Trackless Trolleys

They do have some nice qualities. I think it was discussed for Washington street, but like everything else, put off. I wouldn't mind seeing more usage, but you'd have to fight ridiculous NIMBY wars to expand the wire network, and don't forget the power infrastructure behind it.

If you want to see lots of trolley buses, go to SF. They're the best vehicle at climbing hills, and they get plenty of use out west. Seattle too, if memory serves correctly.
 
Matthew said:
If you want to see lots of trolley buses, go to SF. They're the best vehicle at climbing hills, and they get plenty of use out west. Seattle too, if memory serves correctly.
Click to expand...

Vancouver, BC also has quite a few trackless trolley routes all around the city.
 
NIMBY's hate new overhead wires. I've head that Mayor Menino does as well.

The old MTA wanted to extend the North Cambridge trackless trolley line up to Arlington Center (or Arlington Heights) in the early 1960's but was stopped by NIMBY's. The NIMBYs are even more ubiquitous and virulent today, so new trackless trolley lines now have a snowball's chance.
 
Norumbega said:
Having recently moved to Watertown, I've been charmed and impressed by the trackless trolleys that operate between here and Harvard Square. After doing some cursory research on Google, I was surprised to learn that the trackless routes are in fact vestigial trolley lines, and that following the end of regular trolley service in the 1940s and 50s, trackless trolleys predominated in many parts of the city.

Before becoming a daily user I never would have guessed, but the trackless trolley is a fantastic vehicle. It is quieter and more spacious than a bus, does not produce any emissions, and they seem to have better acceleration than regular buses.

I'm curious, with the advent of the Silver Line on the Waterfront if we might see expansion of trackless trolley service elsewhere in the city (along the Washington Street corridor, for example, or perhaps as the Silver Line expands to Chelsea.

I also wondered if the existing Cambridge/Watertown trackless trolley network is in danger of being fully bustituted in the future-- I notice that the 73 is all diesel buses these days. I know the reason for that is road construction in Belmont, but it's not hard to imagine the T turning a temporary suspension into a permanent one. The 72 and 77A also seem to be more bus than trackless trolley as well.

I'm sure there are downsides to the trackless trolley-- certainly when the poles become disconnected from the wire, it is an inconvenience (albeit a minor one), and I'm sure that maintaining a captive and mechanically unique fleet of vehicles is not cheap for the T.

...and yet, the trackless trolleys are such a pleasure to ride and seem to have a tremendous upside and wide potential applications (particularly the dual mode buses used on the Waterfront Silver Line).
Click to expand...

The Route 72 trackless is also replaced by diesels right now because of roadway construction on Huron Ave. and because of planned building construction at the turn-around loop at the Harvard Sq, end of the 72 (at Bennett St.) that will block the wire when it starts.

The MBTA owns 28 of the trackless trolleys (also called electric trolley buses or ETBs) that were built in 2004, They won't be considered depreciated for federal value (federal money was used for their purchase) until 2019, for that reason alone, they have a strong incentive to reopen the 72 and 73 when the construction projects impacting the routes are complete. They are also taking advantage of the shut down to replace and upgrade some of the line poles and other infrastructure items.

The MBTA strongly considered trackless trolleys for the Silver Line Washington St. in the late 1980s once it was clear that the Feds would not fund a Green Line extension because of the proximity of the route to the then new Orange Line corridor. However, NIMBY opposition to the wires in Chinatown began to build before they even got serious about construction and plans were changed to use CNG powered buses.

Besides the MBTA, the only other trackless operations in the U.S. are a few lines in Philadelphia, a small network in Dayton OH, a moderate sized network in Seattle, and the large network in San Francisco. Vancouver is the only Canadian operator. With the small demand, the cost of the vehicles is more expensive than a diesel or CNG bus. There have been major developments in the bus building industry in recent years for electric buses powered by batteries that can be quickly recharged. There are two specialty builders that are selling them now (Proterra and BYD) and the three large bus builders are all working on quick charge battery buses of their own. If these continue to become more affordable and capable of full heavy duty operation, it could become an alternative to the trackless trolley, offering the benefits of an electric bus without the cost and issues of building/maintaining an overhead wire network.
 
How will the T keep the 71 running if the turnaround loop is closed for construction?
 
