DOCSLIB.ORG

Transport in Coventry

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Transport in Coventry Coventry Corporation Transport 1912 - 1974 CONTENTS Coventry & District Tramways Co. Ltd. - History 1884 - 1893……………………… Page 3 Coventry & District Tramways Co. Ltd. - Tram Fleet List 1884 - 1893…………. Page 4 Coventry Electric Tramways Co. Ltd. 1895 - 1912……….………….……………………. Page 6 Coventry Electric Tramways Co. Ltd. - Tram Fleet List 1895 - 1912…………….. Page 8 Coventry Corporation Transport - History 1912 - 1974.………………………………… Page 13 Coventry Corporation Transport - Tram Fleet List 1912 - 1940…………………….. Page 21 Coventry Corporation Transport - Bus Fleet List 1914 - 1974…….………………… Page 29 Cover Illustration: No. 334 (334CRW) a 1963 Daimler CVG6 with MCCW bodywork. (LTHL collection). First Published 2015 by the Local Transport History Library. Second edition 2016. With thanks to John Kaye for illustrations. © The Local Transport History Library 2016. (www.lthlibrary.org.uk) For personal use only. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval sys- tem, transmitted or distributed in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical or other- wise for commercial gain without the express written permission of the publisher. In all cases this notice must remain intact. All rights reserved. PDF-100-2 2 Coventry Corporation Transport 1912 - 1974 Coventry & District Tramways Co. Ltd. 1884-1893 Authorised by the Coventry and District Tramways Act of 1880, the first tramway constructed in the city was owned and operated by the Coventry and District Tram- ways Company and opened in 1884. The single-track line was constructed to a gauge of 3ft 6ins because of the narrow city streets and was operated by a fleet of steam locomotives hauling trailer cars. It ran from the London and North Western Railway's Station, north, through the centre of the city via Hertford Street, Broadgate and Bishop Street out along Foleshill Road, Longford Road, Bedworth Road and Coventry Road to the village of Bedworth, some 5.5 miles away. The tramway was poorly patronised, probably, as reported at the time, because of the regular failures, choking smoke and poor performance in climbing uphill, particularly in Bishop Street. As a result the service became spasmodic, which further affected patronage, and, in 1893, the service was suspended altogether. 3 Coventry Corporation Transport 1912 - 1974 Fleet Summary 1884-1893 Locos This listing is in the format - Year into Stock; Fleet No; Loco Manufacturer. 1884; 1-2; Beyer Peacock 1884; 3-4; Thomas Green 1885; 5-6; Falcon 1887; 7; Falcon No. 7 ex-South Staffordshire Tramways Co (No. 38, new 1884 to Hartlepool Steam Tramways Company (one of Nos. 1-3). 4 Coventry Corporation Transport 1912 - 1974 Trailer Cars This listing is in the format - Year into Stock; Fleet No; Type; Manufacturer; Seating (Upper/Lower) 1884; 1-6; Double-deck open-top bogie; Falcon; 28/26 5 Coventry Corporation Transport 1912 - 1974 Coventry Electric Tramways Co. Ltd. 1895-1912 On the 5th December 1895, the former steam tram line, which had closed in 1893, was re-opened between the LNWR's Station and Foleshill Road, as a double-track, electric line, now under the ownership of Coventry Electric Tramways Ltd., formed to take over the business of the Coventry & District Tramway Company. A week later the remaining section of the line was opened to Bedworth. The first electric trams (Nos. 1-4) were four double-deck open-top cars with Brush 40-seat bodywork on Peckham Cantilever four-wheel trucks. By April 1896 four more cars (Nos. 5-8) were in service; the bodies were converted from four of the six Falcon-built steam trailer cars of 1884 and seated 53 passengers. They were mounted on Peckham Cantilever four-wheel trucks. The remaining two Falcon trailer cars were used as trailer cars with the electric trams until 1898, when they too were converted (as Nos. 9-10). The Coventry Electric Tramways Act of 1897 authorised the construction