New people mover train to connect the new HS2 station at Birmingham Interchange with the airport terminal.

[A0]

A bus is slower and carries less passengers and costs more to run as you have to employ a driver so it is not ideal. Currently at Luton Airport they are replacing the bus with a people mover. So a people mover train is a much more ideal solution for Birmingham Airport to use.

Bit in bold - I wouldn't bet on that.

Luton's DART system has cost almost £ 300m to build and there will be staff employed to run and oversee it.

Assume it costs you £ 500k to buy a new bus and £ 50k a year to employ a driver (i.e. all employment costs not just salaries), you could have a fleet of 20 new buses for £ 10m one off and employ 20 drivers for £ 1m a year.

It would take you decades to hit the £ 300 m build cost of a rail based solution. And you don't need a special station for the bus either - existing stops can be used.

 

[The Planner]

I would imagine the following manufacturers would be candidates:
- DCC Doppelmayr (as per Luton)
- Leitner, with their minimetro product
- Alstom, with an Innovia Automated People Mover
- Siemens AirVal
- Mitsubishi Crystal Mover

Pretty sure DCC run the current one.

 

[zwk500]

Surprised they're panning on keeping the current people mover too. Bit weird.

Who owns the current one, is it the Airport?

 

[PsychoMouse]

Who owns the current one, is it the Airport?

Yeah I believe so, it's been sponsored by various airlines over the years to fund upkeep.

 

[zwk500]

Yeah I believe so, it's been sponsored by various airlines over the years to fund upkeep.

So HS2 wouldn't have said anything about whether or not it closes, that'd be for the Airport to decide.

 

[PsychoMouse]

So HS2 wouldn't have said anything about whether or not it closes, that'd be for the Airport to decide.

Yes but it would make sense for the airport to work with HS2 on this no?

 

[zwk500]

Yes but it would make sense for the airport to work with HS2 on this no?

There's a lot of things that would make sense yet don't hapen. I suspect the Airport will see what passengers do, but may find the additional capacity useful.

 

[Dave_Cardboard]

Perhaps flip the question around:

The existing PM is in situ, it's working, it's funded and it's not in the way of anything. Why get rid of it just because there's a shiny new thing next door? Until usage falls to the point that "it's not (financially) worth it" or it starts to break down or maintaining it gets too expensive.

When my wife parks a shiny new car on our driveway, I don't get rid of mine just because it's older. It still serves a purpose.

I suggest it will ultimately come down to whether patronage falls off and/or the running costs grow to the point it's too expensive to maintain.

Not always. Some of them are more advanced and can have multiple cars, switching cables at intermediate stations, so you can have one vehicle in each section

Ski lifts have the technology to the "clip" multiple vehicles on and off a continuously circling cable, though gravity helps a lot. I'm not sure how well (if at all) that could be adapted to vehicles supported on tracks/guideways (though again some of the bigger ski lifts have fixed "supporting" cables and a continuously rotating "haul" cable) and the "catapult" ski lifts use to get the vehicles from (near) rest up to line speed would be, er, "interesting" to adapt to surface transport.

However, my money would be on self propelled electric vehicles a la DLR or the Heathrow Airport "Ultra" Podway (albeit with larger "pods" on a guideway or tracks.) It's proven existing technology and one cannot help think will be cheaper and easier to maintain in the long term.

And anything with "pods" will get the Musk fanboys squeaking with delight

 

[PsychoMouse]

When my wife parks a shiny new car on our driveway, I don't get rid of mine just because it's older. It still serves a purpose.

You'd at least consider it if you worked in the same building on the same hours.

 

[stuu]

Ski lifts have the technology to the "clip" multiple vehicles on and off a continuously circling cable, though gravity helps a lot. I'm not sure how well (if at all) that could be adapted to vehicles supported on tracks/guideways (though again some of the bigger ski lifts have fixed "supporting" cables and the continuously rotating "haul" cable) and the "catapult" ski lifts use to get the vehicles from (near) rest up to line speed would be, er, "interesting" to adapt to surface transport.

The cable system at Oakland Airport in California has four cars switching between cables part way along the route - so such a system is already proven, and it is longer than the proposed one in Birmingham. The decision will come down to initial cost and running cost. It does strike me that moving all that cable must be less energy-efficient than something self-powered, but maybe not as these systems do exist and are fairly common

 

[Roast Veg]

However, my money would be on self propelled electric vehicles a la DLR or the Heathrow Airport "Ultra" Podway (albeit with larger "pods" on a guideway or tracks) It's proven existing technology and one cannot help think will be cheaper and easier to maintain in the long term.

And anything with "pods" will get the Musk fanboys squeaking with delight

Pods are very unlikely to meet the capacity requirements. If it is self propelled then the majority of products on offer are closer to rubber-tyred automated metros.

 

[HSTEd]

The cable system at Oakland Airport in California has four cars switching between cables part way along the route - so such a system is already proven, and it is longer than the proposed one in Birmingham. The decision will come down to initial cost and running cost. It does strike me that moving all that cable must be less energy-efficient than something self-powered, but maybe not as these systems do exist and are fairly common

These systems have a big advantage that most of the complex stuff is in a nice climate controlled building, and since it doesn't have to move around can be built much more heavily than comparable self propelled systems.

