Leeds trolleybus (NGT - new generation transport)

[34D]

Further to an earlier thread http://www.railforums.co.uk/showthread.php?t=31439 I thought some discussion about this project may be of interest.

The website is live at http://www.ngtmetro.com/

There has been quite a bit of criticism of the project from nimbys.

No idea how realistic the artists impressions are, but the vehicles appear to be an articulated single deck trolleybus with an uncanny resemblance to the Wright Streetcar (FTR/hyperlink).

 

[Muzer]

What is the advantage of a trolleybus over a bus? Just the keeping emissions out-of-town bit? Anything else?

 

[61653 HTAFC]

What is the advantage of a trolleybus over a bus? Just the keeping emissions out-of-town bit? Anything else?

A while back one of Metro's key 'plus-points' was the ability to convert to a full tramway when funds allow, though to me that would just mean the shiny new catenary going unused for 12-18months while the roads are dug up to lay tracks. Ideally Leeds should still be getting a proper tramway (much like Liverpool, Bristol and Portsmouth/Southsea) but it's pretty clear that won't be happening.

Looking at the route map, I'm surprised there doesn't appear to be a 'true' interchange with City station- the nearest stop being City Square which I imagine won't be ideal for anyone with a lot of luggage such as the many students heading home for the holidays.

 

[34D]

The city square stops will be directly outside the main station entrance. This specific location actually received 'supertram advance works' in the mid 90s (cables shifting, etc) so should be ready to go fairly simply.

 

[jopsuk]

What is the advantage of a trolleybus over a bus? Just the keeping emissions out-of-town bit? Anything else?

Lowering emissions in city centres is a pretty big win- just ask any asthmatic! tailpipe emissions are major cause/trigger of respiratory problems

 

[David Goddard]

Great project, lets hope it happens, and encourages other towns and cities to consider it. With every new bus fleet getting greener and greener, eventually there will be a point where we just have to go abandon diesel (or even CNG) and go back to the trolleybus. Would love to see them in Reading!

 

[northwichcat]

A while back one of Metro's key 'plus-points' was the ability to convert to a full tramway when funds allow

They also claimed new trolleybuses would be able to run off a battery for a short distance meaning they could drive around a failed vehicle or roadworks. If they convert to a tramway later on then they lose that advantage.

 

[radamfi]

What is the advantage of a trolleybus over a bus? Just the keeping emissions out-of-town bit? Anything else?

Considerably quieter and good getting up hills. Trolleybuses usually need replacing less frequently.

 

[90sWereBetter]

They should really think about building double deck trolleybuses instead of investing in more single deckers. South Yorkshire PTE proved you can convert a bog-standard Dennis Dominator into a trolleybus, so I can't see any reasons against building some E400 trolleys.

 

[anthony263]

I wouldnt mind seeing the Swansea Metro converted to trolley bus operation in fact I did see a photoshoped picture of one of the Streetcars running off overhead wiring

 

[DW54]

What is the advantage of a trolleybus over a bus? Just the keeping emissions out-of-town bit? Anything else?

In reality, just air quality in the transport corridor, nothing else.

The whole travel benefits case of the NGT is based on the "track". In essence, the priority treatments, the dedicated lanes, the stops ("stations") and sections of busway.

A diesel bus with good power/weight ratio would match the mooted trolley bus times, and would need to be able to in event of power outage, etc - and during construction, so the benefits could be accrued as each increment was added to the route - and the priority sytems tested and the signal timings fine tuned.

By the time they've got the network built (sans wires), there's a good chance "wireless trolleybus" systems will have matured and they can bypass the costly stage of stringing up the overhead wires with attendant visual amenity issues at junctions and in visually sensitive environments.

I have proposed a 2-stage process to them, so they can buy time before committing to installing the overhead and ordering vehicles. I think the travel time benefits are the MAJOR gain. If the good people of Leeds get that with existing buses sooner, the whole image thing of 21st century electric technology might lose its dazzle.

 

[AndyHudds]

Everyone else gets trams, Leeds get trolley buses.....you've got to be pulling my plonker?

West Yorkshire and the Leeds area has big swathes cut off the rail map that would have been ideal for a tram network,Wetherby, Otley and the Spen Valley have been chopped off the rail network with no effort to get them back into the network, again through lack of ambition and vision. This is just symptomatic of Metro's lack of ambition and innovation, they don't do West Yorkshire any justice at all.