Battery buses will probably be nice and helpful for many routes, but they can't fully replace TTs on hill climbing. The power/weight ratio of drawing from the wire and not carrying your own generator/battery is just unbeatable.
 
Matthew said:
Battery buses will probably be nice and helpful for many routes, but they can't fully replace TTs on hill climbing. The power/weight ratio of drawing from the wire and not carrying your own generator/battery is just unbeatable.
Click to expand...

Does anyone know if the T is considering trialing the inductively charged battery bus options that are starting to appear? Wireless charging is embedded in the road at major stops and layover points (anywhere there is significant, predictable dwell time). They need a lot less on-board battery, so have performance more like a trackless trolley.

You do have to build out an electrical infrastructure for the charging points.

Here is an example of inductive charging in action in Korea:
http://www.wired.com/autopia/2013/08/induction-charged-buses/
 
JeffDowntown said:
Does anyone know if the T is considering trialing the inductively charged battery bus options that are starting to appear? Wireless charging is embedded in the road at major stops and layover points (anywhere there is significant, predictable dwell time). They need a lot less on-board battery, so have performance more like a trackless trolley.

You do have to build out an electrical infrastructure for the charging points.

Here is an example of inductive charging in action in Korea:
http://www.wired.com/autopia/2013/08/induction-charged-buses/
Click to expand...

They initiated an engineering trial 12 years ago where 2 extra low-floor bus carbodies of theirs were to be converted into magnetic induction battery buses, but the deal with their contractor fell through and the pilot shells were never fitted with engines. The empty shells are still stored on the property sans any guts: one in Charlestown, one in Everett. Not a lot of details available on what that was going to be because the project barely began before it was shelved. The technology's definitely come a long way since then.
 
Charlie_mta said:
NIMBY's hate new overhead wires. I've head that Mayor Menino does as well.

The old MTA wanted to extend the North Cambridge trackless trolley line up to Arlington Center (or Arlington Heights) in the early 1960's but was stopped by NIMBY's. The NIMBYs are even more ubiquitous and virulent today, so new trackless trolley lines now have a snowball's chance.
Click to expand...

Menino bitched long and hard about the Washington St. plan. That never stood a chance once he put his stamp on it.


All the Harvard streetcars were bustituted in 1958 to cannibalize all PCC trolleys from Cambridge to supply the Riverside Line opening the next year. Mass Ave. used to have the trolley wires running in the middle of the road in Cambridge and Arlington with passengers boarding at crosswalks like they do on the street-running E. Across all 4 lanes of traffic. When the TT's started running the MTA installed the current set of poles to move the loading area to the side of the road (plugged into the exact same electrical hookup the trolleys used). That's when Arlington moved to whack their wires and Cambridge had no choice but to pull it back to the North Cambridge carhouse.

myoldplace.jpg


(Gonna guess from the RR crossing gates that this is this is by Cedar St./Cameron Ave. and the present-day Somerville Community Path)


I don't know what Arlington's problem was. Mass Ave. from the Cambridge line to Heights is to this day an ugly mass of nuthin' but overhead wires on both sides of the road...which they are only now ready to spend a kajillion dollars to bury.
 
Norumbega said:
Having recently moved to Watertown, I've been charmed and impressed by the trackless trolleys that operate between here and Harvard Square. After doing some cursory research on Google, I was surprised to learn that the trackless routes are in fact vestigial trolley lines, and that following the end of regular trolley service in the 1940s and 50s, trackless trolleys predominated in many parts of the city.

Before becoming a daily user I never would have guessed, but the trackless trolley is a fantastic vehicle. It is quieter and more spacious than a bus, does not produce any emissions, and they seem to have better acceleration than regular buses.

I'm curious, with the advent of the Silver Line on the Waterfront if we might see expansion of trackless trolley service elsewhere in the city (along the Washington Street corridor, for example, or perhaps as the Silver Line expands to Chelsea.

I also wondered if the existing Cambridge/Watertown trackless trolley network is in danger of being fully bustituted in the future-- I notice that the 73 is all diesel buses these days. I know the reason for that is road construction in Belmont, but it's not hard to imagine the T turning a temporary suspension into a permanent one. The 72 and 77A also seem to be more bus than trackless trolley as well.

