why do new tram lines cost so much and take so long to build?

[Tweed]

Having just come back from Prague I started to wonder why new tram lines
(Edinburgh, Nottingham etc) in the UK cost so much and take so long to
build. I seem to recall the Edinburgh system was dogged by having to divert
underground services. Now, knowing almost nothing about the subject I'm
presumably going to make a fool of myself by musing that tram tracks are
very shallow so why do they affect underground services so much. Prague has
a very comprehensive tram network, which seems to have been kept going
through the worst of times when there was little money around. The other
things that struck me was that they managed to thread the trams through the
narrowest of streets, round very tight bends and up very steep gradients,
all the things that are supposed to render British towns unsuitable for
trams. The advantages over buses were clear, no smelly exhaust, much much
faster acceleration, and greater capacity. The entire city seems to operate
without buses (well I didn't see one that belonged to the city transport
operator). Perhaps we ought to get the Czechs to install our next tram
system. Seems to be a very good way of doing public transport.

[Graeme Wall]

Post by Tweed
Having just come back from Prague I started to wonder why new tram lines
(Edinburgh, Nottingham etc) in the UK cost so much and take so long to
build. I seem to recall the Edinburgh system was dogged by having to divert
underground services. Now, knowing almost nothing about the subject I'm
presumably going to make a fool of myself by musing that tram tracks are
very shallow so why do they affect underground services so much. Prague has
a very comprehensive tram network, which seems to have been kept going
through the worst of times when there was little money around. The other
things that struck me was that they managed to thread the trams through the
narrowest of streets, round very tight bends and up very steep gradients,
all the things that are supposed to render British towns unsuitable for
trams. The advantages over buses were clear, no smelly exhaust, much much
faster acceleration, and greater capacity. The entire city seems to operate
without buses (well I didn't see one that belonged to the city transport
operator). Perhaps we ought to get the Czechs to install our next tram
system. Seems to be a very good way of doing public transport.

They have the advantage of not having got rid of the tramlines before
they put the modern services in.

[Charles Ellson]

On Fri, 9 Oct 2015 16:27:45 +0100, Graeme Wall

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by Tweed
Having just come back from Prague I started to wonder why new tram lines
(Edinburgh, Nottingham etc) in the UK cost so much and take so long to
build. I seem to recall the Edinburgh system was dogged by having to divert
underground services. Now, knowing almost nothing about the subject I'm
presumably going to make a fool of myself by musing that tram tracks are
very shallow so why do they affect underground services so much. Prague has
a very comprehensive tram network, which seems to have been kept going
through the worst of times when there was little money around. The other
things that struck me was that they managed to thread the trams through the
narrowest of streets, round very tight bends and up very steep gradients,
all the things that are supposed to render British towns unsuitable for
trams. The advantages over buses were clear, no smelly exhaust, much much
faster acceleration, and greater capacity. The entire city seems to operate
without buses (well I didn't see one that belonged to the city transport
operator). Perhaps we ought to get the Czechs to install our next tram
system. Seems to be a very good way of doing public transport.

They have the advantage of not having got rid of the tramlines before
they put the modern services in.

They also have local and national government planning further ahead
than the next election.

[Basil Jet]

Post by Tweed
Having just come back from Prague I started to wonder why new tram lines
(Edinburgh, Nottingham etc) in the UK cost so much and take so long to
build. I seem to recall the Edinburgh system was dogged by having to divert
underground services. Now, knowing almost nothing about the subject I'm
presumably going to make a fool of myself by musing that tram tracks are
very shallow so why do they affect underground services so much.

Because if the services are under the trams, you have to stop the trams
every time you need to dig the services up, so it's better to move the
services first (although some services must still cross the tram tracks,
but I guess they install a foot tunnel to take those services under the
track.)

Having said that, how hard would it be to have temporary crossovers with
sprung points which could be clipped onto the track to create a single
track section 20-50 yards long? You could then close any part of the
track any time you wanted to dig up the services with minimal impact on
tram journeys, so you would no longer need to move the services before
building the track.

Post by Tweed
Prague has
a very comprehensive tram network, which seems to have been kept going
through the worst of times when there was little money around. The other
things that struck me was that they managed to thread the trams through the
narrowest of streets, round very tight bends and up very steep gradients,

Google URLs please!