of more routes and on 22nd July 1899 a line to Stoke, east from the city centre via Priestley's Bridge, Ford Street and Gosford Green was opened. On the 27th July another line to Gosford Green via Victoria Street was opened. To work the new services an additional 15 tramcars were purchased from Brush, ten (Nos. 11-20) were powered cars, whilst 6 Coventry Corporation Transport 1912 - 1974 the remaining five were trailer cars and were un-numbered. A second tram depot at Priestley's Bridge was opened to supplement the depot in Foleshill, which had been inherited from the Coventry & District Tramway Company. In March 1905 two short extensions from Broadgate to Earlsdon and Allesley Road, via Smithford Street and Spon Street, were opened and twelve ex-Wigan Corporation ERTCW cars (Nos. 19-30) purchased (the previous Nos. 19-20 being sold). The five Brush trailer cars were also electrified at the same time using the trucks from Nos. 6-10; the new cars taking the now vacant numbers. The fleet was further strengthened, in 1907 with the purchase of six more open-top double-deckers (Nos. 31-36) from Milnes, and in 1910 with five ex-Norwich Electric Tramways, Brush-built, open-top, double-deck cars (Nos. 37-41). Under the Coventry Electric Tramways Act of 1903, the Corporation was given the power to purchase the undertaking in 1910, or at intervals of seven years thereafter. In the event, the undertaking was purchased on the 1st January 1912 and the tramway passed to Coventry Corporation. 7 Coventry Corporation Transport 1912 - 1974 Tram Fleet List 1895-1912 This listing is in the format - Year; Fleet No; Type; Trucks; Builder; Seating (Upper/Lower). 1895; 1-4; Double-deck open-top 4-wheel; Peckham Cantilever; Brush; 20/20 1896; 5-8; Double-deck open-top 4-wheel; Peckham Cantilever; Falcon; 28/26 1898-99; 9-10; Double-deck; open-top 4-wheel; Peckham Cantilever; Falcon; 28/26 1898-99; 11-20; Double-deck open-top 4-wheel; Peckham Cantilever; Brush; 26/26 1904; 6-10; Double-deck open-top 4-wheel; Peckham Cantilever; Brush; 20/20 1904; 19-30; Double-deck open-top 4-wheel; Peckham Cantilever; ERTCW; 24/22 8 Coventry Corporation Transport 1912 - 1974 Coventry Electric Tramways No. 1 was a Brush-built double-deck open-top 4-wheel car on Peckham trucks delivered in 1895 for the opening of the system. It seated 20 on the upper deck (on back to back knifeboard seating) and 20 inside. It passed to Coventry Corporation in 1912. (LTHL collection). Coventry Corporation Transport 1912 - 1974 Coventry Electric Tramways No. 20 was a 1900 Electric Railway and Tramway Carriage Works 4-wheel open-top double-deck car that was purchased from Wigan Tramways in 1904 (LTHL collection). Coventry Corporation Transport 1912 - 1974 1907; 31-36; Double-deck open-top 4-wheel; Mountain & Gibson; Milnes Voss; 28/22 1910; 37-41; Double-deck open-top 4-wheel; Mountain & Gibson; Brush; 34/26 Nos. 1-4, 5, 6-10 (of 1904), 11-41 to Coventry Corporation 1912. Nos. 5-8 were constructed from former steam car trailers built in 1884/85 by Falcon. Nos. 9-10 were constructed from former steam car trailers built in 1884/85 by Fal- con. Nos. 19 and 20 (of 1898-99) transferred to Norwich Electric Tramways in 1904. Nos. 6-10 of 1904 were converted from un-numbered trailers cars of 1898-99, using the trucks and equipment from the previous Nos. 6-10. Nos. 19-30 ex-Wigan Corporation (Nos. 1-12, new 1900). Nos. 37-41 ex-Norwich Electric Tramways (Nos. 7, 9, 16, 32, 36, all new 1900). Withdrawn 1904 (6-10 of 1896). Trailer Cars 1895; 9-10; Double-deck open-top bogies; ? ; Falcon; 28/26 Nos. 9-10 were converted to electric cars on Peckham Cantilever trucks c.1899. Withdrawn 1904 (9-10). 11 Coventry Corporation Transport 1912 - 1974 1898-99; - ; Double-deck open-top 4-wheel; Peckham; Brush; 20/20 These cars were un-numbered until 1904 when they were converted to electric cars and numbered 6-10, from whom they inherited the trucks and electrical equipment. 