I'm sure there are downsides to the trackless trolley-- certainly when the poles become disconnected from the wire, it is an inconvenience (albeit a minor one), and I'm sure that maintaining a captive and mechanically unique fleet of vehicles is not cheap for the T.

...and yet, the trackless trolleys are such a pleasure to ride and seem to have a tremendous upside and wide potential applications (particularly the dual mode buses used on the Waterfront Silver Line).
Click to expand...

They're not in any great danger. Belmont asked to have its wires removed on the 73 as part of the Belmont St./Trapelo Rd. streetscaping project. The response from Cambridge and Watertown to that plan was...vitriolic. And no one ever spoke of that again. Getting rid of or scaling back the TT's has been floated every few years ever since the they first appeared replacing the trolleys. The two towns have circled the wagons each time. Having real fixed routes on a comfy, upscale mode is a big pride thing for Cambridge and Watertown. And they go to the mat for the 71, 72, 73, and 77A every time there's a perceived threat. Ultimately it proves a better value to the state to keep maintaining the system than to fight City Hall here and pay the ransom in streetscaping and branded faux-BRT Superbus millions it would take to get the two towns to swallow a diesel replacement. Not exactly worth the effort for modal 'purity' when they're perfectly happy with the utilitarian wired routes they've got.

As mentioned there's a ton of road construction going on. North Cambridge has had the living shit ripped out of its pavement the last two years by major sewer projects. Huron and Mt. Auburn by the hospital are getting it bigtime right now. Mt. Auburn is not a fun drive in that area; any given weekday afternoon it's down to 1 lane in front of the hospital driveway while a backhoe carves then fills another few feet of trench. So obviously all these ongoing projects are creating temporary disruptions. The good news is that the T is funding and scheduling renewal of nearly all of the TT overhead. The 73 gets it when that road rebuild project begins. Harvard gets it when the Cambridge Common rebuild begins. And the 71 and 72 are getting renewal. It's needed. The newer Neoplan TT's de-wire a lot at the Garden St./Cambridge Common switch, and there's a spot in front of the Porter Shopping Ctr. driveway on the northbound side of Mass Ave. that throws up some impressive sparks. Old wire...older wire hangers. It's all way past due for a refresh. But it's actually going to happen, so the TT network's long-term future is pretty secure.

For one, as long as they keep expanding the Silver Line they are going to be buying dual-mode vehicles that run on traction power from the same Transitway overhead. Regardless of what newfangled tech comes along for the "dual" portion of the dual-mode...when it's in the Transitway it's going to run on TT poles from the same traction power. No way are they junking a power source that's barely 10 years old and cost a fortune.

Also, the voltage is exactly the same for the TT's as it is for the Green and Blue lines. The only difference is pantograph vs. pole. So there is an enormous amount of scale in the system for that power source. The Green Line and the TT's are literally connected via the still-live underground cable for the ex- A line. It boosts the TT's at the Watertown Carhouse end and provides some system redundancy. That trunk line is even scheduled for rehabilitation in the budget. So turning off the juice to the TT overhead doesn't...turn off the juice feeding the TT overhead. Which is why they're not too well motivated to consolidate. The feeder cables follow a lot of ex- trolley routes, not necessarily just the ones that are still running trolleys. Purging that mode doesn't necessarily purge all the associated cost of maintaining that mode's infrastructure. So there's not overwhelming motivation to do it.



I could even see some small expansion of the network. A Newton Corner commuter rail station running DMU's would certainly beckon an economical half-mile extension of the wires down Galen St. from Watertown Carhouse so the 71 can loop at this station. If the DMU is replacing most of the Pike express buses Galen will need a bump in general bus frequencies for completing that transfer to Watertown Sq. And the 71 will be an in-demand transfer to Harvard from people taking the DMU. Thankfully, that A Line cable is still live underneath Galen so just about all you have to do is re-erect the poles and wires that came down in 1994 and plug it back in.

Or...just temporarily assign some Silver Line dual modes to the 71 when that Newton Corner CR station opens, if they're still haggling over the wires. The next Transitway order is going to be much bigger. Provision for some extras that can serve this build-out, then head back to Silver as reinforcements when they do complete the wires to Corner.