[Tweed]

Post by Basil Jet

Post by Tweed
Prague has
a very comprehensive tram network, which seems to have been kept going
through the worst of times when there was little money around. The other
things that struck me was that they managed to thread the trams through the
narrowest of streets, round very tight bends and up very steep gradients,

Google URLs please!

I'm sorry, I'm not sure what you mean by that. Perhaps I've left my brain
in Prague...

[Basil Jet]

Post by Tweed

Post by Basil Jet

Post by Tweed
Prague has
a very comprehensive tram network, which seems to have been kept going
through the worst of times when there was little money around. The other
things that struck me was that they managed to thread the trams through the
narrowest of streets, round very tight bends and up very steep gradients,

Google URLs please!

I'm sorry, I'm not sure what you mean by that. Perhaps I've left my brain
in Prague...

I'd like to see some streetviews of tight corners and steep tracks. Or
just a map reference or street name would do.

[Anna Noyd-Dryver]

Post by Basil Jet

Post by Tweed

Post by Basil Jet

Post by Tweed
Prague has
a very comprehensive tram network, which seems to have been kept going
through the worst of times when there was little money around. The other
things that struck me was that they managed to thread the trams through the
narrowest of streets, round very tight bends and up very steep gradients,

Google URLs please!

I'm sorry, I'm not sure what you mean by that. Perhaps I've left my brain
in Prague...

I'd like to see some streetviews of tight corners and steep tracks. Or
just a map reference or street name would do.

Google 'Lisbon Trams', click 'images', then ignore the ones which are
images of the three tram-like funiculars. Most of the rest of the pictures
meet your criteria ;)


Anna Noyd-Dryver

[Tweed]

Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver

Post by Basil Jet

Post by Tweed

Post by Basil Jet

Post by Tweed
Prague has
a very comprehensive tram network, which seems to have been kept going
through the worst of times when there was little money around. The other
things that struck me was that they managed to thread the trams through the
narrowest of streets, round very tight bends and up very steep gradients,

Google URLs please!

I'm sorry, I'm not sure what you mean by that. Perhaps I've left my brain
in Prague...

I'd like to see some streetviews of tight corners and steep tracks. Or
just a map reference or street name would do.

Google 'Lisbon Trams', click 'images', then ignore the ones which are
images of the three tram-like funiculars. Most of the rest of the pictures
meet your criteria ;)
Anna Noyd-Dryver

That makes my point even better than Prague.

Thanks to those that responded about diverting services. When we did have
trams in many of our cities were the services never put under the tram
tracks?

I guess the thrust of my original question is are we making the
installation/construction of new tramways harder/ more expensive than it
might need to be?

[Michael Bell]

Post by Basil Jet

Post by Tweed
Having just come back from Prague I started to wonder why new tram lines
(Edinburgh, Nottingham etc) in the UK cost so much and take so long to
build. I seem to recall the Edinburgh system was dogged by having to divert
underground services. Now, knowing almost nothing about the subject I'm
presumably going to make a fool of myself by musing that tram tracks are
very shallow so why do they affect underground services so much.

Because if the services are under the trams, you have to stop the trams
every time you need to dig the services up, so it's better to move the
services first (although some services must still cross the tram tracks,
but I guess they install a foot tunnel to take those services under the
track.)

You should see how they do it in Rotterdam. The tram tracks are strong
enough to bridge a gap of 2 Metres, and having dug that trench across
the track, the trams roll on overhead while the pipes are seen to
below.

Post by Basil Jet
Having said that, how hard would it be to have temporary crossovers with
sprung points which could be clipped onto the track to create a single
track section 20-50 yards long? You could then close any part of the
track any time you wanted to dig up the services with minimal impact on
tram journeys, so you would no longer need to move the services before
building the track.

Such tracks are established technology. There is a name for them,
which I have forgotten.

Michael Bell

Post by Basil Jet

Post by Tweed
Prague has
a very comprehensive tram network, which seems to have been kept going
through the worst of times when there was little money around. The other
things that struck me was that they managed to thread the trams through the
narrowest of streets, round very tight bends and up very steep gradients,

Google URLs please!

[Christopher A. Lee]

On Sat, 10 Oct 2015 09:58:10 +0100, Michael Bell

Post by Michael Bell

Post by Basil Jet
Having said that, how hard would it be to have temporary crossovers with
sprung points which could be clipped onto the track to create a single
track section 20-50 yards long? You could then close any part of the
track any time you wanted to dig up the services with minimal impact on
tram journeys, so you would no longer need to move the services before
building the track.

