Where are the Trackless-Trolleys?!

Can someone tell me why the Trackless-Trolleys (ETB) aren't running? Are the lines still up and energized?

Why isn't SEPTA/Phila. looking in to expanding the ETB operations? San Francisco has the largest fleet and most ETB lines in the nation right now at close to 20.

PHILLY NEEDS ETBs!!

The existing fleet fell apart. SEPTA has a new fleet out to bid.

The remnants are being stored at Midvale District, along with the rest of the rotting PCC's.

San Francisco still has a fleet of the exact same ETBs. They should have bought all the ones that SF just recently got rid of.

Weren't these TT's something of a lemon from the start? I recall reading somewhere that these never performed well. Or was there something to SEPTA's maintenance that did them in?

My curiosity stems from the fact that the MBTA has kept these tracklesses running for close to 30 years now, and, as anyone who ever rode a bus in Boston knows, the T doesn't give their bus fleet much tender-loveing care:

http://www.hopetunnel.org/bus/030927/4004-4029.jpg

Clearfield, do you know when the descision on the bids will be made? I'm interested to see if Neoplan/Skoda will bid, as their tracklesses seem to be doing well in Boston. I ride them or the Flyers daily, and they seem to have gotten past some initial teething problems. The ride quality on them is amazing, and without the diesel or CNG engine onboard, its a very nice smooth ride. Without the need for left-hand doors, the "lack of seats" problem we have on them shouldn't be so bad.

QnLnR8, do you know what SF bought? Any experiences riding them? Just trying to get an idea of what's out there on the (limited) ETB market.

queenlnr8 wrote:Why isn't SEPTA/Phila. looking in to expanding the ETB operations?

Probably because if they go in the other direction, and eliminate them, they can also eliminate all the fixed costs that go with it(specially trained mechanics, spare parts, maintainance). If SEPTA goes entirely to buses they derive improved cost-to-benefit ratio from economies of scale.

PHILLY NEEDS ETBs!!

Just curious: Why do you think so?

octr202 wrote:QnLnR8, do you know what SF bought? Any experiences riding them? Just trying to get an idea of what's out there on the (limited) ETB market.

San Francisco Municipal Railway (MUNI) bought some new ETI/Skoda 40' and articulated ETBs over the last few years. They replaced the wonderful Flyer 40' ETBs which I love. There are still a handful on the system, mostly on the 6 Parnassus Line, though I caught one on the 14 Mission Line the other day.

I have ridden on the Flyers and the new ETI/Skodas. As for which one I like more, I would have to say the old Flyers for a number of reasons. One, the old ones don't talk. The new ones talk way way way too much and hey give you pointless information. Second, the old ones have the cool roll signs. I don't care for the sanitary LEDot signs. They have no personality.

The new ones also have emergency batteries so they can go off wire to pass or get out of the way in the event of a blackout. This is a nice feature. You can see in the photo I linked there is a orange road cone in the bumper. This is for when the bus goes off wire it can warn traffic. How high-tech!

flynnt wrote:

queenlnr8 wrote:Why isn't SEPTA/Phila. looking in to expanding the ETB operations?

PHILLY NEEDS ETBs!!

Just curious: Why do you think so?

I think that the Center City area of Philly needs to be quieter, less polluted and generally a nicer area. Downtown San Francisco has practically banned the diesel bus with their ever growing fleet of ETBs ane new ETB routes. Imagine no blaring busses down Walnut? Or roaring around City Hall? Sounds good to me.

queenlnr8 wrote:I think that the Center City area of Philly needs to be quieter, less polluted and generally a nicer area. Downtown San Francisco has practically banned the diesel bus with their ever growing fleet of ETBs ane new ETB routes. Imagine no blaring busses down Walnut? Or roaring around City Hall? Sounds good to me.

Also, trolleybuses last almost twice as long as diesel buses.

octr202 wrote:Clearfield, do you know when the descision on the bids will be made?

Should be soon. The bids went out a month or two ago.

queenlnr8 wrote: I think that the Center City area of Philly needs to be quieter, less polluted and generally a nicer area. Downtown San Francisco has practically banned the diesel bus with their ever growing fleet of ETBs ane new ETB routes. Imagine no blaring busses down Walnut? Or roaring around City Hall? Sounds good to me.

You will probably never see Trackless Trolleys in Center City. They didn't run there even in their PRT-PTC heyday, and I expect that you'd have a bit of a NIMBY type problem trying to re-install overhead contact wires in that area. ( Remember, the last overhead on Market Street and the City Hall area came down in 1956 when Streetcar Routes 17 and 32 were bustitued).