 

[plarailfan]

Metro probably DO have some ambition and inovation. The lack of funds for new projects seems to be a major issue, after all, re-instatement of the Bradley curve took a good few years to actually happen (it's on the Huddersfield to Bradford line if anyone isn't sure)
Low Moor station is another project taking a long time coming, again, it will happen eventually. As a bystander / enthusiast, it feels very frustrating when these officials just talk and nothing actually happens, or when it eventually does, half your life has gone by !!
Metro have done a fairly good job of subsidising off peak and rural bus routes to provide a reasonable service and they have provided some trains and new stations, so all in all, I don't think they have done too bad over the years !
The govt seem to have lost enthusiasm for trams to some extent, so I hope Metro can lobby the govt for adequate funds to provide a really good trolleybus system with dedicated bus lanes or guided routes.
I really do fear we might end up with a half baked, watered down scheme, that will only be any good for a small proportion of Leeds residents. Leeds is a huge city, with Bradford and Dewsbury routes both being ideal candidates for trolleybus operation. Sad to say I can't imagine millions of £ being provided for such schemes.....

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Everyone else gets trams, Leeds get trolley buses.....you've got to be pulling my plonker?

Everyone elsehock: ...try telling the good citizens of Leigh that they have been the ones chosen by TfGM to be the recipients of the Leigh Guided Busway to prove that not all things are Manchester Metrolink based.

 

[Liam]

Everyone else gets trams, Leeds get trolley buses.....you've got to be pulling my plonker?

I'd much rather Edinburgh got trolley buses than trams. Of course trolley buses aren't as 'cool' as trams, but far more effective IMO.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

I'd much rather Edinburgh got trolley buses than trams. Of course trolley buses aren't as 'cool' as trams, but far more effective IMO.

The problems with Edinburgh's tram project is not really a problem with trams per se, more a problem of mismanagement and political interference from an administration that is known for it's cosying-up to a certain Christian Fundamentalist bus-operator

 

[AndyHudds]

Metro probably DO have some ambition and inovation. The lack of funds for new projects seems to be a major issue, after all, re-instatement of the Bradley curve took a good few years to actually happen (it's on the Huddersfield to Bradford line if anyone isn't sure)
Low Moor station is another project taking a long time coming, again, it will happen eventually. As a bystander / enthusiast, it feels very frustrating when these officials just talk and nothing actually happens, or when it eventually does, half your life has gone by !!
Metro have done a fairly good job of subsidising off peak and rural bus routes to provide a reasonable service and they have provided some trains and new stations, so all in all, I don't think they have done too bad over the years !
The govt seem to have lost enthusiasm for trams to some extent, so I hope Metro can lobby the govt for adequate funds to provide a really good trolleybus system with dedicated bus lanes or guided routes.
I really do fear we might end up with a half baked, watered down scheme, that will only be any good for a small proportion of Leeds residents. Leeds is a huge city, with Bradford and Dewsbury routes both being ideal candidates for trolleybus operation. Sad to say I can't imagine millions of £ being provided for such schemes.....

Where as I would agree with a lot of what you said in that respect it's the absence of any kind of major project like other PTE's have made. SYPTE have the Supertram, GMPTE THE Metrolink, TfL tons of stuff. Metro, nothing.

As for the bus network its been allowed to be run down by the companies, First in particular, that its got to a stage where they are trying to introduce Quality Contracts to get the regions buses back up to a decent service standard. There is no limited stop connection between Huddersfield and Leeds, a coach style limited stop service on that route, I think, would be a rip roaring success.

As for the railways and new stations, we had the Bradley curve fair enough along with Brighouse station re-opening but other than that the only other station that has opened is Glasshoughton and if Xscape wasn't there it wouldn't have opened. The Low Moor station is a utter farce. There has been no concerted effort to re-open any lines that were previously closed either. The Spen Valley Line would be a good candidate for re-opening, the track bed is practically intact aside from redevelopment around the Low Moor area and a small intrusion at Cleckheaton, still no re-opening campaign. For the last, however many years, we've only had one stopper between Huddersfield and Leeds and only one stopper and hour between Huddersfield and Wakefield and no Sunday service at all, with Metro only recently realising that we could probably do with another one of each!! Still no station at Elland, despite the line through the town being open well over 10 years. I could go on.

The current rail plan it announced is particularly unimpressive and they have the audacity to call the current rail network in West Yorkshire 'unfit for purpose' I can think of something else that's 'unfit for purpose' too.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

For a short while in the late 90s/early 2000s I think there were two stoppers per hour between Huddersfield and Leeds (at least on Saturdays) though I'm not sure the extra one ran every single hour and I think it skipped Ravensthorpe and Cottingley. However the reopening of Brighouse and the introduction of the Leeds-Victoria via Dewsbury and extension of the Wakefield-Pontefract service to Knottingley along with increased services on the Harrogate line and the 4th TPE service meant there was not enough capacity in ATN/Northern's fleet or indeed between Huddersfield and Leeds for this to continue.