Such tracks are established technology. There is a name for them,
which I have forgotten.
Michael Bell

I'm pretty sure it's not that.

[Clive D. W. Feather]

Post by Michael Bell

Post by Basil Jet
Having said that, how hard would it be to have temporary crossovers with
sprung points which could be clipped onto the track to create a single
track section 20-50 yards long? You could then close any part of the
track any time you wanted to dig up the services with minimal impact on
tram journeys, so you would no longer need to move the services before
building the track.

Such tracks are established technology. There is a name for them,
which I have forgotten.

"California Crossing", I think.

[The Real Doctor]

Post by Basil Jet
Having said that, how hard would it be to have temporary crossovers with
sprung points which could be clipped onto the track to create a single
track section 20-50 yards long? You could then close any part of the
track any time you wanted to dig up the services with minimal impact on
tram journeys, so you would no longer need to move the services before
building the track.

I've seen those in use in Karlsruhe.

Ian

[a***@yahoo.com]

Post by Basil Jet
Having said that, how hard would it be to have temporary crossovers with
sprung points which could be clipped onto the track to create a single
track section 20-50 yards long? You could then close any part of the
track any time you wanted to dig up the services with minimal impact on
tram journeys, so you would no longer need to move the services before
building the track.

you mean one of these?

Loading Image...

[s***@potato.field]

On Tue, 27 Oct 2015 08:24:43 -0700 (PDT)

Post by a***@yahoo.com

Post by Basil Jet
Having said that, how hard would it be to have temporary crossovers with
sprung points which could be clipped onto the track to create a single
track section 20-50 yards long? You could then close any part of the
track any time you wanted to dig up the services with minimal impact on
tram journeys, so you would no longer need to move the services before
building the track.

you mean one of these?
http://photo.tramscape.com/tram/zurich/090723.21.jpg

Presumably they put in some new knitting as well, or did the trams just
go for it with the pan down and hope they didn't get gapped?

--
Spud

[a***@yahoo.com]

Post by s***@potato.field
Presumably they put in some new knitting as well, or did the trams just
go for it with the pan down and hope they didn't get gapped?
--
Spud

This shot would appear to show there is temporary knitting

[Michael Bell]

Post by s***@potato.field
On Tue, 27 Oct 2015 08:24:43 -0700 (PDT)

Post by a***@yahoo.com

Post by Basil Jet
Having said that, how hard would it be to have temporary crossovers with
sprung points which could be clipped onto the track to create a single
track section 20-50 yards long? You could then close any part of the
track any time you wanted to dig up the services with minimal impact on
tram journeys, so you would no longer need to move the services before
building the track.

you mean one of these?
http://photo.tramscape.com/tram/zurich/090723.21.jpg

Presumably they put in some new knitting as well, or did the trams just
go for it with the pan down and hope they didn't get gapped?
--
Spud

In right hand running, it's quite steeply downhill, so no problem.

Michael Bell

[Chris J Dixon]

Post by Tweed
Having just come back from Prague I started to wonder why new tram lines
(Edinburgh, Nottingham etc) in the UK cost so much and take so long to
build. I seem to recall the Edinburgh system was dogged by having to divert
underground services. Now, knowing almost nothing about the subject I'm
presumably going to make a fool of myself by musing that tram tracks are
very shallow so why do they affect underground services so much.

Two main reasons.

Firstly, since subsequent access would be disruptive, all
existing services are re-routed so that they are not beneath the
tracks.

If you have to dig up a road, a bus can drive round or divert, a
tram is somewhat stuck.

Secondly, there is a risk of unwanted electrical currents being
induced in services, so precautions have to be taken to prevent
this.

The whole task is made more difficult because what records do
exist of the location of services have been found to be
inadequate and incomplete, so the true details of the task ahead
don't become apparent until ground is broken.

Chris

[[e-mail]]

Just think of a tram system where the government doesn't care about the locals... Walsall to Dudley. ... 25 years of empty promises

[Michael Bell]

Post by Tweed
Having just come back from Prague I started to wonder why new tram lines
(Edinburgh, Nottingham etc) in the UK cost so much and take so long to
build. I seem to recall the Edinburgh system was dogged by having to divert
underground services. Now, knowing almost nothing about the subject I'm
presumably going to make a fool of myself by musing that tram tracks are
very shallow so why do they affect underground services so much. Prague has
a very comprehensive tram network, which seems to have been kept going
through the worst of times when there was little money around. The other
things that struck me was that they managed to thread the trams through the
narrowest of streets, round very tight bends and up very steep gradients,
all the things that are supposed to render British towns unsuitable for
trams. The advantages over buses were clear, no smelly exhaust, much much
faster acceleration, and greater capacity. The entire city seems to operate
without buses (well I didn't see one that belonged to the city transport
operator). Perhaps we ought to get the Czechs to install our next tram
system. Seems to be a very good way of doing public transport.

