Coventry Very Light Rail - Awarded to RailAdventure

[Steddenm]

I have heard that the new Coventry Very Light Rail has been awarded to Rail Adventure to operate the short trial run in the city.



According to Coventry City Council the service will operate in May and June of this year.

Coventry Very Light Rail news – Coventry City Council

Coventry Very Light Rail news

www.coventry.gov.uk

RailAdventure UK, a specialist transport company in the West Midlands, will operate the Coventry Very Light Rail (CVLR) vehicle for the on-road test in the city centre in May and June this year.

CVLR is a new and innovative transportation system that is using the region's advanced automotive expertise to provide a flexible and affordable alternative to traditional light rail. It features a modern vehicle and a unique, revolutionary track design, aiming to offer a reliable, frequent, and eco-friendly 'hop-on, hop-off' service for Coventry residents.
RailAdventure UK has earned its reputation by providing support services for rail operations, moving trains, testing them, and running passenger services. The company has now secured the contract that will see a father-and-son team driving the vehicle and its passengers on the 220-metre demonstration track.

 

[Lewisham2221]

I've got mixed feelings about this VLR.

On one hand, it's good to see the effort going into developing a light rail system that's cheaper and quicker to build etc.

On the other hand, I'm asking what is the point of it? They're battery operated vehicles, so will need charging capabilities, whether that be rapid charge or something requiring more downtime. They're about the size of a bus. They have the capacity of a bus. They run on rails, so they have less flexibility than a bus. I appreciate that the creators talk about wanting to develop an autonomous, driverless system and also the possibility of operating the vehicles in pairs - but until either of those things are possible, what does VLR do that an electric bus can't do?

As a society, have we really got so engrossed in the "buses are dreadful" mentality that we'll do anything to avoid using the bus, even if the system we use instead is essentially still a bus?

 

[edwardajames]

The thing that convinced me VLR is worth piloting is this piece. https://www.tomforth.co.uk/birminghamisasmallcity/

It shows how a bus is far less reliable than a tram (when adequately segregated) to get to your destination on time at peak time. People are more likely to use reliable transport.

This reminded me that I already sort of knew this. When I lived in London I'd always take rail over bus at peak times, cos I knew the bus would get caught in traffic.

If they can make the VLR work - and segregate it - it can be a game changer for cost and certainty - you can invest on that route in taller buildings cos you know there will always be transport and you can always get to work/ home. Self driving is just a further bonus. Charging already seems to be sorted.

Looks like promise of mass transit is spurring huge planned investment in Leeds Elland Road stadium for the same reason - predictability.

 

[Lewisham2221]

It shows how a bus is far less reliable than a tram (when adequately segregated) to get to your destination on time at peak time. People are more likely to use reliable transport.

This reminded me that I already sort of knew this. When I lived in London I'd always take rail over bus at peak times, cos I knew the bus would get caught in traffic.

If they can make the VLR work - and segregate it - it can be a game changer for cost and certainty - you can invest on that route in taller buildings cos you know there will always be transport and you can always get to work/ home. Self driving is just a further bonus. Charging already seems to be sorted.

Yes, I suppose adequate segregation and priority measures is the key. Will certainly be interesting to see how the pilot goes.

 

[stuu]

Why not just segregate a bus then?

 

[BrunswickGreen]

What is the point of a 220m test track? Apart from showing the system in a public arena I fail to see what technical information can be gained from such a short run.

 

[Peter Mugridge]

What is the point of a 220m test track? Apart from showing the system in a public arena I fail to see what technical information can be gained from such a short run.

It's more to do with proving the track doesn't need extensive utilities works beforehand.

I think they did ask for 800 metres but were refused?

 

[Gag Halfrunt]

As a society, have we really got so engrossed in the "buses are dreadful" mentality that we'll do anything to avoid using the bus, even if the system we use instead is essentially still a bus?

