New Melbourne trams have fewer seats than the old ones but they're longer!
David McLoughlin
diagrams of the new Combino trams ordered by Swanston Trams in
Melbourne.
I am amazed to see that the new trams, despite being much longer than
the existing Melbourne trams, have far fewer seats. I predict when the
public discover this, there will be an uproar in the news media.
The order for 59 Combinos has two sub-orders, for three-section
articulated trams and for five-section articulated trams.
The three-section trams will be 19.08 metres long and from the diagrams
appear to have 28 seats. There are certainly no more than 32.
By comparison, Z1-class trams which they are supposed to replace are
16.6 metres long and have 48 seats.
The five-section Combinos are 28.89 metres long and as far as I can see
from the diagrams have no more than 56 seats, but possibly less (I think
some of the seats in both models are fold-up slots for wheelchairs
rather than standard double seats for ambulent passengers).
By comparison, Melbourne's existing articulated trams, the B classes,
are much shorter at 23.63 metres yet they have comfortable seating for
76 people.
Somebody really seems to have goofed with this new tram order. Longer
trams with fewer seats? The proverbial will hit the fan in a big way
the moment these trams hit the streets or the useless Melbourne news
media get a tip-off.
Combinos are European trams designed for the much shorter tram routes
found in compact European cities, where passengers don't mind standing
for the short journey from home to work/shopping and back etc.
Melbourne's existing trams are Melbourne-designed (and built)
specifically for the much longer tram routes Melbourne has (two of them
the 75 and the 86, are almost 21 km long and many Melbourne routes are
10-15 km long). Thus there have always been many more seats in Melbourne
trams than in European trams.
At present, most passengers on routes such as 1 South Melbourne Beach or
6 Glen Iris or 1 East Coburg are assured of a seat even in peak hour
because the trams used on those lines have at least 48 seats. Up to 100
more passengers can cram in standing but this only happens on the inner
portions of the routes. Longer-distance riders always have or get a
seat.
With the new trams, many long-distance riders will be forced to stand
for their entire journey because there are simply not enough seats. The
problem will be worse if service frequencies are reduced because of
articulated trams replacing bogie trams, which is what happened on most
Melbourne routes where Bs took over.
Franchising the trams out to foreign companies means the franchisees buy
their new trams from Europe to European designs. It's a step backwards.
All previous Melbourne trams have been built in Melbourne to Melbourne
designs for Melbourne conditions.
David McLoughlin
Auckland New Zealand
David Bromage
> Somebody really seems to have goofed with this new tram order. Longer
> trams with fewer seats? The proverbial will hit the fan in a big way
> the moment these trams hit the streets or the useless Melbourne news
> media get a tip-off.
Welcome to reality. Low floor vehicles usually have fewer seats. Wait
until all the older buses are replaced with low floor versions, which also
have fewer seats.
Cheers
David
David McLoughlin
The issue of fewer seats in low-floor buses has been an ongoing debate
in the mtu-t group. It appears that in North America, low-floor buses
are not very well designed and have fewer seats than standard buses
because they don't have seats over the wheel wells, for example. But
low-floor buses here in NZ have as many seats as high-floor buses.
I think the issue with the new Melbourne trams is not that they are
low-floor, but that they are European designed and built for the shorter
routes in compact European cities. European buses and trams have long
had fewer seats than buses and trams in Australia (and NZ and Canada and
the US) where cities sprawl more and transit routes are longer and thus
people are not as happy to stand as they are in Europe.
Ted Gay
"David McLoughlin" <davemc...@iprolink.co.nz> wrote in message
news:399DE6...@iprolink.co.nz...
> Courtesy of Wolfgang Auer in Wien, I have a set of blueprint-style
> diagrams of the new Combino trams ordered by Swanston Trams in
> Melbourne.
>
> I am amazed to see that the new trams, despite being much longer than
> the existing Melbourne trams, have far fewer seats. I predict when the
> public discover this, there will be an uproar in the news media.
>
> The order for 59 Combinos has two sub-orders, for three-section
> articulated trams and for five-section articulated trams.
>
> The three-section trams will be 19.08 metres long and from the diagrams
> appear to have 28 seats. There are certainly no more than 32.
>
> By comparison, Z1-class trams which they are supposed to replace are
> 16.6 metres long and have 48 seats.
>
> The five-section Combinos are 28.89 metres long and as far as I can see
> from the diagrams have no more than 56 seats, but possibly less (I think
> some of the seats in both models are fold-up slots for wheelchairs
> rather than standard double seats for ambulent passengers).
>
<and 2 for the driver! :-)> A German design but built in Melbourne with
Aussie modifications, really makes you think.