You're not alone in your thinking, see http://www.lr55.com/

Its problem may be that it's not "Re-assuringly expensive".

Michael Bell

[R. Mark Clayton]

Post by Tweed
Having just come back from Prague I started to wonder why new tram lines
(Edinburgh, Nottingham etc) in the UK cost so much and take so long to
build. I seem to recall the Edinburgh system was dogged by having to divert
underground services. Now, knowing almost nothing about the subject I'm
presumably going to make a fool of myself by musing that tram tracks are
very shallow so why do they affect underground services so much. Prague has
a very comprehensive tram network, which seems to have been kept going
through the worst of times when there was little money around. The other
things that struck me was that they managed to thread the trams through the
narrowest of streets, round very tight bends and up very steep gradients,
all the things that are supposed to render British towns unsuitable for
trams. The advantages over buses were clear, no smelly exhaust, much much
faster acceleration, and greater capacity. The entire city seems to operate
without buses (well I didn't see one that belonged to the city transport
operator). Perhaps we ought to get the Czechs to install our next tram
system. Seems to be a very good way of doing public transport.

They don't have to - Greater Manchester seems to do very well. Nottingham was a bit if a pain, but Edinburgh was so badly managed that they are having a public inquiry: -

http://www.edinburghtraminquiry.org/

[Theo Markettos]

Post by R. Mark Clayton
They don't have to - Greater Manchester seems to do very well. Nottingham
was a bit if a pain, but Edinburgh was so badly managed that they are
having a public inquiry: -
http://www.edinburghtraminquiry.org/

To be equitable to other transport modes, Cambridge is having a guided bus
inquiry. Perhaps we should ask for a bulk discount?

Theo

[Primitive Person]

Post by R. Mark Clayton
They don't have to - Greater Manchester seems to do very well. Nottingham was a bit if a pain, but Edinburgh was so badly managed that they are having a public inquiry: -
http://www.edinburghtraminquiry.org/

A lot of that is motivated by the hatred between the SNP and Labour, though, and has little to do with reality. Fat lot of good it'll do.

PP

[R. Mark Clayton]

Post by Primitive Person

Post by R. Mark Clayton
They don't have to - Greater Manchester seems to do very well. Nottingham was a bit if a pain, but Edinburgh was so badly managed that they are having a public inquiry: -
http://www.edinburghtraminquiry.org/

A lot of that is motivated by the hatred between the SNP and Labour, though, and has little to do with reality. Fat lot of good it'll do.
PP

The Edinburgh trams were and still are an utter fiasco - both the above at fault.

[Arthur Figgis]

Post by Tweed
The advantages over buses were clear, no smelly exhaust, much much
faster acceleration, and greater capacity. The entire city seems to operate
without buses (well I didn't see one that belonged to the city transport
operator). Perhaps we ought to get the Czechs to install our next tram
system. Seems to be a very good way of doing public transport.

Places like Prague have legacy systems - they never scrapped their
trams. Had British cities kept their trams, they too might have tight
bends (steep gradient aren't an issue - see Sheffield).

If you are going to the trouble of building a modern tramway from
scratch, you probably want fast-ish and high-ish capacity ways to move
large-ish numbers of people, particularly commuters. Threading lines
through old towns and round sharp bends probably doesn't really help
achieve this (like upgrading the GW main line and building Crossrail has
a better case than reopening someone's favourite milk
churn/porter/cat-on-seat rural branch line). You also want to meet
modern standards for accessibility (no climbing up from the road).

Prague has new tram lines in the part of the cities tourists don't reach
- how do they compare to here? How much effort do they put into
protecting newts?