12 Coventry Corporation Transport 1912 - 1974 Coventry Corporation Transport 1912-1974 Authorised by the Coventry and District Tramways Act of 1880, the first tramway constructed in the city was owned and operated by the Coventry and District Tram- ways Company and opened in 1884. The single-track line was constructed to a gauge of 3ft 6ins because of the narrow city streets and was operated by a fleet of steam locomotives hauling trailer cars. The tramway was poorly patronised and the service became spasmodic, which further affected patronage, and, in 1893, the service was suspended. On the 5th December 1895, the line was re-opened between the LNWR's Station and Foleshill Road, as a double-track, electric line, now under the ownership of Coventry Electric Tramways Ltd., formed to take over the business of the Coventry & District Tramway Company. A week later the remaining section of the line was opened to Bedworth. Under the Coventry Electric Tramways Act of 1903, the Corporation was given the power to purchase the undertaking in 1910, or at intervals of seven years thereafter. In the event, the undertaking was purchased on the 1st January 1912 and Coventry Corporation became the owner of over 13 miles of single- and double-track tramway, 13 Coventry Corporation Transport 1912 - 1974 41 tramcars and two depots. One additional tramcar was under construction by the Company and it was finally completed by Coventry Corporation in January 1913. In 1912, ten new trams (Nos. 43-52) were ordered from Brush of Loughborough, built on Peckham Pendulum trucks, and an extension to the depot at Priestley's Bridge was authorised to accommodate the growing fleet. The Coventry Corporation Act of 1913 gave the Corporation the necessary powers to operate motorbuses and on 30th March 1914 the first motorbus service from Stoke Heath, via the Council House in Earl Street, to the Central Fire Station in Hales Street was inaugurated.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • TCRP Report 52: Joint Operation of Light Rail Transit Or Diesel Multiple
    APPENDIX A Key FRA Regulations (Affecting Joint Use) The following is a listing of key FRA specifications. This listing is intended as a regulations taken from the Code of Federal general identification of the operative code Regulations (49 CFR 200-299), Federal sections, along with a general description Railroad Administration, that may affect of the requirements. This identification joint operation of light rail transit or diesel code section should not imply or impute multiple unit vehicles with railroads. The that the code provision will need to be selected regulations concern operational modified to operate light rail transit or procedures, standards, and certain design DMU with railroads. Regulation Number and Section Comment §209: Railroad Safety Enforcement Policy procedures for assessing Procedures penalties and for appealing penalties. Also includes, fitness-for-duty and follow-up on FRA recommendations. §210: Railroad Noise Emission Covers total sound emitted by moving Compliance Regulations rail cars and locomotives. Does not apply to: • Steam engines; • Street, suburban, or interurban electric railways, unless operated as a part of the general railroad system of transportation; • Sound emitted by warning devices such as horns, whistles, or bells when operated for the purpose of safety; • Special-purpose equipment that may be located on or operated from rail cars. §211: Rules of Practice Subpart C - Rules of practice that apply to Waivers rulemaking and waiver proceedings, review of emergency orders issued §211.41: Processing of petitions for under 45 U.S.C. 432, and miscellaneous waiver of safety rules safety-related proceedings and informal safety inquiries. Page A-1 Regulation Number and Section Comment §212: State Safety Participation Establishes standards and procedures for Regulations State participation in investigative and surveillance activities under Federal railroad safety laws and regulations.