In comparison the last Sydney designed tram, the R1 class introduced in
1935, had 56 seats, most had tip over backs therefore 48 passengers could
ride facing forward, whereas all modern trams have fixed seating ensuring
that half the passengers are riding with their back to the direction of
travel or are sitting side on which is not comfortable on any but short
trips.
Regards... Ted
Railway Rasputin3
current trams?
--
Cheers
RR3
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
David McLoughlin
>
> Would the dimension of seats on Combino bigger then those seats on
> current trams?
Looking at the diagrams the seats are smaller.
My point was that the Combinos are European trams designed and built in
Europe for short-distant European tram trips (where most people are
happy to stand for the short distances they travel) , not Melbourne
trams designed and built in Melbourne for the longer average journeys
where long-distance passengers expect to sit for their trip.
Why couldn't Melbourne's new trams have been designed and built in
Melbourne for Melbourne conditions, like all Melbourne trams before
them?
Daniel Bowen
> My point was that the Combinos are European trams designed and built in
> Europe for short-distant European tram trips (where most people are
> happy to stand for the short distances they travel) , not Melbourne
> trams designed and built in Melbourne for the longer average journeys
> where long-distance passengers expect to sit for their trip.
The routes might be longer... are there figures on how long the average
trips are? Sure, the 75 and 86 are long routes... but how many people travel
their entire length?
Daniel
--
Daniel Bowen, Melbourne, Australia
dbo...@custard.REMOVE.net.au
http://www.custard.net.au/bowen/daniel/
Railway Rasputin3
> Why couldn't Melbourne's new trams have been designed and built in
> Melbourne for Melbourne conditions, like all Melbourne trams before
> them?
>
> David McLoughlin
> Auckland New Zealand
overseas desginer. If the contract was won by say EDI or Adtranz, they
would have local knowledge about Melbourne's operating condition and
more experience at the same time......Oh well, it's too late now.....
I won't be surprise if Yarra trams/Connex and Bayside trains found
teething problems with their new toys coming up from Euro.
David McLoughlin
>
> "David McLoughlin" <davemc...@iprolink.co.nz> wrote in message
> news:399E22...@iprolink.co.nz...
> > Europe for short-distant European tram trips (where most people are
> > happy to stand for the short distances they travel) , not Melbourne
> > trams designed and built in Melbourne for the longer average journeys
> > where long-distance passengers expect to sit for their trip.
>
> trips are? Sure, the 75 and 86 are long routes... but how many people travel
> their entire length?
Hardly any. But the average distance travelled by tram passengers in
low-density Melbourne is much less than the average distance travelled
in high-density European cities.
For example, tram lines in say Zurich, Basel and Bern are maybe three or
four kms long on average, but ones in Melbourne are 8 km long on
average.
Transit passengers in sprawling, car-rich cities like Melbourne are much
less inclined to stand in a tram for an 8-km ride than passngers in a
compact city like Basel or Bern or Zurich where they have to stand for
half the distance and time.
David Hansen
<davemc...@iprolink.co.nz> wrote this:-
>Why couldn't Melbourne's new trams have been designed and built in
>Melbourne for Melbourne conditions, like all Melbourne trams before
>them?
Cost perhaps?
David Hansen | david...@NO.spidacom.co.SPAMuk | PGP email preferred
Edinburgh | CI$ number 100024,3247 | key number 5432274D
Due to the amount of spam now killing e-mail I have modified my address
to reply remove SEND NO SPAM.
David Hansen
<ted...@bigpond.com> wrote this:-
>that half the passengers are riding with their back to the direction of
>travel or are sitting side on which is not comfortable on any but short
>trips.
Back to direction of travel is more comfortable. Sideways is fine, if
the vehicle rides reasonably smoothly.
Andrew Box
B/c jeff flogged them off to a european company.
Test For Echo
<399E13...@iprolink.co.nz>...
> David Bromage wrote:
> >
> > David McLoughlin (davemc...@iprolink.co.nz) wrote:
>
> > > Somebody really seems to have goofed with this new tram order.
Longer
> > > trams with fewer seats? The proverbial will hit the fan in a big
way
> > > the moment these trams hit the streets or the useless Melbourne
news
> > > media get a tip-off.
> >
> > Welcome to reality. Low floor vehicles usually have fewer seats.
Wait
> > until all the older buses are replaced with low floor versions,
which also
> > have fewer seats.
>
>
> The issue of fewer seats in low-floor buses has been an ongoing
debate
> in the mtu-t group. It appears that in North America, low-floor buses
> are not very well designed and have fewer seats than standard buses
> because they don't have seats over the wheel wells, for example. But
> low-floor buses here in NZ have as many seats as high-floor buses.
