# Overhead wired electric buses



## SanAntonioClyde (May 20, 2015)

A frequent argument I hear against streetcars and light rail is that it is cheaper to buy and run overhead wired buses. My question is where in U.S. do we have such systems. I recall that Detroit has one, but can not find any reference to any other systems. Anyone know of any?


----------



## CCC1007 (May 20, 2015)

Seattle has an extensive network


----------



## TiBike (May 20, 2015)

San Francisco Muni:

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trolleybuses_in_San_Francisco


----------



## TiBike (May 20, 2015)

I should've kept reading. There's another wikipedia article about trolley buses in the U.S.:

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_trolleybus_systems_in_the_United_States

Besides Seattle and SF, there's Boston and vicinity, Philadelphia and Dayton. I'm surprised there's only five. Growing up in SF and having lived in Seattle, I just took them for granted.


----------



## Swadian Hardcore (May 20, 2015)

Please don't argue about it. It's not worth arguing about. I'm a fan of both.


----------



## Eric S (May 20, 2015)

Trolleybuses or trackless trolleys

Pretty sure Detroit does not have any. As mentioned, systems in the US are located in/around Boston, Dayton, Philadelphia, San Francisco, and Seattle. Go back 40-50 years ago and they were much more common.


----------



## SarahZ (May 20, 2015)

Detroit hasn't had trolleybuses since the '60s.


----------



## SanAntonioClyde (May 20, 2015)

Thanks for input, not trying to argue point, just always like to make a counter point with enough knowledge to support my comment.


----------



## TinCan782 (May 20, 2015)

Los Angeles had those in the late fifties/early sixties as traditional street cars (on rail) were being phased out.


----------



## Shawn Ryu (May 21, 2015)

What is the point of trolley bus? Might as well just have a street car if you are gonna go through all that trouble of installing a catenary.


----------



## Swadian Hardcore (May 21, 2015)

The point is flexibility, to drive around obstacles. You see, Shawn, you're being argumentative. Both have their advantages and disadvantages. A lot of cities around the world simply have both.


----------



## rickycourtney (May 21, 2015)

Here in Seattle we have both streetcars and electric trolleybuses.

The trolleybuses are a beloved part of the cityscape. They are used on some of our busiest, urban routes and citizens love them because they are quiet, cheaper to operate, have zero tailpipe emissions and they climb Seattle's steep hills without a problem. But other than following a truly fixed route, they aren't much different than a local bus in any other city.

Seattle has one streetcar line and another that will open later this summer. I wouldn't go so far as to call them controversial but they have proven problematic. Essentially they are run as glorified local buses. They have somewhat nice stops with shelters and ticket vending machines, but until recently you weren't forced to buy a ticket before boarding. While they operate on rails, the streetcars still use the general purpose traffic lanes. That means if there's a traffic jam they get stuck along with every other vehicle. Also, if a car, truck or more often, a emergency vehicle stops in front of the streetcar they're stuck and they can't steer around it. Trolleybuses don't have that problem and can easily pass stopped vehicles (except stopped trolleybuses).

The big difference between streetcars and trolleybuses is that until this point, most cities have used streetcars as a form of high capacity transit, while trolleybuses are simply a local bus with a different form of propulsion. That will change in the next few years if Seattle goes through with its plan to build a bus rapid transit line using trolleybuses. It will be more like light rail than a local bus.

All that being said I think that it would be somewhat tough to get a new built in another American city. The upfront costs are very high (wire installation, power conversion and more expensive buses) and the overhead wire is somewhat ugly considering you need two wires on each side of the street.


----------



## John Bredin (May 21, 2015)

I see from the Wikipedia article that Chicago has the dubious distinction of being the last U.S. city to end its trolleybus service, as late as 1973. I already knew CTA trolleybuses ended in 1973, but I didn't know we were the last to get rid of them.

Anyone know the story on how flat Chicago (unlike hilly Seattle and San Francisco who still have trolleybuses) managed to keep them so long (WAG: lots of ComEd nuclear power, like Seattle and SF's hydro-power) but *then* got rid of them? Was the wire system reaching the end of its useful life? (I see in the Wiki that Seattle, for example, suspended all service for renovation.)

