What Does the Future Hold in Passenger Transport?
Page 39
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
A Precis of an Informative Paper by Mr. R. Stuart Pikher, F.R.S.E.
THE paper read by Mr. R. Stuart Pilcher, F.R.S.E., M.Inst.T., general manager of Manchester Corporation Transport Department, at the annual Conference of the Scottish Road Passenger Transport Association, bore the particularly interesting title " What Should Be the Future System of Road Passenger Transport?"
The author says that evidence of the changing character of transport is seen in the fact that several large municipal transport undertakings have reached decisions recently on their future policy, which are of tremendous importance to themselves and of no less interest to others, Public passenger transport first appeared in London in 1625, in the form of the hackney carriage. Soon, stage coaches arrived, so that, by 1658, there were regular services throughout the country. Mail coaches arrived about 1784 and, by 1836, there were some 3,000 coaches in service It was not until 1820-30 that horsed buses appeared in London and the provinces.
Early attempts at introducing mechanically-propelled vehicles, such as Gurney's steam coach in 1821, were soon discouraged by repressive legislation, high tolls and had roads. • The second revolutionary change was the corning of the horsed tram, in about 1870, soon replaced by mechanical tramway traction.
Within, a few years of municipal operation, roadpassenger transport developed on a spectacular scale. There is no finality in transport, for then came the motorbus, of which there were 31 in 1904, increasing to over 500 in 1906. All the horsed-bus companies, which had not taken to trams, turned to the motor -vehicle, the motorbus retain-, ing the advantages of the horsed bus in being able to open up, at lower capital cost, new districts not r.siched by trams, and to serve lightly populated areas.
Thus developments were particularly rapid in central London and, after the wars coaches and buses began to establish national services. on -routea traversing several counties, breaking down the railway monopoly which had existed for many years.. .
By the Road Traffic Act, 1930, road-passenger transport passed from local authority to national control in the wider irrterests of the public. Accompanying this change, and partly as a consequence of it, housing estates have been constructed on a grand scale,: and the decentralization of the population required additional transport facilities and reduced the loading density on main routes.
• Why the Bus Beat the Tram • Through bus services were run, thus duplicating facilities and weakening tramway revenue, because breaks on journeys were unpopular. Advance in bus design enabled it to prove a serious rival to the tram, even for dense traffic, eventually surpassing the tram in its capacity for handling big loadings. Improved power and reliability, better chassis, pneumatic tyres, improved weather protection, low-loading lightweight bodies and, finally, the more economical oil engine, all combined in producing a vehicle which closely met the requirements of the public and the times.
Between 1924 and 1938 61 local authorities and 48 com
panies completely abandoned tramway systems. Tram tracks have fallen in route length from 2,624 miles to 1,183 miles in 1938. Following this abandonment, in most cases, striking increases in passengers carried and revenue were achieved.
The author's experience is that, wherever a change-over is made from trams, the same fares can he offered and more passengers carried, with a higher revenue. There is also the advantage of higher scheduled speeds, greater frequency and, with the bus, ability to extend or vary routes in immediate response to traffic demands.
Es cry new form of transport, conforming most suitably with the needs of the times, not only retains traffic, but creates new traffic. Even where bus operation is dearer, it is frequently more profitable. In one undertaking, the population of the inner city area has decreased 12 per cent. in 10 years, owing to rehousing, etc. This warrants serious consideration as to whether fixed-route transport is still justified. The main aspect appears to be the altered conditions resulting from the development of farther suburbs.
It does not appear to be wise to embark on a transport system requiring a dense population per route mile, when the tendency is for this to diminish by evacuation and extension into areas of lower density.
Urban transport is faced with the question of the relative merits of the bus and trolleybus, but whereas the bus can operate successfully in both urban and rural districts, the trolleybus is limited in its practical use to town services, and requires a loading demand sufficient to warrant services of fairly high frequency, if capital charges of overhead equipment are to be spread over sufficient vehicle-miles.
• Common Policy for Adjoining Districts • Where operators are running services in a number of adjoining transport districts, it is important to have a common policy, if the convenience of the public is not to suffer, as, for instance, if one operator adopts trolleybuses and others run buses. The through services would require to be continued by bus, if the public utility were not to suffer, thus causing duplication of services.
The trolleybus suffers from being limited in range and unable to overtake another on the same route. Stopping for passengers of necessity obstructs any trolleybus immediately behind. A bus can load up at a terminus, run non-stop to its destination, unload and return quickly, intermediate traffic being picked up by other buses without obstruction. This is a marked advantage at rush hours, or for sports and other off-peak traffic.
As the need to maintain vehicle speed to avoid adding to congestion is increased, so are difficulties arising from the increase in vehicles in procession on the. route. Buses, by complete independence and ability to run two or more abreast, are much more able than is the trolleybus to meet the requirements of present and future traffic conditions. In emergencies buses can easily be diverted. An operating difficulty is the spacing of turning circles for a trolleybus system, but a bus can turn in a street junction.
Dependence upon a central power supply further handicaps a trolleybus system, and an inherent weakness is its having to rely upon current collector gear, with the dewirements and speed restrictions that this involves. On some routes bridges are too low to allow double-deck troIleybuses being run, although not too low for specially designed double-deck buses. Peak loading may occur at different times and places on a system, and buses may be transferred from place to place to concentrate on these.
The cost of power for oil-engined buses and trolleybuses is almost identical, the figure for motorbuses being J.44d. and for trolleybuses 1.5d. per vehicle-mile (at 0.6d. a unit). The bus, by paying fuel tax, gives an additional contribution to public funds of about 0.5d. per vehicle-mile, yet, with this burden, it is usually cheaper to operate than the trolleybus to the extent of id. to 2d. per vehicle-mile. From the passenger point of view the trolleybus is more pleasant and is a stimulant to the designers of buses to attain a higher level of performance. The elaborate network of wires and poles required by trolleybuses perpetuates the ugly appearance of urban streets associated with the tram.
For each 10,000,000 bus-miles run, employment is found for nearly 70 more men by the importation, refining and delivery of, oil fuel than are employed in the production of coal for the trolleybus. For evacuation purposes buses have complete freedom of movement.