Jump to content
Attention: In order to reply to messages, create topics, have access to other features of the community you must sign up for an account.

Articulated bus. Operation, configuration and routes best utilized.


metsfan

Recommended Posts

So I was watching top gear right now, and they had kind of a race using busses, the kind one would find in London specifically. That got me to wondering...

 

What is the best articulated bus for north American markets? Where to put the engine, low or mid height floor, 2 or 3 sections, 2 or 3 or 4 doors, CNG, hybrid, straight diesel... Out of the models being produced today, which would be best in NYC, Philly Boston, etc etc. And list the benefits vs the current articulated models in service.

 

- A

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So I was watching top gear right now, and they had kind of a race using busses, the kind one would find in London specifically. That got me to wondering...

 

What is the best articulated bus for north American markets? Where to put the engine, low or mid height floor, 2 or 3 sections, 2 or 3 or 4 doors, CNG, hybrid, straight diesel... Out of the models being produced today, which would be best in NYC, Philly Boston, etc etc. And list the benefits vs the current articulated models in service.

 

- A

 

This isn't really a question that can be answered in broad general terms. Different agencies have different requirements. None of which will ever be the same across the board. What is best for LA might be a disaster for New York.

 

3 section double articulated coaches aren't allowed in the USA, the number of doors depends on the individual TA's specs, Philly has trolly buses, and fuel types vary across North America as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, i was wondering which system/agency was matched to which bus, not a one bus to move them all kinda deal.

 

I feel in the snowy parts of the country, a mid engine design might be best, coupled with rear axle steering. I think 2 doors per section could be used on routes with very frequent on/off passenger movement, then a 3 door model could be used for express routes. Hybrid would be cool, but straight diesel would be fine too.

 

Out in the pacific coastal cities you could have CNG to keep the air from getting nasty. Or go one further and get a hybrid CNG. SFO, SEA, PDX, probably mid engine for the hills, and LA, SD rear engine.

 

I feel philly could get away with an articulated trolly bus as long as you gave it rear steering for those curves.

 

I also think the PA should get the faster of all the types out there and run shuttles between the airports they operate. People connecting LGA-EWR would have a much easier time.

 

What does everyone else think?

 

- A

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, i was wondering which system/agency was matched to which bus, not a one bus to move them all kinda deal.

 

I feel in the snowy parts of the country, a mid engine design might be best, coupled with rear axle steering. I think 2 doors per section could be used on routes with very frequent on/off passenger movement, then a 3 door model could be used for express routes. Hybrid would be cool, but straight diesel would be fine too.

 

Out in the pacific coastal cities you could have CNG to keep the air from getting nasty. Or go one further and get a hybrid CNG. SFO, SEA, PDX, probably mid engine for the hills, and LA, SD rear engine.

 

I feel philly could get away with an articulated trolly bus as long as you gave it rear steering for those curves.

 

I also think the PA should get the faster of all the types out there and run shuttles between the airports they operate. People connecting LGA-EWR would have a much easier time.

 

What does everyone else think?

 

- A

 

SEPTA will not get any more trolleys anytime soon. If they wanted they could get E60LFR's like Translink. Better chance of MUNI getting E60LFR's to replace their E60HF's

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, i was wondering which system/agency was matched to which bus, not a one bus to move them all kinda deal.

 

I feel in the snowy parts of the country, a mid engine design might be best, coupled with rear axle steering. I think 2 doors per section could be used on routes with very frequent on/off passenger movement, then a 3 door model could be used for express routes. Hybrid would be cool, but straight diesel would be fine too.

 

Out in the pacific coastal cities you could have CNG to keep the air from getting nasty. Or go one further and get a hybrid CNG. SFO, SEA, PDX, probably mid engine for the hills, and LA, SD rear engine.

 

I feel philly could get away with an articulated trolly bus as long as you gave it rear steering for those curves.

 

I also think the PA should get the faster of all the types out there and run shuttles between the airports they operate. People connecting LGA-EWR would have a much easier time.

 

What does everyone else think?

 

- A

 

I don't think mid-engine designs will go over too well in North America. Most all bus maintenance bays are set up to service rear engines, which is the standard.

 

Not only that, but the cost of a mid-engine, rear axle steering coach would be astronomical because they are not in demand at all.

 

It would also be extremely hard, and near impossible to add a second door to the rear (trailer) section because it is a high floor.

 

You have some good ideas, but most of them are not feasible in part of the world.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.