Agreed that our low-floors aren't the best designed in terms of
interior seating. Ironically it was the mobility-challenged persons
these buses were designed to serve that were the first to complain
about the low-floors. Wierd.
> I think the issue with the new Melbourne trams is not that they are
> low-floor, but that they are European designed and built for the
shorter
> routes in compact European cities. European buses and trams have long
> had fewer seats than buses and trams in Australia (and NZ and Canada
and
> the US) where cities sprawl more and transit routes are longer and
thus
> people are not as happy to stand as they are in Europe.
Let's see if I get this straight. Melbourne is purchasing trams from a
European supplier and these trams will be built in Europe and shipped
to Australia. Why can't the Melbourne transit authorities specify an
interior seating design that meets their needs? Or do they not care
about their customers? Australia has designed and built their own trams
in the past, why not this order? Is it because the European product is
better and costs less per unit including shipping? Okay, that's a good
reason for choosing the European bidder. But you'd think the
company/consortium would want to build a product suited to Melbourne.
It's called customer satisfaction.
Just pondering ...
Cheers
Alex
HXP1
news:8nletl$45f$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> I won't be surprise if Yarra trams/Connex and Bayside
> trains found teething problems with their new toys coming
> up from Euro.
Speaking of which I just happened to find myself at a presentation by
Siemens on their new Bayside sparks the other day.
There are a couple of notable design changes as far as the passenger is
concerned, 2 doors per side instead of 3, and 2+2 seating instead of 2+3.
The seating will be a combination of 'bay' & 'airline' seating, and the
seats & aisle will be wider than now.
However, although the car lengths are very close, the new sparks will have a
lower seating capacity.
The theory behind these changes is apparently to provide greater comfort for
the travelling pax, & therefore attract more patronage.
So with more pax & less seats they'd better have a better headway?...
--
HXP1
(now with v6.08 software)
Dave Proctor
news:399E13...@iprolink.co.nz...
>
> The issue of fewer seats in low-floor buses has been an ongoing debate
> in the mtu-t group. It appears that in North America, low-floor buses
> are not very well designed and have fewer seats than standard buses
> because they don't have seats over the wheel wells, for example. But
> low-floor buses here in NZ have as many seats as high-floor buses.
Same in Sydney - without actually counting the number of seats, the low
floors seem to have the same capacity as high floor, AFTER you take into
account that they are wheelchair accessible and therefore have the
wheelchair parking bays.
--
Dave
No man is complete until he is married, then he is finished.
Dave Proctor
> Why couldn't Melbourne's new trams have been designed and built in
> Melbourne for Melbourne conditions, like all Melbourne trams before
> them?
Or just order more of Sydney's Vario trams, which would be ideal (and a
proven product in Australian climate conditions as well).
Matthew Geier
David McLoughlin <davemc...@iprolink.co.nz> wrote:
>Because the trams have been franchised to a European company which is
>buying the new trams from another European company. The idiots probably
>don't even know that all previous Melbourne trams have been built in
>Melbourne and designed for Melbourne conditions.
And that a modern low floor tram design (Sydney's Variotram) was built
in Dandenlong, Victoria already!
Funny, the Victorian industry can build modern low floor trams. Older designs
have been exported. (Hong Kong), yet the new owners find it cheaper to
buy complete units from Europe. Europen wages can't be much lower than here,
we have the engineering talent and the manufacturing capablity.
Probably simply a matter of EU politics and stuff the Australians. After the
last few rounds of rail equipment manufacture mergers, Europe is over stocked
with manufactureing capacity, but no company wants to close a plant incase the
local pollies retailiate and order their next batch from their competition
who DIDN'T close a factory in that country. They would rather spend more on
the Melbourne order and keep a European factory open in order to keep the
local Euopean pollies on side for a much larger order than Melbourne could
ever want.
I also find it stupid that the 2 operators are buying small numbers of
DIFFERENT low floor trams. So over all 2 inventories of foriegn sourced
spare parts will be needed instead of one common pool.
David McLoughlin
> Let's see if I get this straight. Melbourne is purchasing trams from a
> European supplier
Yes
> and these trams will be built in Europe and shipped
> to Australia.
Yes
Why can't the Melbourne transit authorities specify an
> interior seating design that meets their needs?
Because the trams have been franchised to a European company which is
buying the new trams from another European company. The idiots probably
don't even know that all previous Melbourne trams have been built in
Melbourne and designed for Melbourne conditions. I suspect the idiots
responsible have never even been in a tram.
David McLoughlin
>
> On 19 Aug 2000 23:44:03 GMT, mat...@mail.usyd.edu.au (Matthew Geier)
> wrote:
>
> > Probably simply a matter of EU politics and stuff the Australians.
