TROLLEY BUSES

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXII, Issue 22108, 14 May 1935, Page 10

TROLLEY BUSES

POWEBS OF MANOEUVRE TRAFFIC BLOCKS EASED EXPERIENCE IN ENGLAND REPLY MADE TO MR. FORD Comment upon references to trolley buses made by Mr. A. E. Ford, manager of the Auckland Transport Board in his recent report on transport developments overseas, is made by Mr. Adam G. Whyte, editor of the Trolley Bus Gazette, London, in a letter to the Herald. Mr. Whyte says:— "Mr. Ford states that he 'found abundant evidence against the assertion that motor buses and trolley buses cause less interference with other "traffic than rail-bound tramcars.' Here the impression Mr. Ford appears to have received is directly contrary to the experience of transport authorities in this country. The fact that a tramcar monopolises a section of the roadway and is unable to manoeuvre round slower traffic must surely be a source of interference with other traffic, except in the rare cases where the road is so wide as to give complete freedom to all types of vehicles. On one typical stretch of urban roadway where a double line of tramways was removed and a trolley bus service substituted, a traffic census showed that the average speed of the motor traffic increased by ovey 25 per cent. Convenience of Passengers "Mr. Ford adds that 'in busy English streets it is not generally possible for them (trolley buses and motor buses) to draw into the kerb.' As it is the established practice of both these vehicles to pick up and set down passengers at the kerb, it is difficult to understand how Mr. Ford gathered that it is generally impossible for them to do so. No other practice would, in fact, be tolerated by the authorities, if only on account of the danger and obstruction caused by passengers entering and leaving vehicles in the centre of the roadway. "On the first section of the London tramway system to be converted to trolley buses, it was found that the kerbing power of the trolley buses definitely encouraged traffic. Experience on this section (about 18 miles) led the London Passenger Transport Board to decide upon the conversion of a further 148 miles of tramway route. The board, it may be noted, has had long experience in operating all forms of passenger transport—underground and surface railways, tramways and motor buses as well as trolley buses. Its large-scale trolley bus plans are therefore a convincing proof of the ability of the trolley bus to give efficient service under a wide variety of conditions. A Question of Cost "Where a tramway system has been maintained in good condition and operates profitably on streets of suitable width, it would undoubtedly be unwise, if not absurd, to scrap it in favour of any other system of transport. The steel wheel on the steel rail principle is still the most economical in power consumption per passenger mile. Several British tramways are in this happy condition, but in many others the necessity for heavy outlay on track reconstruction has made the trolley bus alternative attractive, as it enables a large proportion of the tramway assets, overhead gear, cables, etc., to be retained, and offers the public a popular service of speedy, quiet and comfortable vehicles, free from exhauslj fumes and other drawbacks. "As the Auckland Transport Board possesses a thoroughly modern tramway system, Mr. Ford's decision to continue on the present lines will be universally endorsed, even among trolley bus enthusiasts. It is unfortunate, therefore, that his decision should bo accompanied by disparaging observations, which find no justification in British experience, about trolley buses."