Great Western Coffee Shop

In what's claimed to be the world's largest order of electric buses, Warsaw City Bus Corporation has just ordered 130 Solaris Urbino electric buses for ~£80m. The city currently has 30 electric buses, 20 made by Solaris and 10 by Urbino. Solaris was the only bidder for the new tender. The new buses are low floor throughout and I think they'll be articulated, holding slightly less than 135 passengers (the desired maximum), with four doors. There will be 20 overhead charging points distributed around the city as part of a separate tender (photo below).

(https://www.transport-publiczny.pl/img/20190212135110mzasolariselektryczny.jpg_678-443.jpg)

Splendid news !
Electric power is the way forward, not for every bus operator and not under all conditions, but greater use of electricity is to be encouraged.

No pollution at the point of use, and less pollution overall presuming that a reasonable proportion of the electricity is from renewables.

Did I read that right? Over £600,000 for a bus? How much is a comparable diesel vehicle?

That's right. Price is inclusive of taxes. As to a diesel bus, I've no idea.

Easier in big cities, presumably. I'm quite impressed that 20 charging points will be enough for 130 vehicles.

As to the second point, unfortunately most electricity in Poland is still from burning coal.

I understand Bristol's Biogas buses weigh in at about £300,000, if that helps..!

I suspect that the 20 charging points might be for fairly brief top-up charges during the day, possibly at bus stops, with extra charging at night in the depot or garage.
The large scale burning of coal is most regrettable, but hopefully this will change during the life of the vehicles.

I googled "How much does a bus cost?" and after the bus tickets, the first return was from... Rail Forums UK! I don't know how accurate these figures are but they suggest articulated buses, which these will be, can be much more expensive than rigids.
https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/how-much-do-buses-cost.63783/

As great as I think it is that these types of vehicles are becoming the norm, I will never understand why overhead and trolleybuses aren't ever considered anymore, particularly in Britain. Times have changed with that technology too since the early 1970's when they last ran. The vehicles don't cost that much and tend to last longer than diesel buses, plus if routes are running established corridors, why not have a permanent feed. The permanent infrastructure makes the psychological difference to the user much like a tramway, the vehicles obvious different look makes changing ticketing to off vehicle much easier, plus vehicles can be equipped with short range batteries for emergency diversions. The versatility of infrastructure free vehicles isn't always a plus point when it comes to establishing transport.

I'm still waiting to see a picture of this "world's largest electric bus" that Warsaw is ordering...  ;D

Here's a challenge for transport historians with more time than I have tonight.

My immediate thought was - is that true? During the relatively brief heyday of the trolley bus could this number be exceeded?
I have had a quick google/wikipedia search revealing that London had 1811 as its maximum fleet, and a total of 1891 in all, between 1931 and 1962, implying it built up a large single generation fleet and then ran it down. It seems likely that there would have been an order for more than 130 in that lot. Anyone out there with the time or deeper knowledge beat Warsaw's claim?

I'm struck by how clear the roads are of cars when looking at old pictures of trams and trolley buses, and I note the comments from Giles Fearnley at TravelWatch about how much congestion has slowed down buses.   I suspect that vehicles tied to a track (above or below them) are going to have real issues if they get routed through areas of congestion - they can't wriggle around queues ....

On costs of both electric and diesel buses (some stuff on running costs too) :

https://www.forbes.com/sites/sebastianblanco/2018/08/31/84-million-electric-buses/#3cc3990f5e40

