Motor Omnibus or Electric Tramcar ?
Page 3
Page 4
Page 5
Page 6
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
Conditions for the Use of Public-Service Conveyances other than on Tramways.
The commercial use of motor omnibuses has now reached the stage of development at which, for employment upon paved or other impervious road surfaces, all fundamental and practical difficulties of operation have disappeared. It has, in Great Britain, required a full decade of dearlybought experience to justify this statement. The problem of country services, upon inferior macadamized roads whose metalling is loose and water-bound, still remains with us; its gradual simplification, by road engineers, can only be secured pan i passu in relation to the money that is placed at their disposal by the authorities (local and, or, national) concerned. There can be no approach to perfection of internal communication by road, unless and until drainage and other constructional road features are systematically taken iu hand. A return to this aspect of the subject w ill be made, later in the paper, but the enforcement of its importance by mention at the outset is by no means superfluous.
Conditions of Service.
The conditions of service differ essentially, in urban and in rural districts. Town-used motorbuses have to wit hstand the competition of high-speed t mincers, electrified shallow and underground railways, taximeter cabs with law-scale charges, and horse-omnibuses whose des
owners sometimes find a bare living on particular routes; owners of country-used motorbuses, which generally link one or more villages with one another or with the outskirts of a larger community's passenger-transport system, experience virtually no competition beyond that of locally-owned and out-of-date horse-omnibuses, slowermoving carriers' carts, tedious and circuitous railway connections, the bicycle and " shanks' pony." Whereas, however, there is usually an assured volume of passenger traffic offering in and around cities or big towns, and which traffic must pass to and fro, by public-service conveyances of some kind, each day of the week, there is seldom a maintained traffic, in rural areas, except on particular days of the week or while seasons of fluctuating duration hold sway. It is necessary, for these and other good reasons, to divide the subject, under certain of the heads which have been chosen, if one is to take proper cognisance of the limiting factors which the two sets of conditions impose.
Public Convenience and Equity.
Tramway rails are deservedly unpopular with many users of the highway ; whilst they admittedly serve the interests of the capitalists who hold monopolistic rights-in that no other vehicles can benefit by the lower resistance to propulsion, rolling or traction, and whilst they contribute to smooth travelling for millions of passengers, they inflict grave inconvenience and risk, as well as positive monetary loss, upon owners and users of ordinary wheeled vehicles and carriages of all classes. The claim that tramcars and tramrails increase the traffic capacity of a given thoroughfare has never been proved to demonstration; the exact converse, in numbers of instances, is more in accordance with observed facts. The rigid-track cars, in busy streets, force all other vehicles to the sides of the roadway, with resulting delays for all but the tramcars, and with an enormous consequential increase of maintenance cost for the local authorities which have to repair the abnormally-used portions of such roadways. The oftrepeated plea of persons responsible for tramway undertakings, that it is a hardship upon them to have to bear the cost of upkeep of the highway between and imme
diately adjacent (t) to the rails, which, as it is ingenuously added, they do not wear, is seldom founded upon a motive worthy of acceptance; the exceptions de tact° arise on suburban and inter-urban lines, where horsed and other heavy traffic does make preferential use of the paved track in wet weather. In cities, however, the frequent passage of the tramcars actually transfers the old-time and normal wear and tear from the centre to the sides; the tramway accounts are thus relieved, and not burdened.
It is, hence, an equitable, fitting and natural corollary that tramcar interests should be rated to support local highway funds, and that their contributions should be in direct proportion to ear-incidence per mile of track. This is merely asking that prime-cost value should be paid to the community for that which is enjoyed to the exclusion of the community—the sole use of the. metal rails. It will be noted, of course, that there is no comparable or equivalent justification for a road tax upon motorbuses qua the use of the highway, whatever may be expedient in respect of levies for accelerated and specific improvement; where, as in London, no monopoly grant exists, and where anybody may run approved types of motorbuses on payment of 1;3 18s. per vehicle per annum, the partisan enemy of that type of vehicle alone advances the inequitable proposal, oblivious of the fact that the Paris practice, which he inisquotes, does involve monopoly rights from the municipality.
Advantages.
