Bristol tram plan may replace bendy buses plan (merged topics)

[whole diary]

[trainer]

May I suggest a better alternative?  A flexible electric vehicle capable of negotiating sharp curves has proved popular in many cities and had aided a rapid increase in the use of public transport.  It is true that it requires two parallel rails sunk into the road and the provision of a power supply, but this has proved cost effective in most places. 

Excuse me...for a moment I got carried away. 

[grahame]

It is true that it requires two parallel rails sunk into the road and the provision of a power supply ...

You may be able to provide a built in power supply.   I was impressed by the frequency achieved here ... just count the number of seats (and real seats, not just standing room) in a short period.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R_lqp3yZv-E

[TonyK]

If Brunel was alive today, I wonder what he would do?

He would be turning in his grave!

I've only found this thread today, hence my disinterment of that post, but it seems appropriate in the circumstances. This rubbish scheme is being watered down every day. We started with "modern low emission vehicles" "high quality experience" "rapid" running on "segregated routes". Now we're down to bog standard diesel buses running in bus lanes, then through the streets of Knowle West, due to become 20mph soon. Complete pigs ear of a job!

One of the arguments against light rail is the cost of moving services from under where the rails are to go. That doesn't wash for the line past Spike Island. The track was laid in 1906. If there are services under it, they haven't needed looking at for 106 years. If they rip that up for buses, they won't be thanked. The route was originally going to serve the new 10,000 home development at Yanley, now scrapped, and the Long Ashton P&R^▸ (Park and Ride), due to become much quieter the day Portishead reopens. It was also envisaged as transporting football fans to Bristol City's new stadium. Not only have Bristol City Council cocked that up, but the police have advised against it.

I think the cracks will widen quickly now. My spies (via twitter) at the Hustings going on as we speak reveal  at least 3 mayoral candidates dead set against Bust Rabid Transit, 4 are for massive changes. Only Jon Rogers is sticking by it, and even he doesn't like the Prince Street bridge part of the route.

Trams, please! Well worked, fully understood technology, proven to get people out of their cars. More expensive than buses, but much better value long term.

[TonyK]

This story from Bristol Evening Post deserves to be in several threads for different reasons.

Transport minister: "I'm looking forward to working with Bristol mayor"

Transport minister Patrick McLoughlin was in Bristol today for David Cameron's Cabinet meeting - and afterwards met bosses from First Great Western and Network Rail at Temple Meads station.

The minister said that he is looking forward to working with the city^s first elected mayor.
 
He went on to say that the problems surrounding the tendering process for the Great Western franchise should be ironed out by the end of the year.

Mr McLoughlin said: ^This is a fantastic facility and a fantastic station and there has been a big increase in demand for rail travel in recent years. It is fantastic that such a great city as Bristol is going to get a great city to match its aspirations.^

The minister said he saw the new mayor as a vital role for the city in terms of transport and business.

He said: ^It will be a great help for me to be able to speak to one individual voice in the city. The elected may will be one clear single voice that we will be able to speak to directly.

^The mayor will be a major voice for Bristol. When I want to speak to someone about transport I can go directly to Boris and hopefully it will work the same way in Bristol.^

The city has been awarded ^130 million to help pay for a new Rapid Transit System but some of the of the candidates have voiced objections to the scheme.

However, Mr McLoughlin is said he is willing to talk directly to the new mayor on a number of issues. He did not rule out moving the cash to another scheme but added that he was keen to work with the new mayor as soon as the election has been settled.

The row over the West Coast Mainline franchise has left a cloud of uncertainty hanging over the bidding to run train services between London and Bristol.

The bidding process has been put on hold after the Government was forced to admit it had made serious mistakes in the process.

Mr McLoughlin said: ^We are holding a number of inquiries which are due to report by the end of the month. The hope is that once we have the findings then we will be able to continue in the bidding process.

^At the same time we want to make sure that Bristol and the south West will continue to get the train service it deserves.^

Of interest in this thread is that the minister did not rule out using the BRT^▸ (Bus Rapid Transit) money on a different scheme. This rather pulls the rug from under BRT's few supporters. Their main - only, even - argument against making changes to this shocking scheme is that the funding is for BRT and only BRT.

[swrural]

'Mr McLoughlin said: ^This is a fantastic facility and a fantastic station and there has been a big increase in demand for rail travel in recent years. It is fantastic that such a great city as Bristol is going to get a great city to match its aspirations.^'

I take it, FTN, you did not notice this, as reported, ridiculous mangling of the English language.

Apart from that, I do not see how you could read into it that BRT^▸ (Bus Rapid Transit) was up for change. 

The photo op was about improving rail facilities in the area, to which BRT is ancillary and complementary.

