and to that I say the transit system of Birmingham, AL (among other places) solved that very neatly about 70+ years ago:

Bracket arm construction worked quite neatly, both figuratively and literally. Now, with that solved, let's resume.