[r***@gmail.com]

Post by Tweed
Having just come back from Prague I started to wonder why new tram lines
(Edinburgh, Nottingham etc) in the UK cost so much and take so long to
build. I seem to recall the Edinburgh system was dogged by having to divert
underground services. Now, knowing almost nothing about the subject I'm
presumably going to make a fool of myself by musing that tram tracks are
very shallow so why do they affect underground services so much. Prague has
a very comprehensive tram network, which seems to have been kept going
through the worst of times when there was little money around. The other
things that struck me was that they managed to thread the trams through the
narrowest of streets, round very tight bends and up very steep gradients,
all the things that are supposed to render British towns unsuitable for
trams. The advantages over buses were clear, no smelly exhaust, much much
faster acceleration, and greater capacity. The entire city seems to operate
without buses (well I didn't see one that belonged to the city transport
operator). Perhaps we ought to get the Czechs to install our next tram
system. Seems to be a very good way of doing public transport.

There are a few issues that have caused this state of affairs.

One issue is that the contractors used to design and build modern tramways in the UK have relatively little experience in the field and have fallen back on "heavy rail" experience and practices, meaning they have over-engineered a lot of the infrastructure. I recall comments along these lines raised with respect to the Croydon system.

Another issue is the services one. First, in some instances the tramways were there first, so the services didn't get installed under the tracks. Second, if you have a more extensive network, diversionary routes may be available that on a simple single line sysetm are not, so the disruption from closing a route to access underground services is less significant on legacy systems.

Regarding tight bends and steep gradients, I'm not aware that this is a particular issue in the UK. Certainly in central Croydon there are some narrow streets with tight bends and steep gradients that are used without problems. Obviously a number of the UK routes have used ex-heavy rail infrastructure which lacks these characteristics.

The general philosophy, though, is that mixed street running is a hindrance to service reliability, so the new lines have tended to feature more off-street track than legacy systems.

Robin

[Basil Jet]

Post by r***@gmail.com
Second, if you have a more extensive network, diversionary routes may be available that on a simple single line sysetm are not, so the disruption from closing a route to access underground services is less significant on legacy systems.

I like that, because it suggests that a more extensive network might be
built more cheaply than a small one, because the services would not have
to be relocated at all!

[AnthonyL]

Post by r***@gmail.com

Post by Tweed
Having just come back from Prague I started to wonder why new tram lines
(Edinburgh, Nottingham etc) in the UK cost so much and take so long to
build. I seem to recall the Edinburgh system was dogged by having to dive=

rt

Post by Tweed
underground services. Now, knowing almost nothing about the subject I'm
presumably going to make a fool of myself by musing that tram tracks are
very shallow so why do they affect underground services so much. Prague h=

as

Post by Tweed
a very comprehensive tram network, which seems to have been kept going
through the worst of times when there was little money around. The other
things that struck me was that they managed to thread the trams through t=

he

Post by Tweed
narrowest of streets, round very tight bends and up very steep gradients,
all the things that are supposed to render British towns unsuitable for
trams. The advantages over buses were clear, no smelly exhaust, much much
faster acceleration, and greater capacity. The entire city seems to opera=

te

Post by Tweed
without buses (well I didn't see one that belonged to the city transport
operator). Perhaps we ought to get the Czechs to install our next tram
system. Seems to be a very good way of doing public transport.

There are a few issues that have caused this state of affairs.
One issue is that the contractors used to design and build modern tramways =
in the UK have relatively little experience in the field and have fallen ba=
ck on "heavy rail" experience and practices, meaning they have over-enginee=
red a lot of the infrastructure. I recall comments along these lines raise=
d with respect to the Croydon system.
Another issue is the services one. First, in some instances the tramways w=
ere there first, so the services didn't get installed under the tracks. Se=
cond, if you have a more extensive network, diversionary routes may be avai=
lable that on a simple single line sysetm are not, so the disruption from c=
losing a route to access underground services is less significant on legacy=
systems.
Regarding tight bends and steep gradients, I'm not aware that this is a par=
ticular issue in the UK. Certainly in central Croydon there are some narro=
w streets with tight bends and steep gradients that are used without proble=
ms. Obviously a number of the UK routes have used ex-heavy rail infrastruc=
ture which lacks these characteristics.
The general philosophy, though, is that mixed street running is a hindrance=
to service reliability, so the new lines have tended to feature more off-s=
treet track than legacy systems.

I suspect there are a number of factors on the Nottingham NET:

In built up areas a lot of the track seems to have been laid on their
own foundation which appears isolated from the rest of the road. The
bed is some 18" wider than the tracks. Presumably this is both to
protect the services and nearby properties from vibration.

There are some tight bends more or less following the left or right
turns at intersections. There are also a couple of steep gradients,
notably into Nottingham (Midland) station.