The energy crisis began in October 1973, but CTA ended trolleybuses in March (and this list http://www.chicagorailfan.com/ctatrbus.html shows that a lot of the North Side east-west service ended in January 1973) -- was there any expressed regret by CTA or city officials, newspaper editorials, etc. on not keeping trolleybus service a little longer?


----------



## Guest (May 21, 2015)

Swadian Hardcore said:


> The point is flexibility, to drive around obstacles out from under the wires and get stuck. You see, Shawn, you're being argumentative. Both have their advantages and disadvantages. A lot of cities around the world simply have both.


Fixed that for you. Glad to help.

Guest


----------



## fairviewroad (May 21, 2015)

Guest said:


> Swadian Hardcore said:
> 
> 
> > The point is flexibility, to drive around obstacles out from under the wires and get stuck. You see, Shawn, you're being argumentative. Both have their advantages and disadvantages. A lot of cities around the world simply have both.
> ...


Out-of-date snark.

_Metro’s contract stipulated the vehicles need to be able to travel a minimum of 3 miles off wire, and during testing they’ve been able to reach that goal._

http://seattletransitblog.com/2014/11/10/metro-test-driving-off-wire-trolleys/


----------



## cirdan (May 21, 2015)

fairviewroad said:


> Guest said:
> 
> 
> > Swadian Hardcore said:
> ...


The idea isn't new.

Trolleybuses have had batteries since them very early days, permitting them to operate short distances away from the wires or to keep moving should the poles become desired, or for moving into the carbarns. Of course they couldn't do 3 miles, but shorter diversions were mo issue.

Some models had motor generator sets instead of batteries.

There is even an interesting hybrid called a duo bus that is a trolleybus when under wires but has a powerful motor generator set permitting it to operate away from the wires over longer distances.


----------



## rickycourtney (May 21, 2015)

SF Muni has one of those first generation auxiliary power units on their current trolleybuses... they simply allow the bus to move a short distance at a slow speed. Basically it's for moving a de-wired bus out of the middle of an intersection, or to bypass a short section of dead or damaged wire.

These new trolleybuses being delivered to King County Metro and SF Muni have lithium ion battery auxiliary power units go far beyond that.

The contract called for buses to be able to travel 3 miles off-wire at full speed, New Flyer and Vossloh Kiepe say the installed are actually be able to up to 5 miles off wire, but the tests here in Seattle have shown that they are capable of even further distances than that.

Dayton is in the middle of buying new trolleybuses from Vossloh Kiepe and Gillig and they are trialing two auxiliary power units... one uses a lithium ion battery, the other has an onboard diesel generator (simply generates power).

TL;DR... the idea that trolleybuses get stuck when they become dewired is totally outdated.


----------



## Swadian Hardcore (May 21, 2015)

fairviewroad said:


> Guest said:
> 
> 
> > Swadian Hardcore said:
> ...


It's the Internet.


----------



## the_traveler (May 21, 2015)

Moderator's note

I ask all please to not change the wording of another's post, as a "correction". If a correction is indeed needed, please send a PM to him/her, and allow him/her to edit the post to make the "correction". Thank you.


----------



## railiner (May 22, 2015)

Back in the 1930's, Public Service Coordinated Transport, a subsidiary of the Public Service Gas and Electric Company of New Jersey, had a fleet of "All Service Vehicles", that were gasoline or diesel engine buses, that also had an electric traction motor, powered by dual overhead trolley wires. So these vehicles could used the trolley wires while in urban area's, and then continue into unwired rural area's. PSCT evolved into today's state-owned NJ Transit-Bus Operations

Another interesting modern version is that of the MBTA "Silver Line", which used diesel power to reach its Waterfront and Logan Airport branch terminals, and then at its "Silver Line Way" station, shuts down the engine and raises its trolley poles. It then proceeds into a dedicated subway busway, serving the downtown stations, where fares are collected at turnstiles, just like the trains. The buses open all three doors at those stations for rapid loading and unloading. And since they are within the fare control zone, passengers can freely transfer to any of the subway lines at those stations...

