Official Trackless Trolley Thread/Tracker

[Arborway]

Just chiming in to say I'm not exactly thrilled that the T is choosing to forgo trackless trolleys in all of its current transit improvement plans. I know the construction cost is prohibitive, but it's still disappointing.

[3rdrail]

Actually, the construction cost is relatively meager as all that you need is overhead. Because of the agility of the cars, they really don't need road construction to facilitate their movement. Their electric efficiency also beats their internal combustion engine counterparts making them even more of a value. Thirdly, they signify a permanence which enhances the stability of routes and neighborhoods which busses don't do, increasing the value of neighborhoods compared with those that have bus routes only. Their motors are generally more powerful than that of internal combustion design, so they are able to overtake the force of gravity climbing hills and accelerating. On the Dedham Line route out of the Arborway in the 50's, they conquered Bellevue Hill, the highest point in the City of Boston, regularly in all kinds of weather, making diesel and gas busses look like skateboards by comparison. Here's another Vancouver TT video. Look at the acceleration of this Brill T-48 at 00:52 out of that access road. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cYNbP8JnlXE

[RailBus63]

Just chiming in to say I'm not exactly thrilled that the T is choosing to forgo trackless trolleys in all of its current transit improvement plans. I know the construction cost is prohibitive, but it's still disappointing.

The MBTA did propose trackless trolleys for Washington Street but the citizen groups pushed back and insisted on light rail. Now they have CNG buses. As our president likes to say, sometimes the perfect is the enemy of the good.

[Disney Guy]

...video on Youtube of a Vancouver Flyer. Check out how it takes this switch at speed. Think we could do that in Boston ? =related

Wear on the overhead increases with speed even if a dewirement doesn't happen. It is in the best interest of the transit company to treat the special work with care since everyone knows it's much more difficult to replace those components.

Was at the south portal of the Harvard bus tunnel not too long ago and noticed that sometimes as a trackless entered the tunnel, there would be a loud "clink" as the trolley shoes passed a certain point. There is a crossing frog there that has two sets of movable points that look like equals signs. As the trolley shoe enters, the point set it is on moves to the side to let the shoe clear the side of the frog housing and the other point set moves in the opposite direction to achieve the proper alignment which always consists of the left bar of one point set lining up with the right bar of the other. Depending on the exact dimensions of the trolley shoe, which also may have suffered wear, the point sets may or may not be pushed over enough so as to line up perfectly for the direction of travel. Any unusual noise means that some imperfect movement took place.

About ten years ago there were signs amidst the ceiling advertising in Seattle trackless trolleys explaining that the coaches have to go slow through special work to reduce wear and tear "and that the coach can resume speed once out on the straightaway".

[Arborway]

Actually, the construction cost is relatively meager as all that you need is overhead. Because of the agility of the cars, they really don't need road construction to facilitate their movement. Their electric efficiency also beats their internal combustion engine counterparts making them even more of a value. Thirdly, they signify a permanence which enhances the stability of routes and neighborhoods which busses don't do, increasing the value of neighborhoods compared with those that have bus routes only. Their motors are generally more powerful than that of internal combustion design, so they are able to overtake the force of gravity climbing hills and accelerating. On the Dedham Line route out of the Arborway in the 50's, they conquered Bellevue Hill, the highest point in the City of Boston, regularly in all kinds of weather, making diesel and gas busses look like skateboards by comparison. Here's another Vancouver TT video. Look at the acceleration of this Brill T-48 at 00:52 out of that access road. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cYNbP8JnlXE

The MBTA did propose trackless trolleys for Washington Street but the citizen groups pushed back and insisted on light rail. Now they have CNG buses. As our president likes to say, sometimes the perfect is the enemy of the good.

I've been checking out videos of the articulated New Flyer TTs in Vancouver and they seem to run incredibly smoothly. I'd love to see something like that here.

A side note: I just noticed how much interior space is lost on the dual modes here in Boston. It almost defeats the point of having an extra section after the articulation. Either one or the other definitely works best from a capacity standpoint.

[3rdrail]

Wear on the overhead increases with speed even if a dewirement doesn't happen. It is in the best interest of the transit company to treat the special work with care since everyone knows it's much more difficult to replace those components.

Was at the south portal of the Harvard bus tunnel not too long ago and noticed that sometimes as a trackless entered the tunnel, there would be a loud "clink" as the trolley shoes passed a certain point. There is a crossing frog there that has two sets of movable points that look like equals signs. As the trolley shoe enters, the point set it is on moves to the side to let the shoe clear the side of the frog housing and the other point set moves in the opposite direction to achieve the proper alignment which always consists of the left bar of one point set lining up with the right bar of the other. Depending on the exact dimensions of the trolley shoe, which also may have suffered wear, the point sets may or may not be pushed over enough so as to line up perfectly for the direction of travel. Any unusual noise means that some imperfect movement took place.

About ten years ago there were signs amidst the ceiling advertising in Seattle trackless trolleys explaining that the coaches have to go slow through special work to reduce wear and tear "and that the coach can resume speed once out on the straightaway".

Overhead special work bends and breaks, depending upon how it's used and maintained. Without careful alignment between the work and trolley poles/shoes, maintenance- fixing minor issues before they become big ones and in some cases, greasing, and careful operation by operators, the work can be damaged. Usually, you can tell a system that is not maintained that well by it's constant de-wirements at special work. They take a beating in the normal course of work, probably more so than the points and frogs in railed street railway switch overhead as they are more closely aligned to the direction of the pole/shoe/wheel, as well as railway track switches despite the additional weight, due to the fact that the rail switch has rolling friction going for it and is not under constant lateral tension as is properly strung overhead.

