London Transport (uk.transport.london) Discussion of all forms of transport in London.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Old February 8th 19, 03:14 AM posted to uk.railway,uk.transport.london
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: Oct 2014
Posts: 2,872
Default DfT favours battery trams

The DfT remains consistent in its dislike of OHLE

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/battery-powered-trams-to-beat-congestion-pzz3p9jk3?shareToken=d7efc8230f20d995b8ea4bff5daae 175





  #2   Report Post  
Old February 8th 19, 09:46 AM posted to uk.railway,uk.transport.london
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: Feb 2019
Posts: 1
Default DfT favours battery trams

On Fri, 8 Feb 2019 04:14:55 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
The DfT remains consistent in its dislike of OHLE

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/b...-congestion-pz
z3p9jk3?shareToken=d7efc8230f20d995b8ea4bff5daae1 75



Not ideal but better than no tram at all I suppose. Presumably they'll need
charge points along the route or at each end.

  #3   Report Post  
Old February 8th 19, 09:58 AM posted to uk.railway,uk.transport.london
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: Aug 2018
Posts: 4
Default DfT favours battery trams

On 08/02/19 4:14, Recliner wrote:
The DfT remains consistent in its dislike of OHLE

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/battery-powered-trams-to-beat-congestion-pzz3p9jk3?shareToken=d7efc8230f20d995b8ea4bff5daae 175



As usual, the incompetent DfT only thinks about short term costs of
initial construction, not the long term running / operating costs.

Batteries have a finite life. You can recharge them, but they eventually
deteriorate, hold less charge, and have to be replaced - and they are
not cheap to replace.

Moreover, you use additional energy to convey the weight of the
batteries on every journey, instead of getting energy from fixed
overhead wires to move a vehicle that is lighter due to the absence of
batteries.

And before anyone suggests fuel cells, they also have finite lives, and
to function, they often rely on the presence of rare, expensive,
precious metals (platinum, palladium, rhodium, etc.)

  #4   Report Post  
Old February 8th 19, 10:11 AM posted to uk.railway,uk.transport.london
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: Feb 2019
Posts: 1
Default DfT favours battery trams

On Fri, 8 Feb 2019 10:58:55 +0000
Bevan Price wrote:
On 08/02/19 4:14, Recliner wrote:
The DfT remains consistent in its dislike of OHLE


https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/b...-congestion-pz
z3p9jk3?shareToken=d7efc8230f20d995b8ea4bff5daae1 75



As usual, the incompetent DfT only thinks about short term costs of
initial construction, not the long term running / operating costs.


Sums up all government departments since the year dot. I suspect it'll be a
case of accept battery trams or we'll give you a busway.

  #5   Report Post  
Old February 8th 19, 11:15 AM posted to uk.railway,uk.transport.london
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: Jul 2003
Posts: 1,372
Default DfT favours battery trams

On 08/02/2019 10:58, Bevan Price wrote:
On 08/02/19 4:14, Recliner wrote:
The DfT remains consistent in its dislike of OHLE

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/battery-powered-trams-to-beat-congestion-pzz3p9jk3?shareToken=d7efc8230f20d995b8ea4bff5daae 175




As usual, the incompetent DfT only thinks about short term costs of
initial construction, not the long term running / operating costs.

Batteries have a finite life. You can recharge them, but they eventually
deteriorate, hold less charge, and have to be replaced - and they are
not cheap to replace.

Moreover, you use additional energy to convey the weight of the
batteries on every journey, instead of getting energy from fixed
overhead wires to move a vehicle that is lighter due to the absence of
batteries.

And before anyone suggests fuel cells, they also have finite lives, and
to function, they often rely on the presence of rare, expensive,
precious metals (platinum, palladium, rhodium, etc.)


Though once you've done the difficult bit of the infrastructure,
actually getting the tracks in the road, adding OLE later is a much
simpler engineering task.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.