    [Show full text]
  • Public Transport Act
    Issuer: Riigikogu Type: act In force from: 01.01.2021 In force until: 30.03.2021 Translation published: 14.12.2020 Public Transport Act Passed 18.02.2015 RT I, 23.03.2015, 2 Entry into force 01.10.2015 Amended by the following acts Passed Published Entry into force 11.11.2015 RT I, 25.11.2015, 1 01.01.2016 09.12.2015 RT I, 30.12.2015, 1 18.01.2016 09.12.2015 RT I, 31.12.2015, 1 01.03.2016 17.03.2016 RT I, 22.03.2016, 10 23.03.2016 09.03.2016 RT I, 24.03.2016, 1 01.04.2016 08.02.2017 RT I, 03.03.2017, 1 01.07.2017 03.05.2017 RT I, 16.05.2017, 1 19.05.2017 14.06.2017 RT I, 04.07.2017, 2 01.01.2018, partially 05.07.2017 14.06.2017 RT I, 04.07.2017, 8 01.11.2017 19.12.2017 RT I, 11.01.2018, 1 01.06.2018, partially 21.01.2018 10.01.2018 RT I, 22.01.2018, 1 01.02.2018 09.05.2018 RT I, 31.05.2018, 1 01.01.2019 21.11.2018 RT I, 12.12.2018, 3 01.01.2019 17.06.2020 RT I, 30.06.2020, 8 01.07.2020 25.11.2020 RT I, 10.12.2020, 1 01.01.2021, the name ‘Road Administration’ (Maanteeamet) has been replaced with the name ‘Transport Administration’ (Transpordiamet) throughout the Act. Chapter 1 General Provisions § 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Get on Board! Get 7-Letter Bingos on Your Board About TRANSPORTATION, TRANSIT, TRAVEL Compiled by Jacob Cohen, Asheville Scrabble Club
    Get on Board! Get 7-letter bingos on your board about TRANSPORTATION, TRANSIT, TRAVEL compiled by Jacob Cohen, Asheville Scrabble Club A 7s AERADIO AADEIOR Canadian radio service for pilots [n -S] AEROBAT AABEORT one that performs feats in aircraft [n -S] AILERON AEILNOR movable control surface on airplane wing [n -S] AIRBAGS AABGIRS AIRBAG, inflatable safety device in automobile [n] AIRBOAT AABIORT boat used in swampy areas [n -S] AIRCREW ACEIRRW crew of aircraft [n -S] AIRDROP ADIOPRR to drop from aircraft [v -PPED, -PPING, -S] AIRFARE AAEFIRR payment for travel by airplane [n -S] AIRFOIL AFIILOR part of aircraft designed to provide lift or control [n -S] AIRLIFT AFIILRT to transport by airplane [v -ED, -ING, -S] AIRMAIL AAIILMR to send mail by airplane [v -ED, -ING, -S] AIRPARK AAIKPRR small airport (tract of land maintained for landing and takeoff of aircraft) [n -S] AIRPORT AIOPRRT tract of land maintained for landing and takeoff of aircraft [n -S] AIRPOST AIOPRST system of conveying mail by airplane [n -S] AIRSHIP AHIIPRS lighter-than-air aircraft having propulsion and steering systems [n -s] AIRSHOW AHIORSW exhibition of aircraft stunts [n -S] AIRSICK ACIIKRS nauseated from flying in airplane [adj] AIRSIDE ADEIIRS side of airport terminal facing aircraft [n -S] AIRTRAM AAIMRRT aerial cable car [n -S] AIRVACS AACIRSV AIRVAC, evacuation by air ambulance [n] AIRWAYS AAIRSWY AIRWAY, passageway in which air circulates [n] ALAMEDA AAADELM shaded walkway [n -S] ALLIAKS AAIKLLS ALLIAK, Inuit sledge [n] AMBAGES AABEGMS AMBAGE, winding path
    [Show full text]
  • Energy and Transportation Systems
    TRANSPORTATION LABORATORY i ENERGY AND TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS JULY 1983 STATE OF CALIFORNIA . DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DIVISION OF ENGINEERING SERVICES OFFICE OF TRANSPORTATION LABORATORY ENERGY AND TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS July 1983 Study Supervised by . Earl C. Shirley, P.E. Principal Investigator ...... Mas M. Hatano, P. E. Report Prepared by ..... Mas M. Hatano, P.E. Earl C. Shirley, P. E. Dan Talaga, P.E. Joe Palen, P.E. A. FORSYTH, P. E. Chief, Office of Transportation Laboratory TECHNICAL RECORT STAMDARD TITLE PACE (ISPORT NO. WA/Q3/TL-83708 I TITLE .ND SUI)TITLC I). REPORT OATS ENERGY AND TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS, JULY 1983 I AuTuORial 9. PICRFORMING ORCANILATION REPORT NC Talaga, D., Palen, J., Hatano, M., Shirley, E. C. 19702-604197 9 PLRFORWIN8 OR0ANIZATION NAML AN0 AOORLSS $0. WORK UNIT NO Office of Transportation Laboratory California Department of Transportation Sacramento, Ca.lifornia 95819 13. TYPE tiF REPORT S PERIOD COVERED (2. SPONMRINQ AGENCY NAMI AND ADORLSS Final California Department of Transportation 1980-83 Sacramento, California 95807 (4. SPONSORING AGENCY COOE IS. tUPPl.EMENTARY NOTES This study was performed in cooperation with the U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration. 19. ABSTRACT The objective of this study was to upgrade the publication titled, "Energy and Transportation Systems". The most recent data for establishing factors for calculating direct and indirect energy usage on a highway improvement project were incorporated into a new report. Energy analysis and updated factors are discussed separately for recycling asphalt concrete pavements and for light rail systems. A new criterion for impact was developed and life cycle costing is discussed. The computer program for performing an energy analysis on a highway project has been expanded and improved.