The outstanding advantages of the motorbus, which are peculiar to it in comparison with the electric tramcar, include: (a) Low capital outlay involved. (b) Absence of necessity to obtain special powers from the legislature.: (c) Mobility of rolling-stock.
(d) Independence of a central power-station.
(e) Non-interference with other traffic. (fi No rails; no overhead equipment. (g) Low working costs now achieved.
(a) Capital outlay.—This will be, in cities, from 0.35 to 0.50 of that required for intensive electric traction, i.e., where six or more ears are awned per routs-mile. In smaller towns, where five or less cars per route-mile are enough to cope with the traffic offering, the ratio will fall to or below 0.25. The motorbuses, however, will readily servo a much-increased route length. A concrete example, in Great Britain, is provided by the experience of Eastbourne, a seaside resort and residential town, on the South coast of England, with a fixed population of about 45,000 and a large holiday-season (Juno to September) influx. The Municipal Council, in the year 1902, rejected two schemes for electric-tramcar installation: one of these, at a cost of £30,000, was to have equipped 3,170 route-yards and provided seven cars: the other, at a cost of £20,000, was to have equipped 2,200 route-yards arid provided four cars. Motorbuses were preferred, and a start was made in 1903, at which date the vehicles were somewhat crude and unproved, with four single-deckers. It may be remarked, as evidence of the handicaps which then had to he endured, that tires alone in the first year of working, cost 4d. per mile run! To-hay, after nearly eight years of running, the Municipality owns a fleet Of 20 doubledeckers, gives an adequate schedule of services and popular fares to the inhabitants over 10.3 route-miles, has a total capital indebtedness of less than £14,000, and is making profits which will pay off that sum, after every
provision for maintenance of the depOt, plant and rollingstock in excellent order, in less than seven years. This success, with motorbuses winch are structurally inferior to 11I10 models, is valuable testimony to their economic and commercial value.
The annual summary by the Board of Trade of the "United Kingdom, issued at the end of January last, shows that the average capital outlay, in respect of 208 tramways undertakings, was £13,002 per mile of single track for lines and works, or £17,345 with all items. It will be realized that much of the capital expenditure shown by these British returns is due to conversions and reconstructions. In Great Britain, the average costs for doubledeck electric cars are: 40-50 seats, £500 cads; 70-80 seats, £800 each. The capital outlay per ear owned varies from £3,000 to £8,000. Taking a new road, however, in Great Britain, and with other conditions favourable, it is cus. ternary to reckon the construction and equipment (inductsag cars) at not less than £10,000 per mile of single track (with passing places), or £15,000 per mile of double track, These figures do not include any capital expenditure upon the power station, which may be put at six per cent. If we allow 1.2 motorbus per electric car and provide for depot accommodation and repair equipment on a generous basis (as set down in Table 1 attached hereto), the capital saving per mile of route served is not less than 70 per cent. with the ample equivalent of a 50-tramcar system. These, the author urges, are results that can he achieved in towns. Emphasis, too, should be laid upon the nonexistence of riskthat capital will he lost in respect of routes which may prove to be unprofitable. A motorbus service can he varied, from one road to another, without loss of capital.
(b) Parliamentary Pourers—Delay and uncertain expenditure are involved by the processes of application, fighting any opposition, and completion of procedure before Committees of the Legislature. The powers, in the end, may not be granted, in which event the promoters lose their money.
(c) Mobility of Rolling-stock.—Reference has been made, under the head of capital outlay, to the facility with which routes can be varied or changed. Attention has, further, to be directed to the facts that passengers are set down, or taken up, beside the kerb, and not in the roadway, whilst no central-stationmishap can paralyse the service. Each road unit carries its own source of energy. Re-timing and interval maintenance—when circulation blocks, due to street accidents, processions or the like, have caused derangement—are infinitely more easy of ready accomplishment with the motorlins, and this factor greatly assists the traffic supervisors in the vital matter of keeping faith with the puotic. it is solely permissible, in nuith,,-ous cases, to sanction higher point-topoint speeds for the motorbus, by reason of the fact that that vehicle is free to move about the roads obliquely, and thereby to avoid the aggregate of irritating minor delays which are peculiar to tramcars, and which are mainly due to the setting-down and picking-up by other tramcars on the same track. The motorbus interferes with no other traffic unit.