The other option is if Alewife gets real-deal busways to Mass Ave. as has been tossed around a number of times. It would make a lot of sense then to extend the wires from North Cambridge carhouse to Alewife and give the 77A a real anchor teminal so that's more like a full-blown key route and can ease the intra-Cambridge crowding on the 77. And it would give the full 77 an in for getting Silver Line dual-modes in the next, expanded vehicle order. The 77 needs articulateds pretty badly, and the infrastructure is there to support duals. Bring the wires the extra half-mile to Route 16, put in a curb turnout for the engine switch...77A's turn down the Alewife busway, 77's continue on diesel to Arlington Heights.



Nothing big. No new routes or Crazy TT Pitches wires over every street. Quite very modest in number of new trolley poles and total capital costs. But does a lot to take the 2 key-most routes on the network up another gear and get max usage out of recycled infrastructure they're very fortunate to still have.
 
F-Line to Dudley said:
All the Harvard streetcars were bustituted in 1958 to cannibalize all PCC trolleys from Cambridge to supply the Riverside Line opening the next year. Mass Ave. used to have the trolley wires running in the middle of the road in Cambridge and Arlington with passengers boarding at crosswalks like they do on the street-running E. Across all 4 lanes of traffic. When the TT's started running the MTA installed the current set of poles to move the loading area to the side of the road (plugged into the exact same electrical hookup the trolleys used). That's when Arlington moved to whack their wires and Cambridge had no choice but to pull it back to the North Cambridge carhouse.
Click to expand...

Streetcar service was already cut-back from Arlington Heights to North Cambridge in 1955, three years before the Watertown, Waverley, and North Cambridge lines were converted to trackless to free up PCCs for Riverside.
 
The 73 will return to trackless trolleys with the December schedule change. The Benton Square short-turn loop will have its wires restored later.

Normally the 71 runs 7 minute headways (9 buses), the 72 runs 20 minutes (2 buses), and the 73 runs 6 minute headways (11 buses). The 73 has been running 5 minute scheduled headways recently; I can't say whether that will continue after it is converted back to trackless. The current fleet is 28 tracklesses; staying at 5 minute headways would use 24 buses at peak versus 22.

The 72 was dieselized in March 2013, the 73 in September 2013. So we're over three years at this point.
 
I can't answer about Bennett Alley, unfortunately; I wasn't too familiar with the Harvard Square routings before the dieselization.

Benton Square (similar name, different place) is here; it's occasionally used as a short turn on the 73.
 
Norumbega said:
Thank you for the information!

As a 71 rider I'm primarily concerned with making sure there aren't longer headways on that route once the 73. I moved to Watertown in the fall of 2013, so all I've known is a diesel 72/73.

One additional question, and I'm not sure if I'm misreading your reply or not: is the trackless trolley loop that goes through Bennett Alley primarily used by the 72 or is it also used by the 71/73? I've often thought it odd that on weekends the 71 does that awkward switch to the other busway (and doesn't go around the Common) and wondered if perhaps that was a result of the Bennett Alley turnaround being out of service.

Thank you again.
Click to expand...

There won't be any reduction in the 71 when the 73 goes back to trackless, there has been a very generous surplus of trackless trolleys during the 73 shut-down, which did allow the carhouse at North Cambridge to do a mechnical overhaul of the 28 coach fleet.

They will still run a few morning rush-hour trips on the 73 from Benton Sq. that will use diesel buses

The Sunday service on the Route 71 and 73 has always been operated with diesel buses going back to when the routes were first converted to trackless from streetcars in 1958. The carhouse would have to be kept open on Sundays if the routes were operated with trackless, so it was cheaper to use diesels on Sundays. Until the bus tunnel closed in 1979 because of Red Line tunnel construction, the diesel buses on Sundays would board on the surface at Harvard Sq. and the bus tunnel was closed on Sundays. When the bus tunnel reopened in September 1985, Sunday service on the 71 and 73 remained with diesel buses, but now the diesel buses on Sunday boarded on the upper busway in the tunnel, which allows passengers to board from the platform with both doors facing the platform. Diesels don't have left-side doors like the trackless, so passengers must board with doors facing the wall in the lower busway. That was thought in the past to be awkward, although that is how the service has operated Mon-Sat with diesel buses during the temporary shutdown.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top