You also avoid all the regulatory headaches of working around traction electricity supplies.

 

[trebor79]

The cable system at Oakland Airport in California has four cars switching between cables part way along the route - so such a system is already proven, and it is longer than the proposed one in Birmingham. The decision will come down to initial cost and running cost. It does strike me that moving all that cable must be less energy-efficient than something self-powered, but maybe not as these systems do exist and are fairly common

Really once the cable is running at the speed it's designed to run at, the only energy consumption will be friction losses in rollers and pulleys (very small) and a very small amount of heating due to the cable bending. The motors driving the San Francisco system are surprisingly small.

 

[Winthorpe]

I wonder if self driving buses which are already on trial in the area would be a good option instead of a light railway. It would save a lot of infrastructure costs.

If the trail is successful, and depending on the time it would take to scale up, it would be a potential option.

Driverless buses added to Solihull’s travel network

Previously Solihull Council has carried out driverless passenger trials at Birmingham Airport and the NEC, where the shuttle was also used in the Commonwealth Games Queen’s Baton Relay.

solihullobserver.co.uk

DRIVERLESS buses will be getting people to work in Solihull and to the NEC next month.

Passengers will be able to use the buses between Birmingham International rail station and Birmingham Business Park through the NEC Birmingham, as part of a permanent commercial route.

This route forms part of a wider project which is being overseen by a regional consortium led by Conigital.

The Multi-Area Connected Automated Mobility (MACAM) project will also see a route between Coventry rail station and Coventry University campus.

A mixed fleet of 13 automated shuttles will serve the two new routes, and the scheme will be supported by a new centralised Remote Monitoring Teleoperation (RMTO) centre.

Operated by Transport for West Midlands, the RMTO centre will monitor the automated vehicles, and using 5G connectivity it will be able to control them when required.

The project aims to make self-driving vehicle operations commercially viable and to reduce technology and operator costs.

Solihull Council is expected to receive a £279,260 grant-funding to cover revenue for project managing vehicle deployment within Solihull, as well as capital funds for installing roadside technology to allow effective operation of the vehicles.

Additional funds have also been secured to carry out an early feasibility study into providing a CAV service between East Birmingham North Solihull (EBNS) as part of a separate project.

This will look at the proposed EBNS transit corridor which could connect the forthcoming HS2 Interchange Station in Solihull to Birmingham City Centre.

Previously Solihull Council has carried out driverless passenger trials at Birmingham Airport and the NEC, where the shuttle was also used in the Commonwealth Games Queen’s Baton Relay.

Councillor Courts, leader of Solihull Council, said: “CAV technology has the potential revolutionise the way we get around, as well as how we transport goods.

“Working with our partners we are excited to be leading the way, not just in Solihull, but regionally and across the country, in providing learning on CAV deployments in different setting and scenarios.

“We’ve already carried out a series of successful pathfinder trials here in Solihull, using our own automated shuttle. We have shown how it is possible to practically and safely incorporate automated vehicles into key parts of our transport infrastructure.

“However, this next step will help develop our understanding around the commercial viability of self-driving operations, and the influence that central RMTO and shared fleets, could have on future business cases.”

 

[The Planner]

I wonder if self driving buses which are already on trial in the area would be a good option instead of a light railway. It would save a lot of infrastructure costs.

If the trail is successful, and depending on the time it would take to scale up, it would be a potential option.

You would likely have to ignore the NEC, let alone the traffic issues when NEC shows are on. Airport, International to Interchange is unlikely to be any quicker either.

 

[Winthorpe]

You would likely have to ignore the NEC, let alone the traffic issues when NEC shows are on. Airport, International to Interchange is unlikely to be any quicker either.

Ah ok, thank you. I'm not overly familiar with the route the bus would have to take. A pity if it isn't a viable option here.

 

[zwk500]

Ah ok, thank you. I'm not overly familiar with the route the bus would have to take. A pity if it isn't a viable option here.

There's a drawing in post #22 that shows the road network underneath and it's clear the bus route would have to be far longer.

 

[edwin_m]

A driverless bus would probably need its own fully segregated road, and if you're doing that you might as well build a peoplemover.

 

[Meerkat]

A driverless bus would probably need its own fully segregated road, and if you're doing that you might as well build a peoplemover.

Why? Sounds like they are planning on using them in Coventry on the public roads.
Wait til the drunks/kids realise they can stop them.......

 

[AndrewE]

A driverless bus would probably need its own fully segregated road, and if you're doing that you might as well build a peoplemover.

so why not go the whole hog and save energy while you are at it? Rubber tyres flex and soak up power, whereas steel wheel on steel rail is about the lowest rolling resistance transport system you can find (apart from hovercraft and MagLevs, but they waste energy keeping the cars in the air.)
And instead of silly cable systems with (literally) tons of moving parts to keep greased, why not have a conductor rail or wire and a modern energy-efficient electric motor for each car which allows flexibility in frequency or train length?