BTW- SEPTA's "newest" units, the AM Generals, were terrible. They were so bad that American Motors had to build a plant in Philly specifically for the purpose of dealing with the problems. I note that AMG never built any other electric units and got out of the diesel bus business fairly quickly after that experience ( and doesn't exist at all today).

walt wrote:

queenlnr8 wrote: BTW- SEPTA's "newest" units, the AM Generals, were terrible. They were so bad that American Motors had to build a plant in Philly specifically for the purpose of dealing with the problems. I note that AMG never built any other electric units and got out of the diesel bus business fairly quickly after that experience ( and doesn't exist at all today).

I concur on that statement. SEPTA was lucky to get the 21-23 years of service out of these vehicles. One SEPTA driver said that "They're a bitch to keep on the road", and he said that when they were NEW! I sense that many drivers weren't shedding tears over their demise, in fact, many were popping corks and celebrating. There were many days when you saw electric trolleys and diesel buses running together because the old AMG's kept breaking down at a fast clip. By the time these buses reached the 12 to 15 year age range, they became even more trouble to maintain.

queenlnr8 wrote:The new ones also have emergency batteries so they can go off wire to pass or get out of the way in the event of a blackout. This is a nice feature. You can see in the photo I linked there is a orange road cone in the bumper. This is for when the bus goes off wire it can warn traffic. How high-tech!

It seems that our Neoplan/Skoda's up here were built without that feature. Any time the drivers have lost the poles on the new ones here, they seem to be stuck dead in the water until they get them back up. A real shame, hopefully SEPTA won't make that mistake. At least ours have the "auto-retract" feature when the poles are lost -- one morning a driver skillfully coasted all the way down the ramp into the Harvard bus tunnel station after losing the poles at the entrance...he made it jsut far enough to get the doors open for us. Without the auto-retract, we'd have been sitting in the tunnel until he could ratchet them back down and put them up again.

As for questions of whether the ETBs are worth it, just ask someone who lives near a route. My bedroom windows are about 20 feet from a bus stop on an ETB route. I almost never hear them, expect in the summer when the windows are open (I will miss the sound of the air compressors on the Flyers...about the last thing in Boston that has that classic "thump thump thump" sound to it), EXCEPT on Sundays when the MBTA runs diesels instead of opening the ETB carhouse. I can be in the basement and still hear them grinding up and down the street.

Its a shame that ETB's get killed so many places by NIMBYism over the trolley wire. To me, the wires are a tiny price to pay in the neighborhood to eliminate the noise and exhaust (although with new emission controls that's not as bad anymore). Also, the wires give the route some permanence -- its not a rail line, but at least it has a fixed, permanent prescence that reassures riders that it will be there (hopefully -- although SEPTA's been trying to work around that).

I know I only had one chance to ever ride the SEPTA tracklesses as a kid, but I remember thinking it was such a cool idea. Shortly thereafter, though, my grandmother moved away from NE Philly, and there wasn't any reason to be back in teh neighborhood. I'm glad that 20 or so odd years later I'm able to have them at my doorstep (even if its in a different city).

When SEPTA got the AMG's, they replaced the far-more reliable Marmon-Herrington and Brill units. The 2 sets of Marmons [301-343/471-98], and the Brills [201-65] were on the road at least 25 years. The AMG's barely made it to 21, with many crapping out at 12 or 13 years old.

Here are the life spans of the Trackless Trolley Fleet:

Brill - 33 years/1947-80.

The Brills were purchased by PTC to replace most of the South Philly trackless, plus add some slightly larger vehicles on the 61 [this line had the really small 40 passenger Trolleys], and provide the vehicles on the 75[another City Of Philadelphia conversion].

Marmon-Herrington - both sets of Marmons were purchased by the City Of Philadelphia for the Trackless Trolley conversions of routes 59 and 66, both paid for with City money. Route 59 was built by the City Of Philadelphia as a Trolley extension of the Frankford Elevated into NE Philly and Bustleton. Route 66 was originally an independently operated line by the Frankford, Tacony and Holmesburg Street Railway. PRT bought out the company in the early 20's, and the Frankford Ave Line became PRT Route 66. The Trackless conversion was made because the track on Frankford Ave was really bad, if the track condition wasn't so bad, then PCC's would have run on this route.

The Route 59 trackless were numbered 471-498, and they were purchased in 1949, so they lasted 31 years until 1980.

The Route 66 Marmons were numbered 301-343, and they were purchased in 1955, they lasted 25 years until 1980.