WYPTE is also in a slightly more tricky position than other PTE areas becuase whereas TfGM and SYPTE have a clear 'centre' to their area in Sheffield and Manchester respectively, WYPTE has Leeds at it's centre but also has significant settlements outside of this in Bradford, Huddersfield and to a lesser extent Wakefield and Halifax. I think WYPTE management are highly sensitive to accusations of being 'Leeds-centric' (charges I myself have levelled at them at times) in a way that doesn't seem to be such a political issue for TfGM.

 

[anthony263]

Everyone else gets trams, Leeds get trolley buses.....you've got to be pulling my plonker?

West Yorkshire and the Leeds area has big swathes cut off the rail map that would have been ideal for a tram network,Wetherby, Otley and the Spen Valley have been chopped off the rail network with no effort to get them back into the network, again through lack of ambition and vision. This is just symptomatic of Metro's lack of ambition and innovation, they don't do West Yorkshire any justice at all.

Cities like Bristol and Swansea have no tram system the closest thing Swansea has is the FTR metro service which some in Bristol want to install.

Now if there was funding available I would very much like to see a tram line installed running from Mumbles to Swansea city Centre and Morriston and a similar system installed in Bristol perhaps running along the current Bristol & Bath cycle Path.

Bristol lost out on a tram system because of the stupid local authorities not being able to agree, littel doubt if it had gone ahead such a system in Bristol would be very popular and there would have been calls to expand it, just like with Manchester and Nottingham's systems

 

[bluenoxid]

In reality, just air quality in the transport corridor, nothing else.

The whole travel benefits case of the NGT is based on the "track". In essence, the priority treatments, the dedicated lanes, the stops ("stations") and sections of busway.

A diesel bus with good power/weight ratio would match the mooted trolley bus times, and would need to be able to in event of power outage, etc - and during construction, so the benefits could be accrued as each increment was added to the route - and the priority sytems tested and the signal timings fine tuned.

By the time they've got the network built (sans wires), there's a good chance "wireless trolleybus" systems will have matured and they can bypass the costly stage of stringing up the overhead wires with attendant visual amenity issues at junctions and in visually sensitive environments.

I have proposed a 2-stage process to them, so they can buy time before committing to installing the overhead and ordering vehicles. I think the travel time benefits are the MAJOR gain. If the good people of Leeds get that with existing buses sooner, the whole image thing of 21st century electric technology might lose its dazzle.

I agree with you. Whilst the Trolley bus is nice, the benefits could be achieved by giving ordinary buses the same priorities and giving the route a simple branding and structure.

My concern is that so much upheval would not be tolerated without a USP such as trolleybus

I know this might sound a stupid question but will Trolley buses fall under the TC's remit?

A clear set of priorities, grouped into a scheme, with simple timetables and pricing can be a winner.

 

[Liam]

The problems with Edinburgh's tram project is not really a problem with trams per se, more a problem of mismanagement and political interference from an administration that is known for it's cosying-up to a certain Christian Fundamentalist bus-operator

I never wanted them from the get go. The farcical construction issues have only added to my dislike of them.

 

[34D]

I agree with you. Whilst the Trolley bus is nice, the benefits could be achieved by giving ordinary buses the same priorities and giving the route a simple branding and structure.

My concern is that so much upheval would not be tolerated without a USP such as trolleybus

Nor, I would suggest, achieve modal shift without being 'special'.

I know this might sound a stupid question but will Trolley buses fall under the TC's remit

A very good question. I would assume so, but then again, who knows.

I am also interested to know whether they can legally prevent other trolleybuses from using it, as road signs "no vehicles except trolleybuses" seem to give the green light to a sunbeam to put it's poles up
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Where as I would agree with a lot of what you said in that respect it's the absence of any kind of major project like other PTE's have made. SYPTE have the Supertram, GMPTE THE Metrolink, TfL tons of stuff. Metro, nothing.

Erm, the UKs first guided bus network? More rail station openings than any other PTE or TfL (I think, but please correct me if I'm wrong). Being the only PTE area to see an _increase_ in passenger ridership in the 1974 to 1986 period?