The mechanical engineering complexity of cars gripping a succession of cables, or just 2 yo-yo-ing on one cable is unnecessarily prone to faults or too inflexible. Just because something has been made to work in Switzerland or some other place doesn't mean it would be fit for purpose here. Even if the one "in" Brum has worked for 20 years now, you don't know its running costs or the maintenance bill, which will be lost in either the station or the airport budgets.

 

[lachlan]

I'm surprised, unless I've missed it, that nobody has suggested just using the proposed tram extension as the people mover. Having a people mover and a tram feels like a waste and extending the tram will enable journeys to the city from every stop whereas with the people mover more folks will have to interchange on to the tram (if it does get extended at all)

 

[Roast Veg]

The lead time on that extension would be far too long. By the time it's funded and built the people mover will be more than 10 years old already.

 

[MarkyT]

I'm surprised, unless I've missed it, that nobody has suggested just using the proposed tram extension as the people mover. Having a people mover and a tram feels like a waste and extending the tram will enable journeys to the city from every stop whereas with the people mover more folks will have to interchange on to the tram (if it does get extended at all)

The lead time on that extension would be far too long. By the time it's funded and built the people mover will be more than 10 years old already.

If the new shuttle system was built using standard gauge light rail technology on a segregated elevated alignment, then a tram extension might plausibly use the same infrastructure to reach the HS2 station when it eventually arrives in the area. The trams could be equipped with automation technology for working along the shuttle section (and elsewhere if expedient). Standards for interoperability would have to be agreed early, including power supply, platform height etc.

 

[Mollman]

Why? Sounds like they are planning on using them in Coventry on the public roads.
Wait til the drunks/kids realise they can stop them.......

The Cov one is their 'very light rail' i.e. trying to save money on a tram by having no driver and not erecting overhead wires (though there is a debate around how much you save in the long term as you have to lug batteries around instead)

 

[Meerkat]

The Cov one is their 'very light rail' i.e. trying to save money on a tram by having no driver and not erecting overhead wires (though there is a debate around how much you save in the long term as you have to lug batteries around instead)

I am sure one of the articles referred to the same buses they were using by the airport/NEC being used for a shuttle between the station and Cov Uni.

 

[MarkyT]

The Cov one is their 'very light rail' i.e. trying to save money on a tram by having no driver and not erecting overhead wires (though there is a debate around how much you save in the long term as you have to lug batteries around instead)

Could work quite well with small lightweight vehicles and automatic fast terminal charging on fixed known length routes. The lower rolling resistance of rail could help for the power consumption and range compared to a similar weight rubber-tired bus. The 'lugging of heavy batteries' is mostly a phenomenon associated with manufacturers trying to squeeze extreme range into cars. No continuous electrification also removes the need for running rail return of traction current with its associated stray current concerns. I'd have thought the best solution for crewing would be to relocate the 'driver' into the saloon to act as a conductor most of the time, with the traditional 'ding ding' initiating autonomous driving to the next stop and the conductor also available to fault-find and take over in manual in the event of a problem. I'm not keen on such vehicles being entirely unstaffed when there are passengers onboard, although they could plausibly do empty stock depot and reversing moves as on DLR and a similar feature recently introduced for turnback of Elizabeth Line trains at Paddington.

 

[matacaster]

With the cut-backs, perhaps some in high places will suggest the people mover goes all the way to Euston?

 

[Roast Veg]

If the new shuttle system was built using standard gauge light rail technology on a segregated elevated alignment, then a tram extension might plausibly use the same infrastructure to reach the HS2 station when it eventually arrives in the area. The trams could be equipped with automation technology for working along the shuttle section (and elsewhere if expedient). Standards for interoperability would have to be agreed early, including power supply, platform height etc.

I would consider the recycling of signalling and automation extremely unlikely, as people movers are sold as turnkey solutions with all-proprietary software and standards. The physical infrastructure could theoretically be reused, even with remodelled platforms, as long as there's enough concrete underneath.

 

[Mollman]

I am sure one of the articles referred to the same buses they were using by the airport/NEC being used for a shuttle between the station and Cov Uni.

You might be right, there are so many proposed new tech it is getting easy to confuse them.

 

[ainsworth74]

The shortlist for this project has now been revealed:

HS2 Ltd has confirmed the shortlisted bidders to operate and maintain the assets required for the new mass transit system at Interchange station in Solihull.

The contracts will require the winning bidder to work with HS2 Ltd to complete the Automated People Mover (APM) and maintain its cable system operation for a 25-year period.

Being invited to tender are Doppelmayr Cable Car UK and POMA S.A.S.

The APM network's four stops connect HS2's Interchange station, the National Exhibition Centre (NEC), Birmingham International station and Birmingham Airport. It is designed to accommodate a minimum of 2,100 people per hour in each direction, with future capacity provision for 3,900 people.

HS2 reveals shortlist for landmark contract - Insider Media

HS2 Ltd has confirmed the shortlisted bidders to operate and maintain the assets required for the new mass transit system at Interchange station in Solihull.

www.insidermedia.com

Hat-tip @Snow1964