Jarrett Walker has entered the chat.

sorting out rail-bus differences — Human Transit

Here's a crucial passage from the book I'm working on, though it may will end up in the next book rather than this one [Human Transit]. The topic is emotive, so I'm trying to be very carefully factual here. I welcome your critiques in comments. If you disagree on a matter of fact, please...

humantransit.org

A community’s attitudes toward rail and bus technologies can easily affect they way they are operated and presented. In short, people who believe that rail is better than buses will tend to act in ways that make that belief true. For example;

• Differences in investment or care. A community that believes that buses are only for poor people, or that rail is the mode of the future, will under-invest in buses as opposed to rail, producing a difference in quality that will reinforce that belief. It may also hold bus operations staff to lower standards than rail staff, and encourage other cultural differences between bus and rail operations that become real for the customer, but are not intrinsic to the bus-rail distinction.
• Perceptions of permanence. If you don’t stop to think about it, rails in the street will make a service feel permanent, especially if you’re used to hearing people tell you that rails imply permanence. History clearly shows that rail systems do stop running if their market disappears. True permanence lies in the permanence of the market, and that lies in the pattern of development [See Human Transit Chapter 14].
• Perceptions of legibility. The notion that a bus might do something unpredictable and a railcar won’t is also a cultural feedback effect, typically the result of insufficiently clear and compelling information about the bus network. It is quite possible to build bus services with such a high level of investment in infrastructure, such as stops and stations, that the routing is as obvious as a rail line’s would be; the Los Angeles Orange Line bus rapid transit system is a good example.
• Regulatory differences. Government regulation often enforces different rules for road transport as opposed to rail transport. These regulations are themselves a kind of cultural feedback, differences in habit and history between agencies that regulate roads and those that regulate rail. By enforcing different standards and safety requirements, these regulations can cause outcomes that amplify the apparent difference between road-based and rail-based transit.
• Different potential for mission-creep. If you build a stretch of road for a busway, there’s always a danger that somebody might try to open it to cars. If you don’t trust your government to protect the stated purpose of a facility, this can be a major decision factor. This issue applies, however, to the narrow range of cases in which a road or lane is being built that could be useful to cars but is closed to them. It is not an issue where the proposal is to reallocate existing roadspace from cars to transit, nor when building a higher-end busway whose design makes it useless to cars even if they were allowed on it.

 

[Hyebone]

Reinventing the wheel for what reason? Trams have proven themselves; why not just invest in that instead?

 

[Zomboid]

I've got mixed feelings about this VLR.

On one hand, it's good to see the effort going into developing a light rail system that's cheaper and quicker to build etc.

On the other hand, I'm asking what is the point of it? They're battery operated vehicles, so will need charging capabilities, whether that be rapid charge or something requiring more downtime. They're about the size of a bus. They have the capacity of a bus. They run on rails, so they have less flexibility than a bus. I appreciate that the creators talk about wanting to develop an autonomous, driverless system and also the possibility of operating the vehicles in pairs - but until either of those things are possible, what does VLR do that an electric bus can't do?

As a society, have we really got so engrossed in the "buses are dreadful" mentality that we'll do anything to avoid using the bus, even if the system we use instead is essentially still a bus?

The thing for me is that it doesn't have to solve all the problems now.
I would agree that in its current state of maturity it might not be ready for much widespread use, but if this prototype proves successful then larger vehicles or >1 in a formation can follow, and ultimately it could become a budget alternative to a full on tram system. And trams do seem to be a more popular thing than buses...

 

[havaska]

Reinventing the wheel for what reason? Trams have proven themselves; why not just invest in that instead?

Isn’t this just basically a battery powered tram?

 

[D365]

Reinventing the wheel for what reason? Trams have proven themselves; why not just invest in that instead?

To elaborate on Peter’s comment. Several cities have found out (e.g. Sheffield, Nottingham, Edinburgh) that diverting public utilities is expensive - almost prohibitively so.

It's more to do with proving the track doesn't need extensive utilities works beforehand.

Isn’t this just basically a battery powered tram?

I believe so. If I recall correctly from the last lecture that I attended, VLR vehicles may even be compatible with ’traditional’ tram tracks.

