Val?

[starrymarkb]

Would the VAL style of metro system be suited to any UK cities?

 

[bb21]

Would the VAL style of metro system be suited to any UK cities?

Can you elaborate? or provide a link? as Google gives me this.

If this is the case, then I would say very fine.

 

[OMGitsDAVE]

Think he's on about this...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Véhicule_Automatique_Léger

 

[WatcherZero]

Rubber tires erosion problem, though from the looks of it their mitigating that by installing concrete rails. However do you think any UK city would really enjoy gaining a raised railway? Docklands was easy because noone lived there until after the line was built and there was plenty of room for it.

 

[starrymarkb]

Think he's on about this...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Véhicule_Automatique_Léger

I was indeed.

 

[valenta]

Personally I wouldn't like a raised railway anytime soon, I find them a bit ugly.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Would something similar to this system be that which was discussed when the original "Guided Busway" proposals for the Leigh area, about 20 years ago, were then in a general discussion between North-West transport bodies?

 

[starrymarkb]

Personally I wouldn't like a raised railway anytime soon, I find them a bit ugly.

Most VALs aren't raised, the Lille system is a mix of underground, viaduct and surface running

 

[Nym]

Why use rubber tyres when we have perfectly good rails?

 

[starrymarkb]

To Claim funding intended for Guided busways

I suspect they have their reasons for going rubber

Advantages of rubber-tyred metro systems (compared to steel wheel on steel rail):

• Smoother rides (with little jostling around)
• Faster acceleration[1]
• Shorter braking distances, allowing trains to be signalled closer together
• The ability to climb or descend steeper slopes (~gradient 13%) than would be feasible with conventional rail tracks so gradient conventional rail tracks would likely need a rack.
• Quieter rides in open air (both inside and outside the train)

The higher friction and increased rolling resistance cause disadvantages (compared to steel wheel on steel rail):

• Higher energy consumption
• Possibility of tyre blow-outs - not possible in railway wheels.
• More heat generated
• Weather variance. (Applicable only to above-ground installations)
• Losing the traction-advantage in inclement weather (snow and ice)[2]
• Heavier as steel rails remain for switching purposes to provide electricity to the trains and as a safety backup[3]
• Tyre replacement cost[4]

[edit] Notes
^1 Modern steel-on-steel rolling stock using distributed-traction with a high-proportion of powered axles narrowed the gap to the acceleration/performance found in rubber-tyre rolling stock.
^2 To reduce weather disruption, the Montreal Metro runs completely underground. On Paris Métro Line 6, upgrades of tyres (as used with cars) and special ribbed tracks have been tried out.
^ 3In effect, there are two systems running in parallel so it is more expensive to build, install and maintain.
^4 Rubber tyres have higher wear rates and, therefore ,need more frequent replacement. Although steel wheels set is more expensive than tyres, the frequency of their respective replacements makes rubber tyres the more expensive option. Rubber tyres for guidance are needed.

Any such decision is a compromise for circumstances I was refering to the concept of the automatic light metro

 

[WatcherZero]

Useful where it could be entirely segregated through viaduct or tunnels, but in this country if it was ground level you would get people trying to cross it.

 

[jopsuk]

Any such decision is a compromise for circumstances I was refering to the concept of the automatic light metro

We've got a fairly large "conventional" tracked automatic (or, at least, semi-automatic) Metro system in the form of the DLR, plus further semi-automatic systems such as the LU Victoria line

 

[185]

The braking distances are very good on them, if not a bit too good. I doubt GMPTE would consider them for Leigh as they are so fixated on Metrolink's tiny little trams.


(My google search for VAL gave me http://991.com/newGallery/Val-Doonican-The-World-Of-Val-421217.jpg )

 

[LE Greys]

I'm not a big fan of rubber-tyred systems, not just because I don't see them as "real" railways. They use more energy, thereby defeating the main object of a railway, low-energy transport. They also produce the most awful smell. Let's stick to steel-on-steel.

 

[WatcherZero]

In France the main home of rubber tyred trams is also the home of Michelin, coincidence?

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

In France the main home of rubber tyred trams is also the home of Michelin, coincidence?

I am gald that you are back...does rubber when heated by such use give off any harmful substances to human health?

 

[jopsuk]

In France the main home of rubber tyred trams is also the home of Michelin, coincidence?

Why are there so few in Italy (home of Pirelli)? There's not many in Japan (Bridgestone) or Germany (Continental). They're not common in the US (Goodyear and Firestone) or the UK (Dunlop, though they're a bit fragmented these days).

Or, shorter version:
YES, IT IS A COINCIDENCE.

 

[WatcherZero]

Not the country, the home town with tyres provided by the company. It was Michelin campaign on jobs and loss of business that they be rubber tyred rather than steel wheels.
Was a rhetorical question, yes it wasnt a coincidence but by design.