  #6   Report Post  
Old February 8th 19, 12:07 PM posted to uk.railway,uk.transport.london
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: Feb 2019
Posts: 1
Default DfT favours battery trams

In message , Recliner
writes
The DfT remains consistent in its dislike of OHLE

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/b...to-beat-conges
tion-pzz3p9jk3?shareToken=d7efc8230f20d995b8ea4bff5daae 175


My preference is clockwork.

Brian
--
Brian Howie
  #7   Report Post  
Old February 8th 19, 01:06 PM posted to uk.transport.london,uk.railway
Bob Bob is offline
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: Apr 2011
Posts: 84
Default DfT favours battery trams

Graeme Wall wrote:
On 08/02/2019 10:58, Bevan Price wrote:
On 08/02/19 4:14, Recliner wrote:
The DfT remains consistent in its dislike of OHLE

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/battery-powered-trams-to-beat-congestion-pzz3p9jk3?shareToken=d7efc8230f20d995b8ea4bff5daae 175





As usual, the incompetent DfT only thinks about short term costs of
initial construction, not the long term running / operating costs.

Batteries have a finite life. You can recharge them, but they eventually
deteriorate, hold less charge, and have to be replaced - and they are
not cheap to replace.

Moreover, you use additional energy to convey the weight of the
batteries on every journey, instead of getting energy from fixed
overhead wires to move a vehicle that is lighter due to the absence of
batteries.

And before anyone suggests fuel cells, they also have finite lives, and
to function, they often rely on the presence of rare, expensive,
precious metals (platinum, palladium, rhodium, etc.)


Though once you've done the difficult bit of the infrastructure,
actually getting the tracks in the road, adding OLE later is a much
simpler engineering task.


It is provided you’ve done the work to properly isolate the track return
current to prevent electrolytic corrosion problems. If not, it probably
means ripping the whole lot up again.

Robin

  #8   Report Post  
Old February 8th 19, 01:46 PM posted to uk.railway,uk.transport.london
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: Feb 2018
Posts: 41
Default DfT favours battery trams

bob wrote:
Graeme Wall wrote:
On 08/02/2019 10:58, Bevan Price wrote:
On 08/02/19 4:14, Recliner wrote:
The DfT remains consistent in its dislike of OHLE

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/battery-powered-trams-to-beat-congestion-pzz3p9jk3?shareToken=d7efc8230f20d995b8ea4bff5daae 175





As usual, the incompetent DfT only thinks about short term costs of
initial construction, not the long term running / operating costs.

Batteries have a finite life. You can recharge them, but they eventually
deteriorate, hold less charge, and have to be replaced - and they are
not cheap to replace.

Moreover, you use additional energy to convey the weight of the
batteries on every journey, instead of getting energy from fixed
overhead wires to move a vehicle that is lighter due to the absence of
batteries.

And before anyone suggests fuel cells, they also have finite lives, and
to function, they often rely on the presence of rare, expensive,
precious metals (platinum, palladium, rhodium, etc.)


Though once you've done the difficult bit of the infrastructure,
actually getting the tracks in the road, adding OLE later is a much
simpler engineering task.


It is provided you’ve done the work to properly isolate the track return
current to prevent electrolytic corrosion problems. If not, it probably
means ripping the whole lot up again.


Or use twin conductors like a trolley bus.
There was a short section In Greenwich when the Royal Observatory was
still located there where stray current even from normal track would have
affected some instrumentation.
They were rare though and I don’t immediately recall another UK
installation.
Having gone to the trouble of avoiding overhead returning a few years later
and putting up twice as much would hardly be popular.