    [Show full text]
  • TCQSM Part 8
    Transit Capacity and Quality of Service Manual—2nd Edition PART 8 GLOSSARY This part of the manual presents definitions for the various transit terms discussed and referenced in the manual. Other important terms related to transit planning and operations are included so that this glossary can serve as a readily accessible and easily updated resource for transit applications beyond the evaluation of transit capacity and quality of service. As a result, this glossary includes local definitions and local terminology, even when these may be inconsistent with formal usage in the manual. Many systems have their own specific, historically derived, terminology: a motorman and guard on one system can be an operator and conductor on another. Modal definitions can be confusing. What is clearly light rail by definition may be termed streetcar, semi-metro, or rapid transit in a specific city. It is recommended that in these cases local usage should prevail. AADT — annual average daily ATP — automatic train protection. AADT—accessibility, transit traffic; see traffic, annual average ATS — automatic train supervision; daily. automatic train stop system. AAR — Association of ATU — Amalgamated Transit Union; see American Railroads; see union, transit. Aorganizations, Association of American Railroads. AVL — automatic vehicle location system. AASHTO — American Association of State AW0, AW1, AW2, AW3 — see car, weight Highway and Transportation Officials; see designations. organizations, American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials. absolute block — see block, absolute. AAWDT — annual average weekday traffic; absolute permissive block — see block, see traffic, annual average weekday. absolute permissive. ABS — automatic block signal; see control acceleration — increase in velocity per unit system, automatic block signal.
    [Show full text]
  • 1A Glossary-1
    Public Transportation Glossary & Acronyms A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z A AASHTO - American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials ABA - American Bus Association accessibility - The extent to which facilities are barrier-free and usable by people with disabilities, including those using wheelchairs. (APTA) accessible station - A public transportation passenger station that provides ready access, is useable and does not have physical barriers that prohibit and/or restrict access by people with disabilities, including those who use wheelchairs. (FTA) accessible vehicle - Public transportation revenue vehicles, which do not restrict access, are useable and provide allocated space and/or priority seating for people who use wheelchairs. (FTA) active vehicle - Transit passenger vehicle that is licensed, where required, and maintained for regular use, including spares and vehicles out of service for maintenance purposes, but excluding vehicles in "dead" storage, leased to other operators, in energy contingency reserve status, permanently not usable for transit service and new vehicles not yet outfitted for active service. (APTA) active vehicles in fleet - The vehicles in the year-end fleet that are available to operate in revenue service, including vehicles temporarily out of service for routine maintenance and minor repairs. (FTA) adaptive re-use - Renovation of a building or site to include elements that allow a particular use or uses to occupy a space that originally was intended for a different use. ADA - Americans with Disabilities Act of 1991 advanced public transportation systems - (or APTS) Intelligent Vehicle Highway Systems, or IVHS, technology that is designed to improve transit services through advanced vehicle operations, communications, customer service and market development.