>
Not sold, just franchised for 15 (?) years, by the previous Kennett
Liberal state government. The trains have similarly been franchised.
> >After the
> >last few rounds of rail equipment manufacture mergers, Europe is over stocked
> >with manufactureing capacity, but no company wants to close a plant incase the
> >local pollies retailiate and order their next batch from their competition
> >who DIDN'T close a factory in that country. They would rather spend more on
> >the Melbourne order and keep a European factory open in order to keep the
> >local Euopean pollies on side for a much larger order than Melbourne could
> >ever want.
>
> I find that somewhat hard to believe. Melbourne has one of the
> biggest tram networks in the world, far larger than most European
> systems with the exception of St Petersburg and Vienna.
Regardless, Matthew's account of the EU politics of tram/train builders
is correct. They have been merging all over the world and there is huge
over-capacity in Europe especially now the Soviet Bloc is in history's
dustbin.
AdTranz which was/is one of the European companies got hold of
Commonwealth Engineering at Dandenong (where all Melbourne trams from
1975 on were built, as well as the Sydney ones, many of the Tuen Mun
ones in Hong Kong and even some of Philadelphia's latest subway cars),
then AdTranz itself has been gobbled up/merged with someone else. It's
hard to keep track of. But all the European countries with rolling stock
factories are demanding new trams/trains keep being built there despite
massive overcapacity.
So production of Melbourne's trams shifts from Melbourne to Germany.
Which as I have been saying, means the new trams are designed for
compact European cities and have far fewer seats than Melbourne's trams
despite being much longer than Melbourne's trams.
David McLoughlin
> >So production of Melbourne's trams shifts from Melbourne to Germany.
>
> If you deliberately relinquish control of something you own in
> exchange for cash, then the possibility that something like this
> *might* just happen is not to be entirely excluded.
Actually, the taxpayers of Victoria are paying the franchise companies
hundreds of millions of dollars to operate the trams. The companies did
not pay for the franchises, they are being paid to do so.
Only in Melbourne.
At least here in NZ when our government forced local authorities to sell
their bus systems, the new owners (Stagecoach in Auckland and
Wellington) at least had to pay for them.
> How do the people of Melbourne now feel about the politicians who are
> responsible for this?
They voted Kennett out at the last election. However legally binding
contracts cannot be broken and the new government, quite rightly, is
sticking with them while trying to reduce the worst of the damage, such
trying to reverse the Kennett deal to abolish clearways on inner city
roads after giving the freeways to private companies to turn into
tollways. Abolishing clearways would have a catastrophic effect on tram
time-keeping, which of course was the intention.
Dave Proctor
news:7adupsgt7eef8tqpq...@4ax.com...
> >So production of Melbourne's trams shifts from Melbourne to Germany.
>
> If you deliberately relinquish control of something you own in
> exchange for cash, then the possibility that something like this
> *might* just happen is not to be entirely excluded.
>
> How do the people of Melbourne now feel about the politicians who are
> responsible for this?
They voted them out of office.
Ted Gay
looking that most European trams are built to a narrow loading gauge, even
when the track gauge is 1435mm. They have 1+2 seating not the 2+2 used on
Aussie trams, and then some of their metre gauge trams only have 1+1
seating.
Ted
Ted Gay
"Dave Proctor" <dap...@spambait.ozemail.com.au> wrote in message
news:ZHun5.491907$MB.74...@news6.giganews.com...> news:399E22...@iprolink.co.nz...
>
> > Why couldn't Melbourne's new trams have been designed and built in
> > Melbourne for Melbourne conditions, like all Melbourne trams before
> > them?
>
> proven product in Australian climate conditions as well).
> Dave
>
> No man is complete until he is married, then he is finished.
>
Ted
Ted Gay
"David Hansen" <SENDdavi...@spidacom.co.uk> wrote in message
news:osfspsspb7o24se77...@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 19 Aug 2000 15:18:07 +1000 someone who may be "Ted Gay"
> <ted...@bigpond.com> wrote this:-
>
> >travel or are sitting side on which is not comfortable on any but short
> >trips.
>
> the vehicle rides reasonably smoothly.
>
>
through the tram swinging every seat back over for the new journey. I never
saw a passenger chose to swing the back over and sit facing the rear. On
Sydney buses (new low floor excepted) there are four seats that face the
rear, why are these seats always the last to be taken? Not because they are
the most comfortable surely?
Ted
Dave Proctor
news:rqKn5.34300$c5.9...@newsfeeds.bigpond.com...
> At stub terminals the conductors of Sydney R and R1 class trams would walk
> through the tram swinging every seat back over for the new journey. I
never
> saw a passenger chose to swing the back over and sit facing the rear. On
> Sydney buses (new low floor excepted) there are four seats that face the
> rear, why are these seats always the last to be taken? Not because they
are
> the most comfortable surely?