No doubt maintaining and upgrading legacy tracks simply laid on the
road is a lot easier than putting new routes down where residents in
particular have an expectation of minimum disturbance from running
trams.

Now all we have to understand is the power outages:

http://www.nottinghampost.com/the-nottingham-tram, perhaps a twice
daily ctrl-alt-del is needed :)

[The Real Doctor]

Post by Tweed
Having just come back from Prague I started to wonder why new tram lines
(Edinburgh, Nottingham etc) in the UK cost so much and take so long to
build.

When it was proposed to terminate the Edinburgh line at Haymarket, the
quoted additional cost of running to St Andrew Square (track had been
laid along Princes St, so this was for about 1 mile of track and 2 miles
of overhead) was more than the total cost of the initial Nottingham Tram
system, including track, depot and fleet.

Why? Because Edinburgh City Council is deeply mired in corruption, from
top to bottom, that's why and because the SNP group on the ruling
coalition refused to exercise any oversight over the project.

Ian

[R. Mark Clayton]

Post by The Real Doctor

Post by Tweed
Having just come back from Prague I started to wonder why new tram lines
(Edinburgh, Nottingham etc) in the UK cost so much and take so long to
build.

When it was proposed to terminate the Edinburgh line at Haymarket, the
quoted additional cost of running to St Andrew Square (track had been
laid along Princes St, so this was for about 1 mile of track and 2 miles
of overhead) was more than the total cost of the initial Nottingham Tram
system, including track, depot and fleet.
Why? Because Edinburgh City Council is deeply mired in corruption, from
top to bottom, that's why and because the SNP group on the ruling
coalition refused to exercise any oversight over the project.
Ian

We will see if the inquiry backs you. OTOH blithering incompetence is plainly manifest.

[Primitive Person]

Post by R. Mark Clayton

Post by The Real Doctor

Post by Tweed
Having just come back from Prague I started to wonder why new tram lines
(Edinburgh, Nottingham etc) in the UK cost so much and take so long to
build.

When it was proposed to terminate the Edinburgh line at Haymarket, the
quoted additional cost of running to St Andrew Square (track had been
laid along Princes St, so this was for about 1 mile of track and 2 miles
of overhead) was more than the total cost of the initial Nottingham Tram
system, including track, depot and fleet.
Why? Because Edinburgh City Council is deeply mired in corruption, from
top to bottom, that's why and because the SNP group on the ruling
coalition refused to exercise any oversight over the project.
Ian

We will see if the inquiry backs you. OTOH blithering incompetence is plainly manifest.

Yeah, I choose to believe it was cock-up rather than conspiracy, with some unforeseen circumstances that weren't dealt with very well when discovered. The SNP were ridiculously unhelpful and even branded the trams a "unionist" project. The political interference was ghastly and created a lot of problems. There are still people in Edinburgh who would gleefully rip the whole thing up given half a chance, despite the fact that now it's open the tram line is proving successful.

It's made a profit earlier than planned, and in the time it's been open, bus usage has shown an impressive climb in addition to all the journeys undertaken by tram, so it's given public transport in the city a significant boost, and I'm glad the Leith section is now going ahead.

PP

[t***@gmail.com]

Post by Tweed
Having just come back from Prague I started to wonder why new tram lines
(Edinburgh, Nottingham etc) in the UK cost so much and take so long to
build. I seem to recall the Edinburgh system was dogged by having to divert
underground services. Now, knowing almost nothing about the subject I'm
presumably going to make a fool of myself by musing that tram tracks are
very shallow so why do they affect underground services so much. Prague has
a very comprehensive tram network, which seems to have been kept going
through the worst of times when there was little money around. The other
things that struck me was that they managed to thread the trams through the
narrowest of streets, round very tight bends and up very steep gradients,
all the things that are supposed to render British towns unsuitable for
trams. The advantages over buses were clear, no smelly exhaust, much much
faster acceleration, and greater capacity. The entire city seems to operate
without buses (well I didn't see one that belonged to the city transport
operator). Perhaps we ought to get the Czechs to install our next tram
system. Seems to be a very good way of doing public transport.