Unfortunately many bus routes in our towns and cities need to go through these areas of congestion. In the U.K we think rather differently to what public transport is for compared to elsewhere. There is an enormous amount of attention to interurban transport and how people from other communities around cities access them but not much attention paid to how people move around within them. The local bus (or trolleybus, tram or anything else) must go to areas with congestion because it's normally these areas where large populations live or where the traffic generating points, such as hospitals, are. The Eastern 'MRT' project Reading Council recently proposed would have moved several bus routes away from the Newtown and Cemetery Junction area which is a huge bottleneck for road traffic but also a large generator of passenger traffic for public transport in both directions. Moving the public transport away from the area to avoid the congestion seems rather backward when it is that very congestion we are trying to remove. Moving the regular traffic to the new proposed route in Reading would have been the better option for public transport. Back in the 1960's and 70's when new major road building towards urban centres occurred, such as the M32 into Bristol, this would have been of benefit to public transport on the previous main corridor the traffic used. The cars from elsewhere used the new road while buses continued running along the original corridor serving the communities along it free from the main flow. Now I am not suggesting that building new urban motorways is what we should be doing, but public transport bypassing inner areas is not the way forward. Sorting the area of congestion with public transport is what's needed.

Persuading people onto public transport is difficult, especially when it remains a regular bus. The biggest barriers against people using the bus I can see, after 18 years of driving them, is the speed the vehicles travel. One point to this is other road traffic of course, however the other factors slowing the vehicles are largely ignored. The driver having to see every individual onto the bus is the first major factor. If there was a major change by operators in how they collect and protect their revenue which led to people stepping on and off the bus in the same way they would use a train (or tram) then this would make a huge difference to the speed of the vehicle. Pay as you enter vehicles have to wait for the individual to prepare themselves.
The next factor is the amount of stops. Here is where local councils can get involved since they normally decide on the locations of these. Many stops in my town are in out of date locations that are difficult for buses to use and more awkward stops have been added between the originals over time in a vague attempt to promote public transport in the post deregulation era. A minimum stop distance in urban areas is what is needed to speed up bus services so that vehicles make better progress.
Getting more people onto public transport is supposed to lead to less road traffic so bus only lanes can be justified in heavy congestion areas. These would be even more acceptable by many people if some sort of permanent infrastructure is present. The infrastructure presents a commitment to reliable public transport. It builds an established corridor to draw people towards and trolleybuses are the cheapest way of doing this.

Cheers.

I think that what they meant was the largest order for battery powered buses, I presume that larger orders for trolley buses were placed back in the day.
Careless translation ?

Trolleybus and bus are distinct words in Polish, but I added the "claimed to be" as they didn't provide any evidence of this.

There are two or three places in Poland with trolleybuses and I used to live in one, so I'll add my experience of them. When I first moved to that city (Lublin, population about 400,000) the trolleybuses were not very reliable. They frequently became detached from their overhead wires, requiring the driver to get out and manipulate the connectors (two big poles on the roof) with cables at the back of the bus provided for this purpose. I think the main cause of the frequent disconnections was that the overhead wires were worn and the roads themselves were in bad condition. Most disconnections happened on long curves where the road was also bumpy. There were unused wires in some districts, where the trolleybuses no longer ran, so the whole system seemed to be neglected. But after a couple of years the city transport authority decided to reinvest in trolleybuses and move back to them from buses. Overhead wires were replaced and new roads were wired up. This immediately solved most of the reliability problems. Later, new vehicles were ordered, which were larger and more comfortable. I don't think they were any more delayed by congestion than ordinary buses.

I've no idea on the economics of trolleybuses versus battery buses, nor do I know if Warsaw ever had trolleybuses – I don't recall noticing any in old photos, so I expect not (it does have trams – I don't think any of the cities with trolleybuses do). As for tickets, virtually all urban transport ticketing in Poland is off-vehicle, regardless of vehicle type.

So they are light years ahead of us then ;D

Reputedly, the biggest trolleybus system was in Moscow, with 2000, and until not long ago. It's now down to half that, with replacement initially by just "buses" (i.e. diesel ones) but now by battery electrics. I've seen 200 quoted for that fleet, split between two makers. I suspect earlier trolleybus orders may have been bigger, but may not be seen as a commercial order. So which is the biggest is probably a matter of "when is an order not one order".

Has me wondering ... "charge as you go" ... trolleybuses with batteries - charge and run on the wired sections (those which have lots and lots of vehicles making it economic to wire and maintain) then battery the out in the Boondocks. All sorts of questions about getting the power through and live wires in cities - though only the same issues as trams, I suppose.   Feels a very Cambridge type solution to innovate with ;D - or has it been done somewhere?