    [Show full text]
  • TCRP Report 52: Joint Operation of Light Rail Transit Or Diesel Multiple
    CHAPTER 8: JAPAN AND PACIFIC RIM EXPERIENCE 8.1 INTRODUCTION to Chapter 8. Several of the most commonly used terms are, however, Chapter 8's organization and bulk reflect incorporated into the master glossary of careful consideration by the author and this report. other investigators on the best way to present this research. Except for high speed Simply put, joint use of track is generally intercity railroad ventures, there is a dearth the operation of one entity's trains over of readily available research material and a another entity's tracks without the passenger general lack of familiarity with Japanese having to change trains. Reciprocal running and Pacific Rim rail transit (in comparison is the operation of passenger trains by two with that of western Europe, for example). or more railways over the tracks of the other The nature and extent of Oriental shared companies. Such operation serves many track practices are particularly obscure. purposes and necessitates certain Accordingly, more detail is provided than preparations. With respect to electric is customary in an issue-based research railways and rapid transit lines, there is assignment. frequently the need to enable passengers to board at different-height station platforms, Shared track cannot be researched or and adapt to the partner's electrification and accomplished in isolation. All Pacific Rim other systems. Throughout Japan and in rail information, therefore, is presented here other Pacific Rim metropolitan areas, these in the context of joint use. The Japanese and other problems of reciprocity have been case studies, lessons learned, conclusions, resolved in different ways, offering lessons and descriptions of unique railway features to any North American urban area are structured around this study's first four considering joint use of track.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Don Bellamy's Rapid Transit Solution (BC Electric Railway Motorman, Retired)
    Don Bellamy’s Rapid Transit Solution (BC Electric Railway Motorman, Retired) “Restore THE POWER OF streetcars NOW” Simple solutions that are based on common sense usually have the greatest impact on society. As is often the case, people with practical experience often have a better understanding of the problem, and can see the most efficient, cost effective solutions first. I spoke with Don Bellamy (former Vancouver City Councilor, Police Officer, and BC Electric Railway Motorman) in July 2008, and his solution is the most efficient and financially viable that I have heard, seen or read about. First let’s get a global perspective. In “The Power of Community – How Cuba Survived Peak Oil” viewers see Americans visiting Cuba in 2006 to learn what Peak Oil really means. When Russia fell in 1991, Cuba lost over 50% of its oil imports from 13-14 million tons down to 4 million tons. While cars produce pollution, buildings and homes consume 40% of world energy and produce 50% of all greenhouse gases. “OIL” Energy is needed for elevators, water supply, heating / cooling, lighting, cooking and food storage, making high rise residential buildings unsustainable. Oil is needed for computers, cosmetics, and plastics. Cubans call the transition to life without Oil the “Special Period”. It took 5 years before the pesticide contaminated soil could be brought back to life with composting. Without the OIL based fertilizers (21,000 tons in 1988 to 1,000 tons in 2006) that produced the 1920’s Green Revolution farm food production increase and oil based pesticides needed to reduce pests associated with mono-agriculture, Cuba had to choose Organic farming.
    [Show full text]
  • Commuter Rail Feasibility Study
    FINAL REPORT COMMUTER RAIL FEASIBILITY STUDY for STATE OF VERMONT AGENCY OF TRANSPORTATION submitted by R.L. Banks & Associates, Inc. Transportation Economists and Engineers in conjunction with JHK & Associates February 22, 1991 COMMUTER RAIL FEASIBILITY STUDY Table of Contents Paqe Executive Summary and Conclusions ............................... E- 1 Task I. RidershipIPatronage Estimate/Analysis ................ 1-1 Task 11 . Inventory of Available Routes ........................ 11-1 Task I11 . Commuter Rail Operations Planning .................... 111-1 Task IV. Commuter Service Cost Estimates ...................... IV-1 Task V . Coordination. Funding and Other Anci 1 lary Issues ..... V- 1 Tables Operating Cost. Ridership and Subsidy by Route ....... Capital Cost by Route ................................ Estimated AM Peak Period Ridership ................... Estimated Peak Period Ridership by Origin Zone ....... Estimated AM Peak Period Ridership by Destination Zone 1988 Zonal Demographic & Employment Data .......*..... Commuter Rail Station Zone Coverage .................. Vermont Commuter Rail Service Schedule ............... Vermont Commuter Rail Fare Schedule .................. Comm~~terRai 1 Market Segment ......................... Estimated AM Peak Period Revenue ..................... Operating Costs Summary .............................. Operating Cost Calculations .......................... Capital Cost Calculations ............................ R.L. BANKS &ASSOCIATES. INC. COMMUTER RAIL FEASIBILITY STUDY Table of Contents
    [Show full text]
  • Compendium of Definitions and Acronyms for Rail Systems
    APTA STANDARDS DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM APTA STD-ADMIN-GL-001-19 GUIDELINES First Published June 20, 2019 American Public Transportation Association 1300 I Street NW, 12th Floor East, Washington, DC, 20005 Compendium of Definitions and Acronyms for Rail Systems Abstract: This compendium was developed by the Technical Services & Innovation Department and published by the American Public Transportation Association (APTA) to provide a glossary of commonly used definitions and acronyms in documents such as standards, recommended practices, and guidelines, so there is consistency within the rail transportation industry. Summary: APTA, through its subsidiary the North American Transit Services Association (NATSA), develops standards, recommended practices and guidelines for the benefit of public rail transportation. These tasks are accomplished by working groups consisting of members from rail transit agencies, manufacturers, consultants, engineers and other interested groups. Through the development of these documents, working groups have created a wide array of terms and abbreviations, many with varying definitions. This compendium has been developed to standardize the usage of such definitions and acronyms as it relates to rail operations, maintenance practices, designs and specifications. This document is dynamic in nature in that, over time, additional definitions and acronyms will be included. It is APTA’s intention that the document be sufficiently expanded at some point in the future to provide common usage of terms encompassing all rail industry requirements. Scope and purpose: This compendium applies to all rail agencies that operate commuter rail, heavy rail (subway systems), light rail, streetcars, and trolleys. The usage of these definitions and acronyms are voluntary. Nevertheless, it is the desire of APTA that the rail industry apply these terms to all documents such as standards, recommended practices, standard operating practices, standard maintenance practices, rail agency policies and procedures, and agency rule books.