 

[EyeKay]

I believe so. If I recall correctly from the last lecture that I attended, VLR vehicles may even be compatible with ’traditional’ tram tracks.

There should be no fundamental reason that VLR tram can’t use normal tram tracks. I’m not aware of anything weird with the wheel profile that would prevent it.

 

[Zomboid]

It's just a lightweight tram that doesn't need to be bedded in so far as a regular one. Ought to suit smaller cities quite well

 

[EyeKay]

I think the small capacity of the vehicles maybe an issue for the economics of operation. But if they could build an articulated one within the same weight constraints, that would help.

I also understand that the plan longer term is for them to be automated which could reduce staff costs if it was reliable in an urban environment

 

[Lewisham2221]

I think the small capacity of the vehicles maybe an issue for the economics of operation. But if they could build an articulated one within the same weight constraints, that would help.

I also understand that the plan longer term is for them to be automated which could reduce staff costs if it was reliable in an urban environment

I believe articulated/multiple operation is a long term aim, from what I've read previously. I'm no engineer, but I can't see any obvious reason why it wouldn't be possible to fairly easily produce an articulated version without increasing the load on each axle (which I imagine would be the significant weight factor?)

 

[duffield]

To elaborate on Peter’s comment. Several cities have found out (e.g. Sheffield, Nottingham, Edinburgh) that diverting public utilities is expensive - almost prohibitively so.

I'll say. I walked along part of one of the stage two Nottingham tram routes on my way home from work almost daily for the years it took to build, and it is just mind-blowing how complicated it gets under an urban/suburban road, and how much time and effort was involved in moving everything.

Gas, mains electric, mains water, sewage, telecoms, road drainage, and all of them connected to every single property - and then there's all those miscellaneous pipes and wires that were "probably" abandoned long ago and "probably" serve no purpose any more... Normal roadworks typically only give you a very constrained keyhole view of what lies beneath, you need to see an entire road scooped right out, with all the utilities just dangling freely to really get a feel for it. It's a rats' nest.

From admittedly a position of ignorance, I'd be surprised if a battery powered lightweight tramway cost as much as 20% as much per mile as a conventional tramway with OHLE. I haven't seen what sort of sums they're talking about for this system and how they compare though. Probably more expensive than that as it's a one-off proof of concept.

 

[Taunton]

It's not just the utilities directly in the way of the rails that need to be identified and moved, it's everything. Otherwise whenever any maintenance, or a new connection, is required, which would require the road to be dug up, that's the end of any rail service if you have left them there. At any point along the route. I doubt my local bus route has had any day when they do not have to get round some road works, major or minor. And they can steer round.

Regarding the track foundations, the less you spend on them, the more undulating and distorted they become over time. A highways engineer does this in the first term at college.

 

[DJ_K666]

I don't know about anyone else but I've booked a place on one of the trial journeys so I can find out more.
So.ewhere I read that the track will be studied over a certain amount of time and data collected about the effect of traffic on it.
From what I've read, it's a type of concrete being used that's extra thin but extra strong, so I'm guessing a high potash content (apparently this makes concrete so strong that a diamond tipped drill can't make a dent in it) and being a pad spreads the weight in a way that using LR55 rail sections wouldn't.

I've no idea if the trial section of track is on the intended route of the network or if it'll be replaced if the trial shows positive results. Get it right and maybe other tram schemes might use the technology. Maybe the track might prove suitable for conventional trams too. They do have a Gronk, which presumably is able to run over it at the test centre, after all.

 

[irp]

I don't know about anyone else but I've booked a place on one of the trial journeys so I can find out more.
So.ewhere I read that the track will be studied over a certain amount of time and data collected about the effect of traffic on it.
From what I've read, it's a type of concrete being used that's extra thin but extra strong, so I'm guessing a high potash content (apparently this makes concrete so strong that a diamond tipped drill can't make a dent in it) and being a pad spreads the weight in a way that using LR55 rail sections wouldn't.

I've no idea if the trial section of track is on the intended route of the network or if it'll be replaced if the trial shows positive results. Get it right and maybe other tram schemes might use the technology. Maybe the track might prove suitable for conventional trams too. They do have a Gronk, which presumably is able to run over it at the test centre, after all.