 

[AndyHudds]

For a short while in the late 90s/early 2000s I think there were two stoppers per hour between Huddersfield and Leeds (at least on Saturdays) though I'm not sure the extra one ran every single hour and I think it skipped Ravensthorpe and Cottingley. However the reopening of Brighouse and the introduction of the Leeds-Victoria via Dewsbury and extension of the Wakefield-Pontefract service to Knottingley along with increased services on the Harrogate line and the 4th TPE service meant there was not enough capacity in ATN/Northern's fleet or indeed between Huddersfield and Leeds for this to continue.

WYPTE is also in a slightly more tricky position than other PTE areas becuase whereas TfGM and SYPTE have a clear 'centre' to their area in Sheffield and Manchester respectively, WYPTE has Leeds at it's centre but also has significant settlements outside of this in Bradford, Huddersfield and to a lesser extent Wakefield and Halifax. I think WYPTE management are highly sensitive to accusations of being 'Leeds-centric' (charges I myself have levelled at them at times) in a way that doesn't seem to be such a political issue for TfGM.

It's not going to get any better either is it? What with electrification and the introduction of the 5th TPE service. The thing is, in between Marsden and Ravensthorpe extra tracks could be accommodated to increase capacity.

I don't go with the argument that other areas have a clear centre,TfGM has other large centres, Oldham, Rochdale,Wigan,Bolton as does SYPTE. If that's the case in West Yorkshire we should be getting a better deal than the other PTE's. We have 1 big city 2 reasonable sized cities and 2 large towns and other smaller satellite towns, if we are 'bigger' than than the TfGM, then we should have a better network and more investment, but that doesn't seem the case. Other areas seem to be getting the investment and the projects, whilst West Yorks is left with buses that stop at 9pm and trains that finish at 11pm.

 

[radamfi]

I know this might sound a stupid question but will Trolley buses fall under the TC's remit?

It seems using trolleybuses is a loophole to avoid falling under the rules of the deregulated bus industry.

http://www.ngtmetro.com/FrequentlyAskedQuestions

The bus industry in Leeds currently operates in a de-regulated environment. This means that in the main, private bus operators set their own fare levels, service frequencies and routes. As the NGT system will be under Leeds City Council and Metro ownership, it will enable them to say how the system operates.

Due to the current available legal frameworks, a diesel-hybrid bus NGT network would not permit LCC and Metro to specify services without other measures being taken such as Quality Contracts with the bus operators, and therefore we would be unable to guarantee the step change needed. By retaining influence of the system Metro and Leeds City Council will have opportunities to further develop future phases of the NGT network.

Of course, if Quality Contracts happen, this wouldn't be an issue anyway. Even if there wasn't such a loophole, I suspect that the initial cost of buying the trolleybuses will be too much for a bus company to consider running the service commercially under normal circumstances, although ongoing running costs should be lower. So the buses would have to be bought by the PTE and run under contract.

Without QCs, though, I expect the trolleybus would face competition from normal buses, especially if First or its successor is not successful in being the operator of the trolleybus service.

--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Erm, the UKs first guided bus network? More rail station openings than any other PTE or TfL (I think, but please correct me if I'm wrong). Being the only PTE area to see an _increase_ in passenger ridership in the 1974 to 1986 period?

I would agree that West Yorkshire was a great PTE before bus deregulation. I was a regular visitor, coming over the Pennines from Rochdale, and it was obvious that Metro was serious in creating a cheap, integrated public transport system. They were considerably ahead of GMPTE at the time, who had considerably higher fares.

Since 1986 obviously they've been largely stuck with trying to improve the rail network. The main improvement has been the electrification and new trains north of Leeds and Bradford. Minor stations are noticeably better kept than in GM.

As far major schemes for the future, though, there seems to be a lack of them apart from the trolleybus scheme. However, they are the only PTE progressing a Quality Contract proposal for buses and if that is successful, that could underpin a genuinely integrated network for WY, which would make them the envy of the other PTE areas, too busy to think about buses with their other schemes going on.

 

[HSTEd]

I am hoping the Trolleybus project in Leeds works.... need to prove that Trolleybuses can be delivered for the low prices that are achieved elsewhere.

Then we might get Trolleybuses in certain places that are choking in exhaust fumes from diesel buses at the present time, such as the Oxford Road corridor in Manchester and a substantial fraction of the London bus network.

Battery powered buses are never going to be viable for intensive operation and pollution from diesel buses on intensive routes is horrible.
Remember it also allows you to use grid electricity to power the buses, which is far cheaper per unit of usable energy than diesel, it also permits value-added accessories to be more cheaply integrated (primarily air conditioning).

 

[northwichcat]

Everyone else gets trams, Leeds get trolley buses.....you've got to be pulling my plonker?