Facing backwards does not worry me, I choose to face backwards on
Tangarbages, and when the XPT had fixed direction seating, I would always
ask for a backward facing seat (no chance of riff-raff sitting next to you
that way).
--
Dave
Studies have shown that if your parents did not have any children, you
probably won't either.
Ted Gay
"Matthew Geier" <mat...@mail.usyd.edu.au> wrote in message
news:8nn643$171$1...@spacebar.ucc.usyd.edu.au...
> >buying the new trams from another European company. The idiots probably
> >don't even know that all previous Melbourne trams have been built in
> >Melbourne and designed for Melbourne conditions.
>
> in Dandenlong, Victoria already!
> Funny, the Victorian industry can build modern low floor trams. Older
designs
> have been exported. (Hong Kong), yet the new owners find it cheaper to
> buy complete units from Europe. Europen wages can't be much lower than
here,
> we have the engineering talent and the manufacturing capablity.
>
the
> last few rounds of rail equipment manufacture mergers, Europe is over
stocked
> with manufactureing capacity, but no company wants to close a plant incase
the
> local pollies retailiate and order their next batch from their competition
> who DIDN'T close a factory in that country. They would rather spend more
on
> the Melbourne order and keep a European factory open in order to keep the
> local Euopean pollies on side for a much larger order than Melbourne could
> ever want.
>
> DIFFERENT low floor trams. So over all 2 inventories of foriegn sourced
> spare parts will be needed instead of one common pool.
>
tenders from other EU countries must be considered. Which gives the
following results:
New system Manchester trams built in Italy
Sheffield Germany
Birmingham Italy
Croydon Austria
Nottingham Derby!!
that's right, only 16miles up the road, somebody stuffed up!!
Strasbourg France York and
Derby UK
Also the new trams for Köln (Cologne) Germany are the same as those for
Croydon, built in an Austrian factory owned by Bombardier the Canadian mob
who have factories in other European countries and are now the new owners of
Adtranz.
Ted
Graeme Cleak
Franchises work. All the big players (mainly British Bus Transport
Companies) established Bid Teams in Melbourne. And I dont think that CGEA
and National Express outbid SERCO , Firstgroup, Stagecoach etc by trading
in Peppercorns etc. for the 'privilege' of being a Franchisee. Try Aus
Dollars.
Graeme Cleak
David McLoughlin <davemc...@iprolink.co.nz> wrote in message
news:399F39...@iprolink.co.nz...
Juergen Groebner-Bruckner
new Adtranz trams and new Variotrams very similar to the Sydney trams. They all
have a 2+2 sitting. The network in my Area is a 1000mm network, with 4
tramcompanies in 3 large cities. The longes Tramline is about 35 km and we have
a circeline which connected the towns of Mannheim, Heidelberg, Weinheim and
Viernheim who has a lenght of 50 km´s
Sorry for the bad English.
Greetings from Germany
Jürgen
p.s. our local powerstation is working with the cheap australian coal, not with
the expensive German coal.
David McLoughlin
> How wide will the new Melbourne trams be? David I think you are over
> looking that most European trams are built to a narrow loading gauge, even
> when the track gauge is 1435mm. They have 1+2 seating not the 2+2 used on
> Aussie trams, and then some of their metre gauge trams only have 1+1
> seating.
They will be 2.650 metres wide which compares with 2.67m for the Zs.
Some of the few seats in them ARE 2+2. Some are 2+1 and others are, in
think the term is "transverse," ie the seats are side-on to the
direction of travel as was the case in the W2 saloons.
Richard Hunt
(David McLoughlin) wrote:
> AdTranz which was/is one of the European companies got hold of
> Commonwealth Engineering at Dandenong (where all Melbourne trams from
> 1975 on were built, as well as the Sydney ones, many of the Tuen Mun
> ones in Hong Kong and even some of Philadelphia's latest subway cars),
> then AdTranz itself has been gobbled up/merged with someone else. It's
> hard to keep track of. But all the European countries with rolling stock
> factories are demanding new trams/trains keep being built there despite
> massive overcapacity.
AdTranz has been sold by DaimerChrysler and now belongs to Bombardier of
Canada, http://www.bombardier.com
Richard Hunt
Calcaria Software Services, Tadcaster, UK
http://www.calcaria.co.uk
Exile on Market Street
> Test For Echo wrote:
>
> Why can't the Melbourne transit authorities specify an
> > interior seating design that meets their needs?
>
>
> Because the trams have been franchised to a European company which is
> buying the new trams from another European company. The idiots probably
> don't even know that all previous Melbourne trams have been built in
> Melbourne and designed for Melbourne conditions. I suspect the idiots
> responsible have never even been in a tram.