Here's a page out of my 61 year old Ohio Brass Transit Overhead catalog, one of my best books as it was a gift from the late George Sanborn. Here is a drawing of a trackless "Narrow Underrun" overhead switch.
http://i203.photobucket.com/albums/aa26 ... TTFrog.jpg

[crash575]

Watertown council holds hearing on MBTA trolleys Tuesday

Tired of trolleys in Watertown? The MBTA might be interested in replacing them with buses.

The town committee on public works will meet on May 17 at 7 p.m. in the council chambers at 149 Main St. to discuss the trolley system for bus routes #71 and #73. Belmont’s Board of Selectmen has considered requesting the MBTA to remove trolley service from its streets and replace it permanently with buses, but to do so would require Cambridge and Watertown to lose their trolley lines as well.

Oh Belmont....

[jamesinclair]

Idiots. We should be doing everything we can to increase electric mileage, not decrease it.

[jbvb]

Belmont's fatheads should really open their ears. Long ago, I stayed in a hotel overlooking Market St. in San Francisco. Diesel buses were loudest, then the PCCs, even though the Muni was still using resilient wheels at the time. I could not hear the trolleybuses at all from my 9th floor room.

[3rdrail]

...just a pleasing "clack" at switches and cross-overs. Trackless trolleys are the most under-rated vehicles in transit. They start and run in a mili-second in freezing weather, they're quiet, they have no rated peak horsepower, they're powerful, emit no pollution, rarely break down, and only have to be replaced when the bodies lierally fall apart due to their motors lasting forever.

[BostonUrbEx]

Terrible news for sure. I know it's not definite, but the talk alone is rather disappointing to hear about...

Paul is definitely right, it is pretty underrated and I think all major bus corridors should be electrified, such as the 28 Bus and other buses down Blue Hill Ave (BH Ave from Dudley to Grove Hall is the highest level of bus passenger volume in the northeast, I think?). There's a slew of buses which should be trolleys...

Also, the wires give a sense of permanence. A bus route is (or at least feels) less likely to change if it's wired up. It's simply more attractive to ridership...

they have no rated peak horsepower

What does this mean?

[F-line to Dudley via Park]

If the requirement for this is that all towns be on board, you can bet Cambridge is going to yell and scream to keep things as-is. They like the wires because of the permanence, they complain when too many diesels get slipped into the schedule, and they have pushed back every time elimination has been discussed. I don't know exactly what this hopes to accomplish. They just bought a new fleet, and it's not like they're much use going back and forth in the Silver Line tunnel instead.

If Belmont doesn't like it and wants to waste a bunch of well-maintained infrastructure AND cost the agency money it doesn't have to remove it all...feel free to opt out of the MBTA district altogether and become your own gated community. I'm sure Fitchburg Line riders would love the fast express trip direct from Waltham to Porter and the T wouldn't mind saving a bunch of money/equipment/staff mashing the 74/75/78 into one single Cambridge loop route around Fresh Pond that never opens the doors outside of city limits.

[3rdrail]

Also, the wires give a sense of permanence. A bus route is (or at least feels) less likely to change if it's wired up. It's simply more attractive to ridership...

they have no rated peak horsepower

What does this mean?

Some either transit or real estate group did a survey years ago and found that trolleys raised real-estate values more so than bus lines which did not. The poles, wires, (and rails in some cases) gave a sense of permanence just as you say.

An electric motor's power depends on the current which it recieves. All trolleys have a relay on their master controller which limits the current, otherwise overloads and unexpected power and speed could occur during surges. In San Francisco, Muni's Marmon-Herrington's had a push-button that the motorman could press for fast acceleration and getting up a steep hill, along with heavy-duty resistors. What it did was merely increase the setting on the relay. They left the cars and diesel buses in their dust. If you ever have occasion to operate Boston's Pullman-Standard trackless trolleys up at Seashore, you'll find out that they crawl and appear under-powered due to the voltage delivered because of conditions (and wisely so !). Put that baby in Cambridge and she'll be a rocket ! (Anybody from Seashore know what you're putting out up there on the TT wire with other activity going on at the same time ?)

[FatNoah]

Belmont's fatheads should really open their ears.

I'd be curious to hear why Belmont wants to get rid of the trolleys. I'd also be curious to know how many of those opposed actually live anywhere near them. As a former resident of East Arlington, I lived about 1/2 mile away from Mass. Ave and could hear the buses every single morning. From the squeal of the brakes to the growl of the engines as they accelerated, the buses were hard to miss. I can't imagine how loud it was for residents living on the street as well. Fast forward a couple years and I lived in East Watertown about halfway between Trapelo Rd. and Mt. Auburn Street and only heard buses when the trolleys weren't running.

As a commuter, I much preferred the quiet of the trolleys to the roar of the diesels. That's why I'm really curious about where the opposition is coming from.

[octr202]

As the article says, the "concern" is that the overhead and poles are too unsightly. Isn't this the same argument the City of Boston has trotted out time and time again when even the hint of restoring trackless trolley operation within their limits has been proposed?

As has been mentioned, you can rest assured that Cambridge will fight this if it ever gets legs (could be someone leaked this to the Globe to "test the waters" on the idea), and it looks like Watertown will be with them.

I have fond memories of a past apartment on Mt Auburn St. My first floor bedroom window was about 20 feet back from a 71 stop. Mon-Sat I never got woken up by the tracklesses (of course this was in the pre-Neoplan era, their HVAC and ASA do make some noise). Only on Sundays would the first diesel of the morning wake me up. They should make anyone proposing this change spend a week or two in an apartment like that for a week or two with diesels running by every 4 minutes like the 73 does at rush hour.