The 300's were slightly longer than the 400's because the 300's had double stream rear doors, the 400's had single stream rear doors.

octr202 wrote: Its a shame that ETB's get killed so many places by NIMBYism over the trolley wire. To me, the wires are a tiny price to pay in the neighborhood to eliminate the noise and exhaust (although with new emission controls that's not as bad anymore).

It's interesting that the NIMBYism doesn't cut the other way..."don't replace those ETBs with noise and air polluting buses". I guess people would rather deal with the occasional bus noise/smog than the constant presence of visible wires.

Also, the wires give the route some permanence -- its not a rail line, but at least it has a fixed, permanent prescence that reassures riders that it will be there (hopefully -- although SEPTA's been trying to work around that).

That is an interesting way to look at it, but I'm sure almost no riders would ever think about an ETB's advantage being it's permanence.

And of course, SEPTA, who makes the decision in the end, would see this as a bad thing. The lose the flexibility to change the route.

walt wrote:

queenlnr8 wrote: I think that the Center City area of Philly needs to be quieter, less polluted and generally a nicer area. Downtown San Francisco has practically banned the diesel bus with their ever growing fleet of ETBs ane new ETB routes. Imagine no blaring busses down Walnut? Or roaring around City Hall? Sounds good to me.

You will probably never see Trackless Trolleys in Center City. They didn't run there even in their PRT-PTC heyday, and I expect that you'd have a bit of a NIMBY type problem trying to re-install overhead contact wires in that area. ( Remember, the last overhead on Market Street and the City Hall area came down in 1956 when Streetcar Routes 17 and 32 were bustitued).

It's also important to remember that the PTC at the time the few ETB routes were being created out of the trolley networks had no incentive to operate their system in an efficient manner. NCL simply wanted the trolleys gone and didn't care what replaced them. Having Standard Oil have an interest in the business likely didn't help things, since they were against any electric propulsion. If PTC in the 1950s hadn't been controlled by NCL, yet had still had to face a growing number of cars and a highway department increasingly hostile to their trolleys it's likely that more routes in the center city area would have been electrified. The economy of operation offered by trolleybuses would likely outweigh the 'flexibility' of the diesels which wound up replacing the trolleys. Additionally the power infrastructure then in place for the trolleys would be able to serve double duty when the trolley buses replaced those trolleys.

I've never really understood why people are against something like a measily pair of wires strung over the street. I especially do not comprehend it in areas where there already are overhead power lines. San Fransisco's Market street shows how unobtrusive overhead power lines for transit vehicles can be when properly incorporated with light and signal poles.

flynnt wrote:It's interesting that the NIMBYism doesn't cut the other way..."don't replace those ETBs with noise and air polluting buses". I guess people would rather deal with the occasional bus noise/smog than the constant presence of visible wires.

That actually happened in Seattle for a short time a few years back. The ETB system was being diesel-substituted on the weekend for a few weeks and the people living along the ETB routes raised hell over the noise and smell of the diesel buses. In the end the wire work was completed and the ETBs returned to their normal schedules, but it really made it clear to KC Metro that any attempt to eliminate or curtail their electric ops would be met with harsh resistance. Unfortunately Philadelphia's ETB lines pass through neighborhoods which could largely care less whether or not they get diesel or electric buses.

flynnt wrote:And of course, SEPTA, who makes the decision in the end, would see this as a bad thing. The lose the flexibility to change the route.

How often does SEPTA change routes around? When was the last time the 17, 33, 48, or 61's route was changed? Those routes are running nearly identical routings to the trolley routes which ran over the same streets 50 years ago. Admittedly the suburban routes are rather fluid, but because of their long headways it'd make little sense to make those routes run with ETBs.

Routes such as the 17 would make sense to electrify because they both do not change routings frequently and run with close headways to get the maximum use out of the wire. The 17 also has the advantage of only needing maybe one or two new substations for it's construction, since at the southern end it would tie into the existing Southern Depot ETB network, while the northern end of the route could be tied into the MFL substation system. This would allow SEPTA to offer clean, nearly silent vehicles which would be perfectly adapted to the stop-and-go nature of the Rt17's route with a rather modest initial investment. Once Market St and JFK Blvd are electrified it'd only make sense to make other routes like the 32, 33, or 48 (amongst others) electrified, while others like the 31, 38, or 44 could be easily operated with perhaps a special 40 foot dual-mode ETB/Diesel bus. Finally electrifying something like the Rt5 bus would allow SEPTA to run their trolleybuses from Frankford depot to Southern without removing them from the wire and towing them.