1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148 
Passenger Transport Discussed
Page 106
Page 107
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
at Portsmouth
Some Interesting Points Raised at the Conference of the Municipal Tramways and Transport Association
LAST week we published summaries of the three papers read at Portsmouth before the Municipal Tramways and Transport Association, and we now give some details of the major comments which followed each.
The discussion on Mr. Pick's paper was opened by Mr. R. Stuart Pilcher, who expressed the view that towns will tend to become larger despitethe transport difficulties that may be introduced. On the question of staggering hours of work he said he had taken a vote of the employees in his department on the iaossibility of starting half an hour earlier and .cutting out Saturday, and 9-7 voted for and 02 against. This, he said, illustrated the difficulty of getting changes of this character, but unless something of this nature were done the peak problem would continue to get worse until transport would come to a stop.
On the problem of cheap fares for people moved from the centre to places four or five miles outside, he said the alternative to a subsidy. from the rates was the American system of the universal fare, but there were great difficulties. Here some 70 per cent, of passengers paid Id., so that a universal fare of 1-i-d. or 2d. was not likely to be popular. In America 165 tramway and 245 bus undertakings had adopted the fare of 10 cents, equivalent to 5d., but a minimum fare approaching that figure here would be prohibitive. In Manchester fares were on an economic basis, each passenger paying a proper proportion towards the cost, a preference being given to those living on housing estates some miles away.
Major R. McCreary said the suggestion that the rates should bear the interest and sinking-fund charges on municipal transport was in contradiction to the report submitted by the National Council in November, 1920, that . the industry should be self-supporting and that every rider should pay the cost in the fare charged. He asked whether the author had considered a two-part tariff—a levy on the basis of the assessment. pl all premises in the area, the remainder being paid by passengers. Frankly, he did not think this would be acceptable. He mentioned the Clogher Valley Railway in Northern Ireland, where, a rate was levied in the district and the remainder obtained by a charge per ton-mile to the sender. of the goods.
Mr. A. Baker mentioned that in Birmingham the fares are slightly, higher on the buses than on the trams to meet the needs of those conveyed by tram to housing estates
several miles out. Owing to the needs of these distant estates and areas SO per cent, of the vehicles on those particular routes are idle for the greater part of the day. He had succeeded, however, in inducing the Austin Co. to stagger -the time of starting and leaving at its three works by a quarter of an hour, which, although small, would be a good start. On certain of these routes operating at a loss the Corporation was better off when there was a large amount of unemployment. At present Birmingham was on the crest of the wave of employment and the loss was the greater.
Mr. Pick, replying, said that his object was to create interest in the problem of town planning and bring the transport people in at the beginning. He emphasized that London Transport was compelled to meet all its charges, so that it could -not permit fares calling for a sulisidy. Any view in that direction mentioned in the paper was his own. Referring to the Clogher Valley Railway, he said it seemed to him that -the line ought not to have been built.
Live Wires Speak on TroIleyhuses.
The first speaker on Mr. Ben Hall's paper, "Trolley Vehicles," was Mr. G. F. Craven. He was surprised at the figures given for tractive resistance. This was only 25 lb. per ton for steel wheels on rails and 40-45 lb. for m',.:1-)er tyres on roads. Trolleybuses take as much energy
as trams in relation to their weight, and proper instruments were available to give definite figures of consumption,
Mr. J. M. Calder thought the regulations required deep consideration. The three factors to be considered were overhead equipment, vehicles and electrical energy. During the past five years more progress had been made in these than in the previous 25 years. Some equipment was too cumbersome. Suspensions and fittings seemed out of proportion. He considered that where tubular suspension of the trolley wires could he used it was sound. Regenerative control sometimes built up high voltage at the motor terminals, causing flashing. For braking it was highly successful, particularly with generators,but there was difficulty with mercury-arc rectifiers. Special, apparatus had to be installed at sub-stations to deal with the auxiliary current from regeneration. Regeneration permitted much
saving in brake facings. •
Mr. H. Muscroft said that with tubular suspension earthed objects were riearthe positive wire and were dangerous to the.wiremen. It was unwise to take the figure of 40 ampa per vehicle, as in starting it might require
many times that figure. .
Mr. A. C. Baker thought trolleybuses suitable for only small towns. Buses can pack up side by side at crossings or elsewhere; trolleybuses must follow one another, and cannot be concentrated at particular points to take peak loads at works, etc., also they cannot be used for private
hire work or " dodge about ".in side streets. •
Mr. A. A. Jackson expressed particular interest in the section of wire employed. He used a special one, but found that rather more stretching occurred. He was not experienced in battery operation, but suggested 120 amps. as being more suitable than 60. With non-regeneration the life of brake material was exceedingly short.
Mr. Ben Hall, replying, agreed that some equipment was still too heavy, but it was like comparing buses of 15 years ago with those of to-day.
He thanked Mr. Stuart Pileher for advocating lightweight motors. Tubular suspension was a thoroughly sound engineering proposition. To warn linesmen the positive side was painted red and the negative black. . The wire was ordinary hard-drawn copper, and no additional stretching was rioted. The battery was split for lighting at 30 volts. On the average there was one dewirement per 2,500 The President, Mr. Owen Silvers, referred to the control of design by the Ministry of Transport. He thought More freedom would soon be allowed. Pills for Traffic Constipation. , Following the paper by Mr. W. G.• Marks on " Traffic Congestion," Alderman C. E. Tatham, LP., said that the attraction of ffiany towns was their narrow winding streets; wide streets would not, in these, be an asset. Referring to the author's reference to Birmingham's one-way traffic system which permitted 1,700 vehicles to pass per hour, he asked how often the same vehicle passed the" same spot in its efforts to get somewhete. The chief cause of congestion in old towns was the railbound tram; comparative congestion figures were 10 for this, 5 for the trolleyhus, and 4 for the petrol bus. It was impossible to provide private parkingplaces at charges satisfactory to motorists, and Blackpool was building large municipal parks.
Councillor W. H. Bale, J.P., thought the author was not taking a sufficiently broad view. Newcomers are always arriving and ample' consideration must be given to all road users, The best, thing was for all concerned to get together. Routes should be better planned instead of all converging on to one or two main thoroughfares, Mr. L. Mackinnon did not agree that automatic signals were one of the principal causes of delay. In Glasgow drivers, at first, looked forward to .them with fear, but every motorman now considers them the be•st scheme introduced.
Parking was another great difficulty. In some American cities the tram companies provided garages outside the central areas and gave free tickets to the centres. The pedestrian must be controlled; he walks as if there were no other traffic but himself, Mr. A. C. Baker said that the Birmingham system might he difficult for strangers, but the inhabitants benefited. Formerly there were sometimes 45-minute delays in getting across the city centre; now, there were none. The principal critics of public-service vehicles were shopkeepers, but the vehicles brought customers to them, Councillor W. J. Petrett said the author should have paid more attention to the safety of pedestrians. Although they were controlled by traffic signals it was hopeless, as turning vehicles, prevented pedestrians from crossing. He suggested an early green signal for the pedestrian, keeping vehicles stationary for a short time.
Mr. Marks, in reply, said the expense of widening streets was-so enormous as to be almost prohibitive, and we should do what we could with what we had, Underground railways had been suggested, but these had no possibilities of commercial success. Those in London were subsidized by the buses; whilst in New York they were in the hands of the Receiver, despite enormous traffic.