In reality, even places that start with overhead wires seem desperately keen to rip them down. However, I'm not aware of any huge problem with these 500-800V lines, and putting them in for trams doesn't seem to be such a big issue (outside "precious" city centres). 

I can see a couple of potential technical issues, which of course could be solved with enough will. One is the automatic engagement of two booms onto the wires, and the other is that charging batteries off relatively short stretches of overhead might call for more current than they can supply. Better contact arrangements onto the wire would help with both.

Trolleybuses in Castellon Spain have unwired sections in the town centre. They can drop booms on the move and have catchers to place them back on the wires at a particular stop provided the bus is near enough positioned correctly. Solingen in Germany has by far the best system as far as I'm concerned. Nice long runs between stops. Routes that cross the town centre, with easy interchange in the middle. Tram like signalling in some areas. At one end they run beyond the wires on small diesel engines to the terminus which will be battery run soon, and best of all, they connect with the Schwebebahn in the suburbs of Wuppertal. I guess my point for wiring is that if the bus runs a route at high frequency all day and all year, why not wire it instead of being battery reliant all the time? I'm sure this will be far cheaper in the long term as well as the permanence benefits. The other issue with battery buses that concerns me is the disposal of the batteries after use. The experience with hybrids so far suggests continually charged batteries are expensive to replace and need doing so every other year. Most of Reading's hybrid fleet have now been converted to rather under powered regular diesel engines.

The first 90 seconds of this video demonstrate the de-wiring and re-wiring

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s4a6ZsFPon0

Cheers

See how the Romans do it ;-

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ufIYOonpIo

Clever stuff

Both Sollingen and Rome are far more sophisticated than anything I ever saw on Polish trolleybuses.

I just watched a video on the youtube of Lublin trolleybuses and it appears they have quite a modern system. Since they chose to refresh the system they have added mileage by wiring the most popular frequent routes. Their vehicles also seem to have off wire traction capabilities. .

With the recent advances in batteries, it seems very worthwhile to consider trolleybuses with limited battery power. If most of the route is wired then only a modest size battery is needed.
Battery operation for short distances would simplify operation at road junctions, roundabouts, and would permit of short diversions away from the wired route for road repairs etc.
A trolleybus on battery power could also cross a railway line via a level crossing, just as a diesel bus does, it could also pass under bridges too low for trolley wires.

Have you got a link to the video? They were wiring more routes and bring old wires back into service when I was last there but they didn't have off-wire traction. I haven't been there since about 2013 though...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kWfWnoCncU0

Took a while to find again as the script is in Polish.
Watching these videos frustrates me that we don't have anything as basic and simple as this form of quiet and emission free transport in the U.K. Annoying we had it all before, and annoying that instead of re-installing it we just wait around for technology to become better and cheaper. Modern Britain thinks it's a world leader, yet it's miles behind with infrastructure. We can't even provide decent transport in major towns and cities! The private car wins hands down. When we do try change something we have to have our own backward way of doing it.

Interestingly when a Reading trolleybus visited the town last year and was parked up in Broad Street, many British people had no idea what it was, or just thought it was an old bus. Many Europeans who stopped though knew exactly what the poles on the roof were for and were surprised to know that the town had trolleybuses in the first place and wondered why on earth they were removed.
Still, enjoy the video. Might have to travel there and have a ride on them one day.

Cheers

RG - we are not alone! I've just spent an informative quarter of an hour on Wikipedia cruising lists of (almost all former) trolleybus systems throughout the world. Only North Korea, Belarus, Lithuania and Latvia seem to have all systems left operating, Ukraine has most still operating as does Russia. I guess all these are genuine full OHL systems, rather than battery/OHL ones.

For much of the rest of the world it is a case of closures over a prolonged period, with one or two recent schemes started. perhaps it's time for a trolleybus revival.   

Nice half hour video of trolleybuses at the UK Trolleybus Museum ;-

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JRmllrVHvu0

Dziękuję (thank you).