    [Show full text]
  • Light Rail Transit Systems: a Definition and Ve Aluation
    University of Pennsylvania ScholarlyCommons Departmental Papers (ESE) Department of Electrical & Systems Engineering 10-1972 Light Rail Transit Systems: A Definition and vE aluation Vukan R. Vuchic University of Pennsylvania, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.upenn.edu/ese_papers Part of the Civil Engineering Commons, Systems Engineering Commons, and the Transportation Engineering Commons Recommended Citation Vukan R. Vuchic, "Light Rail Transit Systems: A Definition and vE aluation", United States Department of Transportation Urban Mass Transportation Administration . October 1972. This paper is posted at ScholarlyCommons. https://repository.upenn.edu/ese_papers/730 For more information, please contact [email protected]. Light Rail Transit Systems: A Definition and vE aluation Abstract Rail transit represents a family of modes ranging from light rail to regional rapid transit systems and it can be utilized in a number of different cities and types of applications. Many European cities of medium size employ very successfully light rail mode for gradual upgrading of transit service into partially or fully separated high speed, reliable transit systems. Analysis of these cities show that with population densities and auto ownership very similar to those in the United States cities, their transit systems offer a superior service and have much better usage than our cities. Many modern features of light rail technology are not known in this country. Wider use of different rail systems, greatly increased transit financing, introduction of more qualified personnel into transit industry and improved transit planning and implementation procedures are recommended to close the gap in urban transportation between some more progressive European cities and their counterparts in this country.
    [Show full text]
  • Why Rail Will Fail: an Analysis of the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority's Long Range Plan
    Policy Study No. 209 July 1996 WHY RAIL WILL FAIL: AN ANALYSIS OF THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY'S LONG RANGE PLAN by Thomas A. Rubin and James E. Moore II In March 1995, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority adopted a Long Range 20 Year Plan—“A Plan for Los Angeles County: Transportation for the 21st Century.” Analysis of the $72 billion plan reveals a multitude of flaws and inconsistencies in predictive models, baseline and scenario results, and against existing data. Population forecasts—a critical component of planning⎯are internally inconsistent within the plan. The population forecast for the transportation model used a 33.4 percent population growth forecast from 1990 to 2015. This extremely high growth rate assumption resulted in predictions of high growth of travel and forecasts of extremely low freeway and surface street speeds. The financial model, however, utilized a 19 percent population growth rate which produced low tax revenue forecasts limiting funding for transportation improvements. Changing the key variable in this modeling exercise is an unacceptable methodology. The plan is heavily skewed toward rail, which is made to look more favorable by highly selective accounting. Only local costs—revenues extracted from Los Angeles County—are considered in evaluations of rail cost-effectiveness. The MTA’s year 2015 baseline suggests that about 72 percent of transit passenger miles traveled will be made on bus, and 28 percent on rail. However, close scrutiny of the primary scenario’s speed forecasts implies that this proportion would be reversed, with 29 percent of passenger-miles of transit travel being made on bus and 71 percent on rail.
    [Show full text]