[PRCo] Re: Articulateds

[Schneider Fred]

As a matter of fact, everything  we have in life is convertible to  
labor.
The point I made initially Phil is that in delivering a passenger to  
his destination, platform labor was largest single cost of running  
the vehicle.

As agencies shift more and more costs away from "operating costs" to  
"non-operating costs" then drivers become an every more visible  
portion of the total.   Put differently, when we no longer maintain  
the bus or streetcar out of the operating budget but bid that out as  
a mid-life overhaul and ask the federal government to cover it as a  
capital cost, then the operating costs are reduced by that amount and  
the drivers and motorman become an even larger share.   If we hide  
waste baskets and computers under capital (because they last more  
than three years), then again we've reduced total operating costs and  
made the drivers and motorman a larger share of the remaining  
"operating costs."   Obviously the next things we need to do are  
lengthen the vehicles and reduce the headways and cut back on pension  
and hospitalization costs and wages to get the platform costs under  
control.   (Remember that Fred didn't say that, the politician said  
that.)

Rarely to single streetcars exceed 50 feet in length.   Interurban  
cars commonly were much longer.

Look at the link below ... a tremendous number of pictures but look  
most closely at the ones that best show the end detail of the cars.    
The motorman's cab rests on its own truck.  Each section is very  
short so that there is very little overhang.  Overhang has always  
been critical in European cities because their streets were built for  
horses, mules, carts, people ... not 53-foot-long x 102 inch wide  
semi trailers towed by Peterbilt tractors.  This is the Eurotram tram  
design built in Bombardier's Derby (pronouced Darby), England plant  
for operation in Strasbourg, France.   My recollection from the two  
times I've seen it:  a very heads up operation.



http://www.railfaneurope.net/pix/fr/trams/Strasbourg/Eurotram/misc/ 
pix.html

On Sep 4, 2008, at 4:04 PM, Phillip Clark Campbell wrote:

> Mr.Dietrich;  That's an over-simplification isn't it; rarely do  
> single vehicles exceed 50-foot lengths, but there are notable  
> exceptions, WP 700s being one of them and they negotiated some  
> severe turning radii didn't they.  Normal truck centers on artic  
> rail vehicles like Boston and San Francisco are very similar to  
> truck centers on single vehicles.  On these systems if the truck  
> centers were longer they would not fit the 'existing system' would  
> they.  Center overhang would be greater as would the end and they  
> could touch on city curves.   Modern artic rail cars are not unlike  
> chopping off one end of two standard trolleys at the king pin and  
> joining them with a common truck  Thus turning radius is identical  
> for both old trolleys and modern artic rail cars.
>
> On buses the back end doesn't follow in the same path as the front  
> axle does it; when there are 2 'back axles' on an artic the artic  
> thus needs more room to turn.  This is just common logic isn't it.   
> There were / are some artic buses that had / have steerable rear  
> axles so this axle would follow in the same / similar path as the  
> center axle  (and considerably less turning ratio than on the front  
> axle;)  this steerable rear axle artic takes the 'same identical  
> space as a standard length bus to turn.'  But these steerable units  
> were problematic since, once into a turn, the driver can't see what  
> that rear axle is doing on the outside edge of the turn; other  
> vehicles could move in here unseen by the bus driver and accidents  
> could result as the back end swung out.  I have witnessed this myself.
>
> On modern LR systems built from scratch  (Denver, San Diego, etc.)   
> the truck center distances on artic rail vehicles are considerably  
> more than that used on the typical trolley of the 1940s.  This  
> effectively limits the minimum turn radius which is 'greater' than  
> the minimum turn radius for trolleys - considerably greater.
>
> As with most everything in life, labor costs are the biggest chunk  
> of expenses for delivering a product /  service aren't they;  
> reducing labor costs is the key to artics, not the turning radius.
>
>
>
> Phil
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----
>> From: BobDietrich <bob.dietrich1 at verizon.net>
>> To: pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org
>> Sent: Tuesday, September 2, 2008 3:51:00 PM
>> Subject: [PRCo] Re: Articulateds
>>
>> Bendie busses and streetcars can get around tighter corners than  
>> can a
>> longer rigid vehicle.  Also the other, cheaper to run, rules apply.
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: pittsburgh-railways-bounce at lists.dementia.org
>> [mailto:pittsburgh-railways-bounce at lists.dementia.org] On Behalf  
>> Of Derrick
>> J Brashear
>> Sent: Tuesday, September 02, 2008 6:12 PM
>> To: pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org
>> Cc: Ken and Tracie; Milwaukee-electric at dementia.org
>> Subject: [PRCo] Re: Articulateds
>>
>> On Tue, 2 Sep 2008, Schneider Fred wrote:
>>
>>> No brainer Ken.
>>>
>>> For most of my working life, platform employe wages have represented
>>> more than half of the operating costs of delivering a customer to  
>>> his
>>> destination.   The more passengers each vehicle carries, the lower
>>> the cost per passenger and the lower the cost per passenger mile.
>>
>> it only works if you fill the vehicle at least as full as a shorter
>> vehicle, though.
>
>
>
>
>
>