I understand everything you're saying except the built-in-Melbourne part.
Understanding the local conditions is essential if you're going to have
equipment that works properly and keeps the passengers happy, but it
doesn't logically follow that the equipment has to be built where it will
be used.
Else we shouldn't have gotten our new M4 Market-Frankford El cars from a
Sydney manufacturing plant owned by a German company (I think the Swedish
firm had already sold its share to the German one).
--
Sandy Smith, University Relations / 215.898.1423 / smi...@pobox.upenn.edu
Managing Editor, _Pennsylvania Current_ cur...@pobox.upenn.edu
Penn Web Team -- Web Editor webm...@isc.upenn.edu
I speak for myself here, not Penn http://pobox.upenn.edu/~smiths/
"I have friends who live in Denver...They gnash their teeth when I tell
them that Denver is Wichita with mountains..."
-------"Captain Billy" in the _Salon_ "Table Talk" thread on Kansas City--
james
Exile on Market Street wrote:
>
>
> >
> > Why can't the Melbourne transit authorities specify an
> > > interior seating design that meets their needs?
> >
> >
> >
> I understand everything you're saying except the built-in-Melbourne part.
>
> Understanding the local conditions is essential if you're going to have
> equipment that works properly and keeps the passengers happy, but it
> doesn't logically follow that the equipment has to be built where it will
> be used.
>
> Else we shouldn't have gotten our new M4 Market-Frankford El cars from a
> Sydney manufacturing plant owned by a German company (I think the Swedish
> firm had already sold its share to the German one).
In the case of the poorly-designed Market-Frankford cars, SEPTA got what
it ordered. No matter where the cars were built, they would still have
come with small seats and poor passenger flow. SEPTA wanted them that
way for some reason. The cars look much better than the old Budd cas and
they're much cooler, but the Budd cars were much better designed when it
comes to seating arrangements and door locations. The Budd cars also had
a sturdier interior. The seats were not as "plush," but they withstood
the average wear and tear the average overweight American posterior puts
on transit seating. SEPTA had almost no choice but to order new el cars
due to safety concerns and outlandishly costly maintenance practices for
the Budd cars, but I can't imagine these cars will not be as difficult
to maintain in the near future.
SEPTA has a way of having problems with new car orders. The Broad Street
Subway cars built by Kawasaki had problems with the doors soon after
their arrival. The Kawasaki trolleys had wheel and break problems, the
AM General trackless trolleys had electrical problems, and the new el
cars were delayed for years for various reasons. I don't know if the new
Norristown High Speed Line cars had problems, but I imagine they did.
One wonders if all transit systems experience such problems with nearly
every order of new cars they receive. Since SEPTA had problems with
various manufacturers, I wonder if SEPTA's design requirements are at
fault. I cannot imagine a rail car manufacturer believing it could
build cars for SEPTA without enduring years of painful rebuilds and
redesigns.
Alex Campbell
> In article <399EF8...@iprolink.co.nz>, David McLoughlin
> <davemc...@iprolink.co.nz> wrote:
>
> > Test For Echo wrote:
> >
> > Why can't the Melbourne transit authorities specify an
> > > interior seating design that meets their needs?
> >
> >
> > Because the trams have been franchised to a European company which is
> > buying the new trams from another European company. The idiots probably
> > don't even know that all previous Melbourne trams have been built in
> > Melbourne and designed for Melbourne conditions. I suspect the idiots
> > responsible have never even been in a tram.
>
> I understand everything you're saying except the built-in-Melbourne part.
>
> Understanding the local conditions is essential if you're going to have
> equipment that works properly and keeps the passengers happy, but it
> doesn't logically follow that the equipment has to be built where it will
> be used.
>
If I was wanting to be picky I would note that David is quick to promote the
sale of foreign made transit vehicles into the US but seems less amused at the
idea of importing transit vehicles into Australia. :))
Seriously however were Wolfgang's plans for the actual trams ordered for
Melbourne or just the generic Combino plans? Things like seating plans tend to
get tailored to each individual customers needs. I thought the owners of
Swanston trams ran a number of successful French light rail systems and did
have some expertise in the area or was that Yarra Trams?
Alex Campbell
David McLoughlin
> If I was wanting to be picky I would note that David is quick to promote the
> sale of foreign made transit vehicles into the US but seems less amused at the
> idea of importing transit vehicles into Australia. :))
I have never promoted any such thing, I have merely observed the irony
of how the US goes out of its way to prevent the importation of many
fine unsubsidised NZ products into the US but insists other countries
including NZ allow absolutely free access for subsidised and protected
US goods.