GH


  #9   Report Post  
Old February 8th 19, 02:08 PM posted to uk.railway,uk.transport.london
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: Jun 2018
Posts: 40
Default DfT favours battery trams

On 08/02/2019 10:58, Bevan Price wrote:
On 08/02/19 4:14, Recliner wrote:
The DfT remains consistent in its dislike of OHLE

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/battery-powered-trams-to-beat-congestion-pzz3p9jk3?shareToken=d7efc8230f20d995b8ea4bff5daae 175




As usual, the incompetent DfT only thinks about short term costs of
initial construction, not the long term running / operating costs.

Batteries have a finite life. You can recharge them, but they eventually
deteriorate, hold less charge, and have to be replaced - and they are
not cheap to replace.

Moreover, you use additional energy to convey the weight of the
batteries on every journey, instead of getting energy from fixed
overhead wires to move a vehicle that is lighter due to the absence of
batteries.

And before anyone suggests fuel cells, they also have finite lives, and
to function, they often rely on the presence of rare, expensive,
precious metals (platinum, palladium, rhodium, etc.)


All of those factors would be included in the appraisal of costs and
benefits of competing options - bus, battery tram, OHLE etc - over the
the life of the project.

I recognise however that many proponents of trams argue that that is the
wrong approach, and that conventional overhead powered trams ought to be
chosen even if they will cost more for the same quantifiable benefits,
because they are just better.


--
Robin
reply-to address is (intended to be) valid
  #10   Report Post  
Old February 8th 19, 02:54 PM posted to uk.railway,uk.transport.london
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: Jan 2015
Posts: 170
Default DfT favours battery trams

Marland wrote:
bob wrote:
Graeme Wall wrote:
On 08/02/2019 10:58, Bevan Price wrote:
On 08/02/19 4:14, Recliner wrote:
The DfT remains consistent in its dislike of OHLE

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/battery-powered-trams-to-beat-congestion-pzz3p9jk3?shareToken=d7efc8230f20d995b8ea4bff5daae 175





As usual, the incompetent DfT only thinks about short term costs of
initial construction, not the long term running / operating costs.

Batteries have a finite life. You can recharge them, but they eventually
deteriorate, hold less charge, and have to be replaced - and they are
not cheap to replace.

Moreover, you use additional energy to convey the weight of the
batteries on every journey, instead of getting energy from fixed
overhead wires to move a vehicle that is lighter due to the absence of
batteries.

And before anyone suggests fuel cells, they also have finite lives, and
to function, they often rely on the presence of rare, expensive,
precious metals (platinum, palladium, rhodium, etc.)


Though once you've done the difficult bit of the infrastructure,
actually getting the tracks in the road, adding OLE later is a much
simpler engineering task.


It is provided you’ve done the work to properly isolate the track return
current to prevent electrolytic corrosion problems. If not, it probably
means ripping the whole lot up again.


Or use twin conductors like a trolley bus.
There was a short section In Greenwich when the Royal Observatory was
still located there where stray current even from normal track would have
affected some instrumentation.
They were rare though and I don’t immediately recall another UK
installation.
Having gone to the trouble of avoiding overhead returning a few years later
and putting up twice as much would hardly be popular.


That would necessitate use of trolley poles, where pantographs are the
current standard fitment for new tramways.

I suppose you could have twin pantographs as fitted for 3-phase on certain
mountain railways, though you might get polarity issues on single track
sections, plus I suspect the OLE then needs to be aligned more accurately,
thus making it more intrusive.


Anna Noyd-Dryver



Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Borismaster battery Stephen[_2_] London Transport 2 April 24th 12 09:26 PM
Battery loco at Epping martyn dawe London Transport 1 September 3rd 09 09:28 PM
L.U. Battery Locomotives Jon Biglowe London Transport 1 July 23rd 09 01:21 PM
Boris' battery drive - London to go green for electric cars... Mizter T London Transport 26 May 30th 09 02:41 PM
DfT consults on extra rail powers for Mayor TravelBot London Transport News 0 March 12th 06 07:40 PM


All times are GMT. The time now is 08:39 PM.

Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2019 London Banter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about London Transport"

 

Copyright © 2017