[Chris from Nailsea]

'Mr McLoughlin said: ^This is a fantastic facility and a fantastic station and there has been a big increase in demand for rail travel in recent years. It is fantastic that such a great city as Bristol is going to get a great city to match its aspirations.^'

I take it, FTN, you did not notice this, as reported, ridiculous mangling of the English language.

I noticed it - and, to be brutally honest (personal opinion) I merely put it down to sloppy journalism.

Apart from that, I do not see how you could read into it that BRT^▸ (Bus Rapid Transit) was up for change.

Hmm.  From that Bristol Post article:

The city has been awarded ^130 million to help pay for a new Rapid Transit System but some of the of the candidates have voiced objections to the scheme.

However, Mr McLoughlin is said he is willing to talk directly to the new mayor on a number of issues. He did not rule out moving the cash to another scheme but added that he was keen to work with the new mayor as soon as the election has been settled.

Note also one of the comments added to that Bristol Post article:

by Brizz_Tony Monday, November 12 2012, 5:42PM
^I think I like Patrick McLoughlin. He has just driven a stake through the heart of the last desperate reason offered by the Lib Dems for not messing with BRT, and the stupid ^50 million BRT2 route. Doubtless Gary Hopkins will disagree, but me and my new mate Pat know what's best for this fantastic city.^

I'm not taking sides, merely pointing out the context. 

[Bristolboy]

Will be interesting to see if rail can be encouraged, or alternatively a tram system and i would agree that it definitely would appear that the minister has suggested that the money could be moved. Whilst I would like to think he knows for certain, it could be the case that he didnt have all the facts when he was asked the question so I don't think we should read too much into it just yet.

[swrural]

I agree.  If he had lunched too well, I can see an open mind, but what all of us with an interest in doing *something* should bear in mind is to get *something* off the ground.

The essence to my mind, is an interchange on the side of TM^‡(resolve) to a local rapid transport that takes people not only around the city but also as quickly up Park St to Whiteladies Rd and Clifton.

That last facility is not the Severn Beach line unless that line is also electrified.  Is it to be? If not, why not?  Why should there be any difference between the Valley lines in South Wales and the Severn Beach line?

[John R]

Because the valley lines have a more intensive service, with four tph or more on much of the network thus making electrification more cost effective than a service which at best is unlikely to be more than 2 tph.

That's the simple answer, but sometimes branches with a less frequent service can merit electrification if the amount of running under the wires is a significant part of the route (as will be the case for the Maesteg line), or if it eliminates the need to maintain a small fleet of different stock.  Neither of these is likely to be the case for the SB^▸ (Signal Box) line for many years, as there will still be a significant DMU^▸ (Diesel Multiple Unit) presence in the Bristol area.

Though never say never, and I may be proved wrong, such is the impetus towards electrification at the moment.

[TonyK]

'Mr McLoughlin said: ^This is a fantastic facility and a fantastic station and there has been a big increase in demand for rail travel in recent years. It is fantastic that such a great city as Bristol is going to get a great city to match its aspirations.^'

I take it, FTN, you did not notice this, as reported, ridiculous mangling of the English language.

I noticed it - and, to be brutally honest (personal opinion) I merely put it down to sloppy journalism.

And so did I!

Apart from that, I do not see how you could read into it that BRT^▸ (Bus Rapid Transit) was up for change.

Hmm.  From that Bristol Post article:

The city has been awarded ^130 million to help pay for a new Rapid Transit System but some of the of the candidates have voiced objections to the scheme.

However, Mr McLoughlin is said he is willing to talk directly to the new mayor on a number of issues. He did not rule out moving the cash to another scheme but added that he was keen to work with the new mayor as soon as the election has been settled.

I know, he didn't rule it in, either. Just being optimistic, as somebody has to.

Note also one of the comments added to that Bristol Post article:

by Brizz_Tony Monday, November 12 2012, 5:42PM
^I think I like Patrick McLoughlin. He has just driven a stake through the heart of the last desperate reason offered by the Lib Dems for not messing with BRT, and the stupid ^50 million BRT2 route. Doubtless Gary Hopkins will disagree, but me and my new mate Pat know what's best for this fantastic city.^

I'm not taking sides, merely pointing out the context. 

It's a fair cop.

[TonyK]

Because the valley lines have a more intensive service, with four tph or more on much of the network thus making electrification more cost effective than a service which at best is unlikely to be more than 2 tph.

That's the simple answer, but sometimes branches with a less frequent service can merit electrification if the amount of running under the wires is a significant part of the route (as will be the case for the Maesteg line), or if it eliminates the need to maintain a small fleet of different stock.  Neither of these is likely to be the case for the SB^▸ (Signal Box) line for many years, as there will still be a significant DMU^▸ (Diesel Multiple Unit) presence in the Bristol area.

Though never say never, and I may be proved wrong, such is the impetus towards electrification at the moment.