I've also booked a place on one of the trial journeys. Like you, I'm not sure if that section of test track will become part of the intended route. However, I did hear back in January via the BBC , that "line one" might go out to the airport investment zone, so who knows, but that fact that they are inviting members of the public to ride the test track suggests to me no safety issues, and that this is about performance/environmental[ie effect on the thin concrete etc] testing.

If my memory serves, being extra thin, they don't need to dig up and take care of utilities. Then again Coventry City Council seem to do that regularly anyway

 

[trainmania100]

Just seen a video showing the inside. The drivers cab (or lack thereof) puts the driver completely in the open for distractions and potential assault / hijacking by intoxicated passengers. The compactness of the vehicle is obviously why they've tried to maximise as many seats as possible, some are right next to the driver with no shield in between.

 

[duffield]

...
The drivers cab (or lack thereof) puts the driver completely in the open for distractions and potential assault / hijacking by intoxicated passengers.
...

So, like a lot of buses then, or if we want a rail example, a class 139 (Parry People Mover)?

 

[Madfly]

I sadly cannot see this being a success at all. The VLR vehicle only having a capacity of 56 is a huge disadvantage. If a bus route currently operated by double-deckers was to be replaced by VLR, the route would loose capacity! Seemingly, the council know this, which is why their promotional material focuses almost exclusively on the cost-saving aspect.

VLR seems to have all the disadvantages of a conventional tram (fixed routes and infrastructure) with none of the advantages (higher capacity and speed than a bus). Any journey time benefits could also be given to buses through bus lanes and signal prioritisation, while a modern BRT vehicle can easily accommodate double the number of passenger (if not more) than the VLR one. I cannot see any scenario in which it would be beneficial to choose VLR over BRT or conventional trams.

The sceptic in me says the council are just desperate to 'prove' VLR works so they can make money off of it. They own of 85% of the intellectual proprtey of the system, so would be rewarded greatly if another city signed up.

 

[Brubulus]

I sadly cannot see this being a success at all. The VLR vehicle only having a capacity of 56 is a huge disadvantage. If a bus route currently operated by double-deckers was to be replaced by VLR, the route would loose capacity! Seemingly, the council know this, which is why their promotional material focuses almost exclusively on the cost-saving aspect.

VLR seems to have all the disadvantages of a conventional tram (fixed routes and infrastructure) with none of the advantages (higher capacity and speed than a bus). Any journey time benefits could also be given to buses through bus lanes and signal prioritisation, while a modern BRT vehicle can easily accommodate double the number of passenger (if not more) than the VLR one. I cannot see any scenario in which it would be beneficial to choose VLR over BRT or conventional trams.

The sceptic in me says the council are just desperate to 'prove' VLR works so they can make money off of it. They own of 85% of the intellectual proprtey of the system, so would be rewarded greatly if another city signed up.

I believe that vehicles can be coupled together to form longer units. Secondly I believe the technology may be able to support some models of conventional tram, with low axle weights. To me the VLR comes across as a new method of tramway construction, to reduce the need for utility diversions and therefore save costs. The limitation will be axle weight, which might prevent tram trains but apart from that, I see this potentially being a success.

 

[DJ_K666]

I've also booked a place on one of the trial journeys. Like you, I'm not sure if that section of test track will become part of the intended route. However, I did hear back in January via the BBC , that "line one" might go out to the airport investment zone, so who knows, but that fact that they are inviting members of the public to ride the test track suggests to me no safety issues, and that this is about performance/environmental[ie effect on the thin concrete etc] testing.

If my memory serves, being extra thin, they don't need to dig up and take care of utilities. Then again Coventry City Council seem to do that regularly anyway

Yeah Ivecread somewhere that the type of concrete track base they're using wasn't available 3 years ago. It'll be interesting to ask a few questions about it on the day (I've booked June 1st)

And yes Coventry council seem to like digging things up and then leaving it unattended for ages.