[Marland]

Post by Tweed
Having just come back from Prague I started to wonder why new tram lines
(Edinburgh, Nottingham etc) in the UK cost so much and take so long to
build. I seem to recall the Edinburgh system was dogged by having to divert
underground services. Now, knowing almost nothing about the subject I'm
presumably going to make a fool of myself by musing that tram tracks are
very shallow so why do they affect underground services so much. Prague has
a very comprehensive tram network, which seems to have been kept going
through the worst of times when there was little money around. The other
things that struck me was that they managed to thread the trams through the
narrowest of streets, round very tight bends and up very steep gradients,
all the things that are supposed to render British towns unsuitable for
trams. The advantages over buses were clear, no smelly exhaust, much much
faster acceleration, and greater capacity. The entire city seems to operate
without buses (well I didn't see one that belonged to the city transport
operator). Perhaps we ought to get the Czechs to install our next tram
system. Seems to be a very good way of doing public transport.

They are not that shallow ,a girder rail won’t be much less than about 10
inches in depth and then you have the foundations underneath often a
concrete raft that will itself be a foot more before the aggregate base
that will be laid on.
The whole structure has to be strong enough to take the weight of any road
traffic that also uses the road,it would be no use if after a few passes of
a heavily laden goods vehicles the rails have been pushed down into the
foundations.
Unlike a conventional road it isn’t easily dug up and then repaired for
access to services so a lot of the preparation work is moving the services
into ducts and locations where they can still be maintained without
disturbing the tramway.

As for trams in a narrow city streets the UK adopted the car to a much
greater degree than many of the places like Prague, and constant road
alterations caused by prosperity that as you noted was absent in Prague and
other East European towns made keeping Tram and Trolley bus infrastructure
impractical as it would have needed constant alteration in many places.
It is true that some systems were retained in Western European cities but
when looked into harder you would find that many smaller places did give up
their systems.
One I recall is Bremerhaven which when I was working there I noticed that
tram rails were still visible under peeling tarmac,the system had closed in
the 1970’s.

GH

[Ken W]

Post by Marland

Post by Tweed
Having just come back from Prague I started to wonder why new tram lines
(Edinburgh, Nottingham etc) in the UK cost so much and take so long to
build. I seem to recall the Edinburgh system was dogged by having to divert
underground services. Now, knowing almost nothing about the subject I'm
presumably going to make a fool of myself by musing that tram tracks are
very shallow so why do they affect underground services so much. Prague has
a very comprehensive tram network, which seems to have been kept going
through the worst of times when there was little money around. The other
things that struck me was that they managed to thread the trams through the
narrowest of streets, round very tight bends and up very steep gradients,
all the things that are supposed to render British towns unsuitable for
trams. The advantages over buses were clear, no smelly exhaust, much much
faster acceleration, and greater capacity. The entire city seems to operate
without buses (well I didn't see one that belonged to the city transport
operator). Perhaps we ought to get the Czechs to install our next tram
system. Seems to be a very good way of doing public transport.

They are not that shallow ,a girder rail won’t be much less than about 10
inches in depth and then you have the foundations underneath often a
concrete raft that will itself be a foot more before the aggregate base
that will be laid on.
The whole structure has to be strong enough to take the weight of any road
traffic that also uses the road,it would be no use if after a few passes of
a heavily laden goods vehicles the rails have been pushed down into the
foundations.
Unlike a conventional road it isn’t easily dug up and then repaired for
access to services so a lot of the preparation work is moving the services
into ducts and locations where they can still be maintained without
disturbing the tramway.
As for trams in a narrow city streets the UK adopted the car to a much
greater degree than many of the places like Prague, and constant road
alterations caused by prosperity that as you noted was absent in Prague and
other East European towns made keeping Tram and Trolley bus infrastructure
impractical as it would have needed constant alteration in many places.
It is true that some systems were retained in Western European cities but
when looked into harder you would find that many smaller places did give up
their systems.

The modern tram network in Bordeaux negotiates some surprisingly tight
corners. It serves both the city centre and some of the suburbs, including
the fast-expanding docks regeneration area along the river. This has a mix of
retail, residential and leisure uses including the Cité du Vin and Les
Hangars – a row of former warehouses which now form a riverside shopping
centre.

Motorists and bus users have been understandably frustrated by delays and
diversions when new sections of route were installed, but generally people
love le Tramway, which is operated by Keolis. I haven’t got the latest
figures but I was told recently “about 300,000 daily”.

And BTW an all-day ticket can be used on the river bus service as well as
trams and buses.

Post by Marland
One I recall is Bremerhaven which when I was working there I noticed that
tram rails were still visible under peeling tarmac,the system had closed in
the 1970’s.
GH