RAILforum: Bus Road or Rail for 21st Century

This is topic Bus Road or Rail for 21st Century in forum Commuter Trains at RAILforum.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
http://www.railforum.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi/topic/12/75.html

Posted by Xporter (Member # 1905) on :

I believe that the time is right to market a bus modification kit that will enable buses to use either road or rail at the flick of a switch. Rationale: In my state there is allot of disused railroad tracks. Tracks that would not be useable for heavy (freight) trains, but could be made useable for light rail. I was told in the past that the FRA does not allow light rail to use heavy rail tracks. But, in a recent communication from the FRA Policy section, they stated that they do not prohibit light (bus or streetcars) rail from using heavy railroads. Buses obey the "Economy of Scale rule” where trains don't. The "Economy of Scale rule" states that load capacity is directly proportional to size of the load. The proposed bus modification kit comes in two sizes, small for city transit bus and large for 55- passenger buses.

Any comments?

Posted by irishchieftain (Member # 1473) on :

I was going to ignore this thread...

But since it makes you sound like a BRT advocate, first, I'll say that there's nothing 21st-century-ish about your suggestion. Nor would any mass transit agencies pick up on it, since it's so impractical and most likely very, very expensive to implement.

There are already diesel LRVs in existence—one example is the O-Train in Ottawa, Canada, which uses freight tracks, but with "time-share" between freight trains (neither can operate on the same tracks at the same time of day). Another is slated to open soon in southwestern New Jersey, the Southern NJ LRT line between Camden and Trenton in that state.

If you want to be more flexible and be compatible with the FRA, there are plenty of DMUs available, with FRA-compatible versions available from Colorado Railcar ( http://www.coloradorailcar.com ), both single-deck and double-deck. Either that or if these ROWs you speak of are actually disused and no freights use them, then they could be re-classified as FTA-regulated railways for diesel LRT usage, so long as they are henceforth separated from any connections to active freight tracks.

Either that...or, if you think that your buses truly obey the "economies of scale" rule (they don't—their short lifespans dictate that only too well), how about your city take over the ROWs and pave over them, turning them into busways. Now, that'll be way more expensive than rehabbing them and using DLRVs on them...but hey, I'm only one guy speaking MHO...

[This message has been edited by irishchieftain (edited 09-02-2002).]

Posted by JimBaker (Member # 1637) on :

Historically, the Houston North Shore, a Missouri Pacific, subsidiary, ran converted Twin Coach Bus bodies on rail frames after converting from overhead trolley.
The CERA, recently published a book on the line. I highly recommend its purchase.
The rail buses were turned on turntable or a Wye at the terminals.

Posted by irishchieftain (Member # 1473) on :

I've always been curious as to the operating cost difference between electric interurbans and the railbuses (nowadays "diesel LRT") on the HNS. The Twin Coach bodies would have made a sharp-looking electric trolley, IMHO...and the HNS, in its infinite wisdom, had to put unidirectional rail vehicles on a loopless interurban, of course.

However, I doubt that we'll ever see a bizarre hybrid road/rail bus such as the vanished author of this thread suggested...

Posted by Xporter (Member # 1905) on :

Federal Railroad Administration, policy department Mr. Peter Kerr "There is no problem mixing commuter rail and freight service on the same track(s). In fact that mixing is often one of the obstacles in starting commuter service. Commuter trains want to move faster than freight trains. To move faster the track often must be in better condition than the railroad owner needs for freight service. It is a case of "you want it faster? You pay for it."

True "light rail" is what used to be called streetcars. Can you mix streetcars with regular rail? Yes, it has been done several times in the past in this country. But, on new systems you usually would not want to because one would lose the advantage of light rail - cheaper to build. Light rail is 'light' because it doesn't weigh as much as regular trains and is smaller. Lighter weight means bridges and track structure can be built for less money. Smaller means that clearances for tunnels and bridges are less, again saving money. True light rail bridges and track structure probably would not support regular trains and the clearances would be too small. But, where light rail uses old or existing rights-of-way, in theory, heavy rail could use the same track. Would it want to? Most likely not because the freight railroad already has mostly given up service on the line anyway for it to be willing to sell or share the right-of-way for light rail use."

Don't we wish that the Federal Government would subsides Railroads, I'm all for that, but it does not seem possible. So what are the options? Check out my web page for my option on how to use disused railroad lines. http://hometown.aol.com/richmagoon/myhomepage

Posted by irishchieftain (Member # 1473) on :

Mr. Xporter: Your idea is not new nor original.

Posted by Xporter (Member # 1905) on :

Awesome thanks. You can delete the topic.

Have a happy.

Posted by coach34135 (Member # 1979) on :

Thats the silliest idea, at least it's been tried out.
I'm a bus driver and I'd rather be on asphalt not steel. No way would I take my 55pax MCI on rails.....

Posted by George Harris (Member # 2077) on :

Where do I begin?

First, the devices to put busses on rails have been around a long time. It would be much the same as used for various pieces of hi-rail work equipment.

Second, any track unsuitable for freight trains for reasons other than bridge weight restrictions and clearances would be highly unsuitable for passenger service. Generally, out of service railways have trailed out their last years with little or no maintenance and give a rough ride at 10 to 25 mph. This will never work in passenger service, where speed is virtually everything.

third, there is precious little if anything to be saved by building a track for light rail instead of freight. The grades can be steeper and the structures may be constructed for a lighter load, but a structure for a 15 ton maximum axle is probably more like 80 to 90% of the cost of a structure built for a 40 ton axle, not 50% of the cost.

Mixed freight and LRT? Look at the Baltimore light rail, both ways outside of downtown Baltimore. Aggregate trains and mixed freight run late at night on the north end, some volume of freight on the Baltimore and Annapolis on the south end. Considerable expense went into both track and structures to make the in-service freight tracks acceptable for light rail passenger usage, not to mention addition of the electrification.

Posted by Amtrak Viewliner (Member # 842) on :

Doesn't NJ Transit have MOW equipment which are trucks that have retractable rail wheels?