A comment under the video says that whereas the Trollino 18 uses batteries to run off-wire, the Trollino 12 is a hybrid system using an Iveco internal combustion (presumably diesel) engine to power a generator.

I think it's more a difference of attitude to infrastructure and funding rather than technological ability, and also it fluctuates over time in all places. As I mentioned earlier, Lublin's trolleybuses (and public transport generally) did get very run down at one stage.

Indeed. It seems to be anything to avoid overhead wires, even in our less attractive towns. I'm all for practicality myself, the benefits of the overhead road outweigh the possible unsightly look of it. It's not appropriate in particular places like Oxford, but there are plenty of places in the 100 000 to 200 000 region of population where it wouldn't be that noticeable, nor destroy the view of some of our treasured street scenes. Tramways have overhead, with one less wire, but the wires holding it are the same. Not sure why this is acceptable and trolleybus overhead isn't. At the closure of the company providing parts for the overhead in Britain, Reading Corporation predicted that their latest trolleybuses would get them as far as 1981, before a ministry of transport planned one way system was forced onto the town leading to the council to decide to close of the system in 1968 by one vote. I often think that if the system survived this we would probably still have it today, as the practical nature of Reading and it's people were very fond of their trolleybuses. I think we are out of the low point of public transport now, but in the modern world a group of bus routes slowly snaking through towns are no longer enough to entice people to make a choice. Railways and tramways will be chosen because of their fixed nature, but buses in urban areas don't really cut it, and I can't see battery powered versions making much difference to the use of them.

Interestingly they are not that bothered about overhead in some attractive European cities.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/alefilobus/31030769510
Here is a photo on flickr by Ale in Modena in Italy, where it's diesel buses that aren't allowed in the old town!

Cheers

With growing concerns about local air pollution in urban areas, and also about climate change, I foresee another advantage in adopting trolley buses.

Not only would passengers be transported with no pollution at the point of use and reduced total pollution, but the infrastructure could also be used for trucks and vans.

Once the overhead is installed, there is no reason why suitably equipped goods vehicles should not use it. An electric truck with say a 20 mile battery range, and unlimited range powered from the overhead would be ideal for urban deliveries, and can of course venture into side streets not wired.
The extra power used by refrigerated vehicles is easily supplied at low cost and zero local pollution.

Whilst such schemes may not be achieved just yet, they should IMO be planned for by requiring that all new trolleybuses and infrastructure should be interchangeable. Not unique to each area.

That seems a really good idea, but how would you ensure that other vehicles paid for the electricity they were using? I'm sure it could be done, but could be an added complication.

When I said (ages ago now) I thought trolleybuses should be able enwire or rewire themselves, I was thinking about something a lot less clunky than ones we've see in videos. It should be quite possible, with a little electronic brainpower and some modern sensors, for the booms to find their own wires and connect - and quickly, too. But for wider roads and busier town centres it might make sense to go a bit further, and put up a selection of + and - contact wires running parallel and let the buses pick whichever they like. A tiny reserve (more supercapacitor than battery) would allow switching wire in mid-stream, if you want.

Would it be worth doing, rather than just using more battery? Maybe, maybe not, but it would be worth a look. And as for the Goldilocks question (who's been eating MY current?) it is easy to detect someone is drawing power, and interrogate them or take pictures, so (combined with on-board meters) I don't see that as a problem.

Google ;-

'Siemens e-highway Sweden'

and post your reaction on this forum.

I'm surprised no member has done it before.

If you search for "ehighway" on this forum you'll find we have!

Interesting idea but apart from allowing trolleybuses (and "trolleylorries" etc) to overtake each other, what advantages would it offer? There's usually enough reach in the poles to allow one set of wires for each direction serve all lanes of a dual-carriageway anyway. I'm not sure the extra infrastructure costs would be worth it.

Either fit each vehicle with a meter, or more radically Charge ALL goods vehicles say £20 a day to enter the relevant area. Electricity being included in this charge. So a diesel vehicle pays £20 simply to enter the area, but an electric vehicle can use the electricity for no extra cost.