Some major EU cities have trolleybuses instead of trams Salzburg is one such city.

Where as I would agree with a lot of what you said in that respect it's the absence of any kind of major project like other PTE's have made. SYPTE have the Supertram, GMPTE THE Metrolink, TfL tons of stuff. Metro, nothing.

The introduction of class 333 trains in the Leeds area was a major Metro funded project - Metro even spent more money than they had and SYPTE had to bail them out!

Remember Metrolink started out as a cheap alternative to a proper rail link between Victoria and Piccadilly and without the conversions from well used heavy rail lines it probably wouldn't have been economically viable.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

We have 1 big city 2 reasonable sized cities and 2 large towns and other smaller satellite towns, if we are 'bigger' than than the TfGM, then we should have a better network and more investment, but that doesn't seem the case.

I would call Bradford a reasonable sized city but Wakefield is really only a city because it's got a C of E bishop, it's actually small for a city. Huddersfield is a large town. Halifax is fairly big for a town but it's smaller than the GM towns of Bolton, Stockport and Rochdale and pretty much on a par with Wigan.

Overall Greater Manchester has a population of 2.7 million, compared to 2.2 million in West Yorkshire.

 

[radamfi]

Some major EU cities have trolleybuses instead of trams Salzburg is one such city.

Salzburg is famous but not really a huge city. It is fairly comparable to Huddersfield in size.

I don't think anywhere in Europe the size of Leeds outside the UK doesn't have a tram or metro system. That's not to say that this trolleybus scheme has no merit. There's no reason why a modern trolleybus scheme can't be a good scheme as long as it has tram-like priority and open boarding. If the trolleybus can build up patronage it will be easier to justify trams in the future for the higher capacity.

 

[northwichcat]

Salzburg is famous

And for that reason it gets a lot more visitors who need to be transported around.

I don't think anywhere in Europe the size of Leeds outside the UK doesn't have a tram or metro system. That's not to say that this trolleybus scheme has no merit. There's no reason why a modern trolleybus scheme can't be a good scheme as long as it has tram-like priority and open boarding. If the trolleybus can build up patronage it will be easier to justify trams in the future for the higher capacity.

While some cities do have trams they are really in lieu of a rail line such as the system in Dublin, so the equivalent for Leeds would be for trams to Knaresborough over the existing rail line with a new Airport spur and maybe a mile or two of city centre running after Leeds station.

 

[DW54]

It seems using trolleybuses is a loophole to avoid falling under the rules of the deregulated bus industry.

http://www.ngtmetro.com/FrequentlyAskedQuestions

{snip}
Without QCs, though, I expect the trolleybus would face competition from normal buses, especially if First or its successor is not successful in being the operator of the trolleybus service.

--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


{Snip} However, they are the only PTE progressing a Quality Contract proposal for buses and if that is successful, that could underpin a genuinely integrated network for WY, which would make them the envy of the other PTE areas, too busy to think about buses with their other schemes going on.

So it would seem that a legal issue ALONE has led to the concept of using trolleybus technology. How bloody daft (sorry DafT)! That means the British taxpayer is having to pay through the nose to make this happen. In that case, perhaps the way forward is the "wireless trolleybus" which of course is not a "bus" either.

Anyway, why should the WY "Metro" or Leeds City really care which bus companies run buses on the high performance network, so long as buses are run? And you could create the necessary quality limitations by creating a few environmental zones in which only buses that are certificated under local clean air ordinances can travel. I guess my point is that you don't need the overhead wiring throughout the network, and certainly you don't want either the cost or visual intrusion of junctions and wired depots. There must also be places on the routes for which visual amenity is a valued local asset, and through these parts, again you wouldn't ideally have overhead wires. So, a wireless (or part-wireless) trolley system is where you'd want to be.

And please, make sure you are able to operate these DOO for off-peak. The design shown can have no front entrance (the front axle is too far forwards) and is patently unsuited to anything other than a completely cashless system with strong and efficient revenue protection arrangements; or high labour costs - the last thing a sustainable system needs.

 

[HSTEd]

"Wireless trolleybuses" require ridiculous amounts of roadwork, if you are referring to the systems that use conductors embedded in the road surface.
They are also rather troublesome with all the high power RF generators you need.

Conventional trolleybuses are cheaper, require far fewer hugely disruptive road closures to be routed over roads and thus can be expanded far more easily and cheaply.

And I would question the idea that modern trolleybus wire installations cause significant loss of "visual amenity", infact housing and commercial properties near trolleybus routes on the continent tend to have higher values because it is a visual indication of the high quality of public transport the area recieves.