> Seriously however were Wolfgang's plans for the actual trams ordered for
> Melbourne or just the generic Combino plans? Things like seating plans tend to
> get tailored to each individual customers needs.
No, they just bought off-the shelf Combinos with the standard seating
layout, identical to the recent Amsterdam order.
Exile on Market Street
<davemc...@iprolink.co.nz> wrote:
> I have never promoted any such thing, I have merely observed the irony
> of how the US goes out of its way to prevent the importation of many
> fine unsubsidised NZ products into the US but insists other countries
> including NZ allow absolutely free access for subsidised and protected
> US goods.
Now that is a valid -- and interesting -- point.
I guess that there is no US kiwifruit growers' lobby to offend, whereas
OTOH, the cattle ranchers would, er, have a cow if we allowed too much
foreign beef in. Besides, that foreign stuff doesn't have those beneficial
growth hormones the domestic product does.
Alex Campbell
> I have never promoted any such thing, I have merely observed the irony
> of how the US goes out of its way to prevent the importation of many
> fine unsubsidised NZ products into the US but insists other countries
> including NZ allow absolutely free access for subsidised and protected
> US goods.
>
Fair call... :)
>
>
> > Seriously however were Wolfgang's plans for the actual trams ordered for
> > Melbourne or just the generic Combino plans? Things like seating plans tend to
> > get tailored to each individual customers needs.
>
> No, they just bought off-the shelf Combinos with the standard seating
> layout, identical to the recent Amsterdam order.
Maybe for Swanston Trams buying an off the shelf product from Europe was basically a
way of them getting new trams on the road at the cheapest price, and in the shortest
time frame, to fulfill State government requirements on their franchise for new low
floor trams. A do minimum solution which is not necessarily the most customer
focussed.
Genuinely curious on this one. Easy to make assumptions on this sort of thing, but
if Wolfgang' s plans say that is the plan for Melbourne then that will be the
seating plan for Melbourne. Otherwise minor details like internal trims, locations
of wheelchair positions, flip down seats and grab rails may be varied to meet the
requirements of each customer, even on a so called standard product. Seating
positions which are "built in" however such as over wheel sets etc obviously won't
be varied on a standard off the shelf product.
Will be watching with interest when the first of these hit the streets in Melbourne.
When are they due to be delivered?
Alex Campbell
David McLoughlin
>
>
> > I have never promoted any such thing, I have merely observed the irony
> > of how the US goes out of its way to prevent the importation of many
> > fine unsubsidised NZ products into the US but insists other countries
> > including NZ allow absolutely free access for subsidised and protected
> > US goods.
>
>
> I guess that there is no US kiwifruit growers' lobby to offend, whereas
> OTOH, the cattle ranchers would, er, have a cow if we allowed too much
> foreign beef in.
The US Government right now has sanctions, quotas and tarrifs against
the import of unsubsidised NZ lamb following protests from the heavily
subsidised US lamb farmers whose products are fatty and tasteless while
NZ lamb is lean and yummy.
There is now a kiwifruit industry in California (which got vines from
NZ) and Californian kiwifruit comes to NZ now in our off-season
(remember the seasons are reversed between our countries) and it is only
a matter of time before the Californian kiwifruit growers get the US
government to ban the import of NZ kiwifruit.
David McLoughlin
> Will be watching with interest when the first of these hit the streets in Melbourne.
> When are they due to be delivered?
>
2002.
The other tram company, Yarra trams, is buying another similar model,
Citadis I think, also being imported.
They are not Wolfgang's plans but plans he photocopied and sent me from
a German transport magazine which had an article on the Melbourne
purchase. It was the May 2000 issue of Stadverkehr and the plans were
clearly marked (in German) as being the ones for Melbourne and like the
Amsterdam ones.
If I had a scanner I could put them up somewhere but I don't. I haven't
looked but I suspect Siemens will have them on a website somewhere.
Exile on Market Street
<davemc...@iprolink.co.nz> wrote:
> The US Government right now has sanctions, quotas and tarrifs against
> the import of unsubsidised NZ lamb following protests from the heavily
> subsidised US lamb farmers whose products are fatty and tasteless while
> NZ lamb is lean and yummy.
Well, I guess that explains why I don't hear radio ads promoting New
Zealand spring lamb any more.
I wonder also how much of this can be explained by relative size and
geography? After all, there are lots of people in the US who felt -- and
still feel -- that they would be (are being) hurt by NAFTA, yet that went
through and those trucks and trains are rolling freely across the US-Mexico
border now.
Perhaps if NZ had a population closer to that of Mexico City alone or
weren't an ocean and a hemisphere away, the calculus would be different in
Washington, sad to say.