(d) Independence of a Central Pareer-Statian.—It is not suggested that the absence of a central power-station is a good point, so far as it concerns mere generation, but the cost there does not include the cost of transmission. The greater cast of power derived from individual generation, upon each working unit, by internal combustion, cannot exceed by more than 0.1d. per vehicle-mile, for a double-deck vehicle, the cost of the same power at a ventral power-station, Mit it would add more than 0.1d. to convey the same amount of energy from such a central station by an overhead conductor. The latest scheme for automobile-trolley motorbuses appears to want no fewer than three overhead conductors, and this, of course, adds slightly to the figure for such transmission of energy. The comparative energy costs, those for motorbuses including all engine and ignition maintenance, are :
Per vehicle-mile.
Double-deck motorbus (London) ... ... 1.7 a.
tramcar (Liverpool)„. ,,, 2.09d.
7 7 tramcar (Glasgow) ... „ 1.56d.
motorbus (English Provinces) 1.8 d.
The foregoing costs in respect of tramcar service do not include the cost of transmission from the power-station to the car in service, but, according to published maintenance figures, this averages about 0.18d. per car-mile. A 1rolley-bus uses about the same energy per mile as a double-deck tramcar-1.25 kilowatt. It is difficult to see why those who are interested in, or are about to embark upon motorbus enterprise should, in these days of highlyreliable engines and cheap petroleum spirit, increase their charge for energy by the construction of a generating station and by overhead-cable or other transmission equipment.
(e) Non-Tnterference with Other Traffie.—Advocates of electric traction, four and more Tears ago, at the time when motorbus operation had still to emerge successfully from a period of initial difficulty and misunderstanding, had seven chief points of attack. These were stated to he as follow : (1) Great noise, and corresponding inconvenience to other users of the road and residents.
" (2) Smell, and the prevalence of the smoke of burnt lubricating oil.
" (3) The ever-present danger of side-slip.
" (1) The danger of fire.
(5) Vibration.
" (6) Danger to other vehicle users on the highway.
'• (7) Unreliability."
This awe-inspiring and calamity-foreboding series is taken from a paper which was read before the Royal Automobile Club of Great Britain in March, 1906. The. was some justification for their elaboration at that date then) is none to-day. Motorbuses are less noisy than tramears; lubricating oil is no longer wasted ; cases of side-slip have been reduced by more than ninety per cent., is drivers have gained experience in the control of the vehicles; the number of fires has been negligible, and there has been no personal injury to a passenger in Great Britain—much less a death—from that cause ; vibration, whim) is now occurs, is largely due to had reads ; thirdparty claims, in keeping with the experience of tramcar undertakings after their first two years of working, are quite normal ; the vehicles are no longer unreliable—in lace, it. is probable, although exact data are not procurable, that tramcars now offer the less-reliable method of transportation.
(f) No Rails ; IVo Overhead Egaipment.—Extra anxiety for cyclists and heavier repair-bills for van-owners are the inevitable concomitants where rails are laid ; unsightly and obstructive poles, with potentially-dangerous live wires upon them, are the common alternative to the expensive conduit system. Have net these " ever-present dangers " i.:een. overlooked by tramway enthusiasts? Electric tramcars take lire as often as, if not more often than, motorbuses!
(g) Low Working Costs now Achieved.-Here is the "unsavoury pill" for those who have tried to damn motor• buses. Steady diminution in working costs has been the bright spot for the other side, and Sir Herbert Jekyll, R.C.M.G., the head of the London Traffic Branch of the Board of Trade, in a report issued last January, has emphatically stated:
" As rivals to tramways, motor omnibuses are likely to become more formidable than they have been hitherto, since they will be cheaper to work, and will travel longer distances than heretofore. Tramways have long since reached a stage at which there would appear to he little room for further improvement either in efficiency or cheapness. Motor omnibuses, on the other hand, are only beginning to show their capacity for dealing with traffic in large volume, and there is still an ample margin for improvement. As an instrument of locomotion, the omnibus is in its infancy, whereas the tramway has come to maturity." London's premier motor-omnibus company has not failed to pay dividends, in the past three years, because-as is erroneously asserted—" the motorbuses don't pay." For the fifteen months ended the 30th September last, the London General Omnibus Co., Ltd., made £59,400 on its motorbuses, but lost £45,000 of that on its horse omni buses. The Chairman of the Directors, at the annual general meeting on the 9th December, stated that the working costs of motorbuses had improved thus: This great company now owns fully 1,000 motorbuses, and it will put the whole of that fleet into service during the summer of 1910, It is once more well on the way to resume the payment of dividends. Table II sets out costs for present-day working in London.