The plans for the Greater Bristol Metro, at least as published earlier, would see 2 tph Portishead to Severn Beach, 2 tph Bath to Severn Beach, or a minimum 4 tph from Temple Meads to Severn Beach. That would certainly merit electrification to enable a true Metro style service with EMUs^▸ (Electric Multiple Unit), because of all the advantages that brings over diesel power when running services with short distances between stations.

[swrural]

Because the valley lines have a more intensive service, with four tph or more on much of the network thus making electrification more cost effective than a service which at best is unlikely to be more than 2 tph.

That's the simple answer, but sometimes branches with a less frequent service can merit electrification if the amount of running under the wires is a significant part of the route (as will be the case for the Maesteg line), or if it eliminates the need to maintain a small fleet of different stock.  Neither of these is likely to be the case for the SB^▸ (Signal Box) line for many years, as there will still be a significant DMU^▸ (Diesel Multiple Unit) presence in the Bristol area.

Though never say never, and I may be proved wrong, such is the impetus towards electrification at the moment.

The plans for the Greater Bristol Metro, at least as published earlier, would see 2 tph Portishead to Severn Beach, 2 tph Bath to Severn Beach, or a minimum 4 tph from Temple Meads to Severn Beach. That would certainly merit electrification to enable a true Metro style service with EMUs^▸ (Electric Multiple Unit), because of all the advantages that brings over diesel power when running services with short distances between stations.

This is the answer to the question i posed on the 'New services' thread, thanks very much.  There was a colour diagram somewhere but this is the same answer in words.

I do think that there is extra work needed before these projected services could achieve their goal (modal shift and environment improvement).

The first is to start developing around the stations proposed for opening and those stations which are still not well placed.  An example of the first would be Ashley Hill (nothing there) and an example of the second is Montpelier which is hidden away, although near the heart (Cheltenham Rd /  Gloucester Road).  In the latter case, one could plonk it next to the viaduct and have lifts (again as example).  Just take a mental trip around the system and it all becomes pretty clear.  As another example, the Henbury loop really does need to dog leg over to the Mall, albeit that i do not understand why people want to go there - soulless.  It would be better if they just converted it into a Bristol Airport terminal building.   

The second is to use tram trains.  They really have to get out of the TM^‡(resolve) island and stretch the track around to the business and shopping areas, as is envisaged for the BRT^▸ (Bus Rapid Transit).

Overcoming the topographical problems of hilly Bristol is a challenge but these ideas are being progressed in Sheffield, for example.

[TonyK]

Montpelier is very handy for, well, Montpelier. There are many homes within a few minutes' walk of the station in its present position, particularly when you include the Cromwell Road side of the footbridge. Moving the station towards Chelthenham Road would risk upsetting more people than would be pleased.

Regarding electrification, the government plans to have an electric route from Derby to Avonmouth via Birmingham.  That would see the Henbury loop energised. As the Severn Beach line is occasionally used by freight - I have seen empty coal trains heading down there - it would make sense to do that too. None of this is likely before 2019. The electrification train is not due to be built until next year, yet its every move will be planned by then for the next 6 years. Once the current planned electrification is done, it would make sense to see it continuing its work, until the whole network is done.

I agree about the Henbury dog-leg to the Mall. That should be a condition of any planning consent for Filton Airfield - due to close on 21 December 2012 in one of the worst ideas mooted for the Bristol area. Incidentally, the whole of the equipment there is for sale in an grandiose eBay style sale. If you've ever wanted a radar system, now's your chance.

[anthony215]

Montpelier is very handy for, well, Montpelier. There are many homes within a few minutes' walk of the station in its present position, particularly when you include the Cromwell Road side of the footbridge. Moving the station towards Chelthenham Road would risk upsetting more people than would be pleased.

Regarding electrification, the government plans to have an electric route from Derby to Avonmouth via Birmingham.  That would see the Henbury loop energised. As the Severn Beach line is occasionally used by freight - I have seen empty coal trains heading down there - it would make sense to do that too. None of this is likely before 2019. The electrification train is not due to be built until next year, yet its every move will be planned by then for the next 6 years. Once the current planned electrification is done, it would make sense to see it continuing its work, until the whole network is done.

I agree about the Henbury dog-leg to the Mall. That should be a condition of any planning consent for Filton Airfield - due to close on 21 December 2012 in one of the worst ideas mooted for the Bristol area. Incidentally, the whole of the equipment there is for sale in an grandiose eBay style sale. If you've ever wanted a radar system, now's your chance.

The only mistake you have made 4 track is that the government are supposed to have ordered two facory trains to help deliver the electrification projects.

[TonyK]

anthony215,

I am obliged. I didn't know there was a second train. I am aware of the cement train, which will do the bases for the gantries - not that, is it?