See....http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dual-mode_bus#/media/File:MBTA_Silver_Line_bus_1132.jpg


----------



## BCL (Jun 2, 2015)

San Francisco MUNI was mentioned. They've got some of those overhead lines running in the most narrow or congested places. For one, I can't see streetcars running through Chinatown like the 30 Stockton, along with lots of double-parked cars. People would get killed the way people cross the street there.

Also - I have seen a driver get out to reconnect the poles to the lines. Sounds like fun.


----------



## cirdan (Jun 2, 2015)

Plus of course street track is extremely costly and disruptive to install. If you wanted to put streetcar tracks on all San Francisco trolleybus routes you'd drain all the money for other investments for years if not decades and gain very little improvement in return.


----------



## NW cannonball (Jun 2, 2015)

Famously el trole in Quito has no rails, only trolleybuses - rush-hour headway is a minute or two. Fare - 25 US cents - works good, crowded at times.

Yup, this particular mode or method can work real well, depending on history and economics.


----------



## cirdan (Jun 2, 2015)

NW cannonball said:


> Famously el trole in Quito has no rails, only trolleybuses - rush-hour headway is a minute or two. Fare - 25 US cents - works good, crowded at times.
> 
> Yup, this particular mode or method can work real well, depending on history and economics.


Unfortunately from what I've heard they are planning to partly replace it by diesel buses.


----------



## BCL (Jun 3, 2015)

cirdan said:


> Plus of course street track is extremely costly and disruptive to install. If you wanted to put streetcar tracks on all San Francisco trolleybus routes you'd drain all the money for other investments for years if not decades and gain very little improvement in return.


I believe the cost is much higher. Those electric buses are also relatively light since they don't need to carry fuel or anything more than a small battery. And then there's the noise. I remember when MUNI touted these Italian designed cars as state of the art and likely to be reliable. Breda came in with the highest bid too. The cars are certainly nice looking, but they're huge, heavy, and loud. I remember visiting a family friend living next to one of their old streetcar lines, and those PCC cars were about as loud. They also have jerky acceleration and sudden braking.


----------



## Rob Creighton (Jun 9, 2015)

John Bredin said:


> I see from the Wikipedia article that Chicago has the dubious distinction of being the last U.S. city to end its trolleybus service, as late as 1973. I already knew CTA trolleybuses ended in 1973, but I didn't know we were the last to get rid of them.
> 
> Anyone know the story on how flat Chicago (unlike hilly Seattle and San Francisco who still have trolleybuses) managed to keep them so long (WAG: lots of ComEd nuclear power, like Seattle and SF's hydro-power) but *then* got rid of them? Was the wire system reaching the end of its useful life? (I see in the Wiki that Seattle, for example, suspended all service for renovation.)
> 
> The energy crisis began in October 1973, but CTA ended trolleybuses in March (and this list http://www.chicagorailfan.com/ctatrbus.html shows that a lot of the North Side east-west service ended in January 1973) -- was there any expressed regret by CTA or city officials, newspaper editorials, etc. on not keeping trolleybus service a little longer?


I'm not sure that Wikipedia article is correct. I spent the first few years of my life in Philly, and being a one car family, my Mom and I rode lots of buses, el-trains/subways and the subway surface cars they had. I clearly remember some electric buses, because I was fascinated with all things on wheels and I'm almost sure we rode on them. And I think that would have to be more 75 or 76. Because I highly doubt I'd have that memory before the end of 74 (too small). That of course, doesn't mean they hadn't already killed it and just hadn't stopped running the electric buses at that point.


----------



## cirdan (Jun 9, 2015)

Rob Creighton said:


> John Bredin said:
> 
> 
> > I see from the Wikipedia article that Chicago has the dubious distinction of being the last U.S. city to end its trolleybus service, as late as 1973. I already knew CTA trolleybuses ended in 1973, but I didn't know we were the last to get rid of them.
> ...


I believe Philly still has them today.

Service was suspended in about 2003, but from the beginning it was said this was only temporary. And sure enough, the overhead lines remained in place and the trackless trolleys came back in 2008. As far as I know there are presently 3 routes operated with them.


----------



## Swadian Hardcore (Jun 9, 2015)

Here's SEPTA's official history on trackless trolleys in Philadelphia: http://www.septa.org/media/50th/trackless-trolleys.html.

BTW, SEPTA Route 66 is really awesome.


----------