Electricity is not expensive for this sort of use, the real expense is the capital cost of the infrastructure.
A large van or light truck might use on average 20Kw when moving and almost nothing when stopped for loading and unloading or for drivers breaks. If the vehicle spends 5 hours a day moving and another 5 hours not moving, then it uses about 100 Kwh a day. That would cost about £15, suggesting that a flat rate charge of say £20 would be reasonable.
If someone chooses to use a diesel vehicle they would still pay the £20 but derive no benefit therefrom, apart from being allowed to drive it in the area.

Only 100% battery vehicles would be exempt from the £20 charge, as they consume no current from the overhead, and emit no pollution at the point of use.

Another point I considered yesterday while lamenting the swap of smooth hybrid motors on Reading's buses for plodding tractor engines, was that overhead means operators cannot change there mind on what powers there vehicles (it also means they cannot keep hiring them out every weekend and bringing in the old rubbish to cover). It means a commitment that private operators cannot get out of. Battery buses could be the next order for example, last for five years then the bus company decides that diesel or gas is the next option for a multitude of reasons. The overhead is long term commitment rather than the bus operators short term consideration.

Cheers

Might do, but then it doesn't seem to have prevented the removal of previous tram and trolley systems.

A valid point, but I'd like to think that we have learnt something from last time. Can you imagine the removal of railway overhead with changes in technology? Or the replacement of Edinburgh's trams with buses in the future because it's cheaper? Times have changed since the 1960's where accommodating the motor car was the priority, we know this isn't the way forward in urban areas (although many authorities are still held to ransom by it). We know that standardised equipment is available and systems don't have to have unique quirks like last time. I would hope that we know knee jerk reactions to cost savings on public transport with only a four or five year projection in mind is not how to do it (but bus operators and councils still don't seem to know this).

Cheers

It always depresses me using Gosport's Bus Rapid Transit route when i recall the hope of the birth of the Portsmouth-Gosport Supertram concept in my childhood, the years of project development through my coming of age, only to see the short-sightedness of politicians from central right through to local level kill off a scbeme that would have made a real, game-changing difference.

A politicians guide to urban public transport.

1) lets build a new railway line.
2) Heavy rail is old fashioned and too expensive.
3) We should build a light railway in that case, nearly as good and sounds more modern.
4) That is too expensive.
5) Lets build a street running tramway then, "more accessible"
6) Too disruptive to the community, and also expensive, dangerous to cyclists.
7)  What about a guided bus way then ?
eight)  Still too expensive, and might upset motorists.
9)  Trolley buses then ? Motorists can still use the road as well.
10) No way! old fashioned, the overhead looks ugly and might electrocute children.
11) Lets replace our diesel buses with battery ones.
12) Costs a lot of money for marginal gain. Liable to "mow down" mothers and children as silent.
13) How about painting the existing buses green, and adding a logo that implies low emissions ?
14) I think that might be the way forward !
15) I reckon we could get a fast food chain or supermarket to sponsor our new greener buses.
16) Good thinking.

At each stage in the above process add in one or more of the following.

1) studies into newts.
2) A fact finding trip overseas to observe how other countries do it.
3) Stakeholder discussions.
4) Studies into the bat population and impact thereon.
5)) A UK fact finding trip to Blackpool.
6)  Studies into the impact on diversity issues.
7) A wide ranging study into the bird population and effects thereon.
8) Studies into the effects on the LBGT population.

You, sir, are a cynic.   There would be no newt study (except for the depot site) when considering trolley buses.

That could be considered "newtist"

This is an interesting video if a bit too long.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sjU7OsuYKPg
It shows a system to allow trolleybuses to rewire without the need for catchers to be installed on the overhead.
From 8-30 it shows the development of technology to allow trolleybuses to rewire in motion albeit it it's early stages.

The failures and successes of electric buses in Nepal.
https://www.citylab.com/transportation/2019/08/electric-bus-history-kathmandu-nepal-himalayan-air-pollution/596842/