Inconveniences.
The only inconvenience due to motorbus traffic is that which mar arise by wear and tear of weak macadamised or other metalled road surfaces. This, however, can be overcome by the use of vehicles with axle-weights less heavy than these which are usual on strong roads.
Electric tramcars, on the other hand, in spite of many years during which the inconvenience might have been eradicated were that result possible, give rise to inconveniences, if not nuisances, by reason of the facts that: (a) Other traffic (except on lines in suburban and country areas) is forced unduly to the sides of highways; (b) The wheel-flanges cause shrieking and roaring ; (c) Passengers have to walk across half the width of many streets;
(d) The stoppage of any car, to set down or to pick up, necessitates stoppages by following cars; which latter may have no such requirement at the same point.
(e) _Rails gravely incommode other users of the highway, and add to the cost of maintenance of all other vehicles; (f) In narrow streets, tramcars hinder ordinary trade avocations and the loading or unloading of tradesmen's carts.
Capacity for Traffic.
In America, where " hustle " is the order of the day, it is not even claimed that more than 14,000 passengers— many of them " strap-hangers "—can be conveyed along the best electrically-equipped track per hour. A high performance is 8,000. In London, not infrequently, at the busiest hour of the day, as many as 9,000 passengers per hour are conveyed along certain central thoroughfares by motorbus; on the basis of 34-seated vehicles, but allowing an average of only 30 passengers per omnibus, this means live vehicles per minute, and corresponds to a meau
iii
terval on the road of (at 12 miles an hour) more than 210 feet. No traffic inconvenience is experienced at such times. With larger bodies, and the Author sees no permanent reason why more than 34 seats should not be allowed in numerous European cities, or in London itself, the capacity for passenger traffic by means of motorbuses may safely be pub as high as 20,000 passengers an hour, in each direction, where there is a call for such concentration. It is, of course, an exceptional requirement, and one that can arise only in special cases, and during relatively-short " crush " periods.
In London, omnibuses may not carry standing passengers, either inside or elsewhere.
It is an error to consider -that the comparative traffic capacities of tramcars and motorbuses are proportional to their seating capacities; correction must be made for the greater point-to-point speed of the motorbus, due to its independence of a rigid track, and its consequential avoidance of delays when sister-vehicles are setting down or picking up passengers. The true comparison is found when tho same number of " seats, per mile of route, per hour" are provided.
Working Costs.
Tables II and III give comparative working costs, and these are all based upon actual practice. Petroleum spirit is taken at 6d. per gallon for London, and 8d, for provincial towns. It is worthy of note that the route-mileage of the motorbuses (Table III) might be extended very considerably without extra capital outlay. The traffic support naturally governs that development, but the 60vehicles might well serve as many as 15 route-miles, instead of only 12 route-miles, No more capital would be required, and the greater mileage average per day would allow the maintenance of the necessary frequency of service. Many of the working costs are lessened per mile on such extension_
Conclusion.
The conclusion to be drawn, from the experience of the past four years more particularly, in regard to the change of relation between the claims of electric tramcars and motor omnibuses upon Municipalities and private capitalists, is this: six double-deck motor omnibuses are practically able to -provide the same carrying accommodation as five average-sized tramcars, by reason of their greater point-to-point speed, and, even though it should be decided to wood-pave the streets upon which the motor omnibuses run, and to charge that capital expenditure to the motorbus account, less money will have to be found for a motor-omnibus project. In the event of any such decision to lay wood Paving, which is ideal for all other forms of traffic, the benefit will extend to the whole width of the highway, and the cost will include adequate concrete foundations, without exceeding tramcar and track costs. The author believes that the motorbus promoter, working in conjunction with the wood-paring contractor, will shortly occupy the commercial position which was enjoyed by the electric-car builder and the permanent-way contractor some ten and more years ago.