> There is now a kiwifruit industry in California (which got vines from
> NZ) and Californian kiwifruit comes to NZ now in our off-season
> (remember the seasons are reversed between our countries) and it is only
> a matter of time before the Californian kiwifruit growers get the US
> government to ban the import of NZ kiwifruit.
Given that climactic fact, I think it would be stupid for the Californians
to do that. But as we see all the time, stupidity hasn't been outlawed.
Ian Jelf
<davemc...@iprolink.co.nz> writes>> news:399E22...@iprolink.co.nz...
>> > My point was that the Combinos are European trams designed and built in
>> > Europe for short-distant European tram trips (where most people are
>> > happy to stand for the short distances they travel) , not Melbourne
>> > trams designed and built in Melbourne for the longer average journeys
>> > where long-distance passengers expect to sit for their trip.
>>
>> The routes might be longer... are there figures on how long the average
>> trips are? Sure, the 75 and 86 are long routes... but how many people travel
>> their entire length?
>
>
>Hardly any. But the average distance travelled by tram passengers in
>low-density Melbourne is much less than the average distance travelled
>in high-density European cities.
>
>For example, tram lines in say Zurich, Basel and Bern are maybe three or
>four kms long on average, but ones in Melbourne are 8 km long on
>average.
>
>Transit passengers in sprawling, car-rich cities like Melbourne are much
>less inclined to stand in a tram for an 8-km ride than passngers in a
>compact city like Basel or Bern or Zurich where they have to stand for
>half the distance and time.
Although my knowledge is Melbourne is, er, "limited", sop far (!), I can
categorically say that David is absolutely right on this. Even if
people don't habitually ride from - say - Burwood or Bundoora into the
city, distances on most European systems are generally considerably
shorter.
I wouldn't suggest that trams *have* to be built in Melbourne top suit
local conditions (Midland Metro has snazzy Italian trams and Strasbourg
has truly *beautiful* British ones, both of which suit local
conditions). But I would certainly suggest that more attentions should
have been given to the specific characteristics of Melbourne in
selecting new trams. After all, a change to seating arrangements is a
(relatively) minor affair.......
--
Ian Jelf http://www.bluebadge.demon.co.uk
Birmingham, UK
Registered "Blue Badge" Tourist Guide
for the Heart of England and London
David McLoughlin
> Hardly any. But the average distance travelled by tram passengers in
> low-density Melbourne is much less than the average distance travelled
> in high-density European cities.
Whoops! What I meant to say was the average distance travelled by tram
passengers in low-density Melbourne is LONGER than the average distance
travelled by passengers of the much shorter lines in high-density
European cities.
WooF
On Wed, 23 Aug 2000, David McLoughlin wrote:
> Exile on Market Street wrote:
> >
> > In article <39A248...@iprolink.co.nz>, David McLoughlin
> > <davemc...@iprolink.co.nz> wrote:
> >
> > > I have never promoted any such thing, I have merely observed the irony
> > > of how the US goes out of its way to prevent the importation of many
> > > fine unsubsidised NZ products into the US but insists other countries
> > > including NZ allow absolutely free access for subsidised and protected
> > > US goods.
Rather like my own experience with the North American Free Trade
Agreement: since that thing became a ratified treaty, it's been
substantially MORE difficult to move things (books, magazines,
color transparencies for printing magazines) across the
US/Canadian border than it was before.
George Scithers of owls...@netaxs.com
Bob Tiernan
> David McLoughlin wrote:
> > I have never promoted any such thing, I have merely
> > observed the irony of how the US goes out of its way
> > to prevent the importation of many fine unsubsidised
> > NZ products into the US but insists other countries
> > including NZ allow absolutely free access for
> > subsidised and protected US goods.
The European Community cut out New Zealand (and other
non-European places) when it comes to various imports
like fabulous NZ leg of lamb in order to be able to
sell meat to each other. The EC has been far worse
regarding such imports.
> Rather like my own experience with the North American Free Trade
> Agreement: since that thing became a ratified treaty, it's been
> substantially MORE difficult to move things (books, magazines,
> color transparencies for printing magazines) across the
> US/Canadian border than it was before.
NAFTA is a treaty but it was called an "agreement" so
as to avoid the Constitutional requirement that it
be passed by Congress with a 2/3rds majority instead
of a simple majority. This is an outrage that was
as usual ignored by the media as well as the
American people who have been taught that the
Constitution is a "living" document so the rules
can change day to day.
NAFTA and GATT are not free or fair trade, but managed
trade. I sympathize with those who protest them (as
well as the WTO and IMF), but they do so for the
wrong reasons, and with misguided misconceptions.
Bob Tiernan
"The policy of the American government is to leave
their citizens free, neither restraining them nor
aiding them in their pursuits."
-- Thomas Jefferson