ENGLISH EXCERPT FROM GERMAN WIKIPEDIA ARTICLE ‘OBERLEITUNGSBUS’
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oberleitungsbus – cite_note-163

Criticisms and Disadvantages

Ever since its introduction, the trolleybus has been in direct competition with both the omnibus and the tram. In this context it is sometimes criticised as combining the disadvantages of both. [163] [148] The operation of both forms of transport with overhead cables i.e. trolleybus and tram is often criticised as being uneconomical, especially in smaller towns. So, only a relatively easily defined niche market is available to the trolleybus, namely on routes with passenger volumes that are not high enough to justify construction of a tram system, but high enough to render the operation of an omnibus service inefficient. [164] The investment in trolleybus infrastructure is therefore only justifiable on main routes with high frequency service and high passenger levels. [148]

Disadvantages compared with the Omnibus

The most frequent criticism of the trolleybus is the higher operational costs compared to diesel or gas-powered buses. Due to the high cost of vehicles and the cost of overhead lines and substations, it is economically inferior to the omnibus. [165]

The trolleybus shares with rail systems the restrictions of a physically defined route. Consequently, diversions and short-term route changes are not possible. Without additional overhead infrastructure it is also impossible to run detours or shortened routes during less busy periods, as is usually the case in many cities with omnibuses during the evenings, at night and on weekends. In Solingen six regular trolleybus lines are replaced overnight by six night-express omnibus lines, all serving routes which deviate from their daytime service. This sometimes leads to confusion among passengers. [166] Furthermore the operation of school services for both the start and the finish of the school day are not feasible if these deviate from the regular route. The same applies to servicing industrial sites at the times of shift changes.

Another disadvantage of being restricted by the overhead cables is
that trolleybuses cannot overtake each other on route, as is usual with omnibuses, this hinders or prevents the provision of express services. [167] Furthermore, empty vehicles returning to or rejoining service from the depot cannot take the quickest route. This means they cannot for example, use bypass roads but must follow the regular route. To avoid this, in some towns extra route bypass infrastructure is provided. These in turn are comparatively expensive to maintain because of their infrequent use and lack of revenue generation from fares. Passenger direction-dependent services – for example, in the morning on the regular route into the city and then empty as fast as possible back to the start and vice versa in the afternoon, are also difficult to achieve with trolleybuses without complex additional infrastructure. An example of this is the Zurich line 46, where the frequency is increased by means of diesel buses. [168] Trolleybuses are also unable to turn at any point in the network in the instance of technical difficulties. By contrast, an omnibus can turn at any major intersection. Furthermore, trolleybus services cannot be supplemented by the use of any extra units to cover demand at major events, because the capacity of the substations is usually designed for regular operation only. In St Gallen, a new substation had to be built when the local transport operators introduced double articulated trolleybuses on the regional network. [169]

Moreover, for technical reasons not every bus line can be electrified: Level crossings with electrified railways or particularly low underpasses both exclude trolleybus operation. An example here is the underpass at the Wuppertal-Vohwinkel station. This prevented the extension of the Solingen line 683 since the necessary lowering of the roadway would have cost around four million euros. [170] The same applies if sections of the route run along motorways or other fast roads with a minimum speed limit of 60 or even 80 km/h. To prevent disconnection with the cable, trolleybuses must also often negotiate junctions or crossings of the overhead cables and tight corners at slower speeds than other motorised road users. For example, in Geneva there is a turning loop with a speed limit of only 10 Km/h. [171] At these places they obstruct the free flow of traffic [172] and also extend their travel times relative to diesel buses. In the case of a dewirement, an entire junction may become blocked.

It is particularly uneconomical to reserve expensive trolleybuses for school transport. They are used only once or twice a day and have the additional disadvantage of being unsuitable for any class outings which are outside the cabled route. Consequently they cannot be used away from the regular route on school trips, club outings or any other such, and are thus precluded from bringing the operator any revenue from non-scheduled services.

Another cost factor is the provision of diesel buses as an operating reserve in order to run an emergency service in the event of disruption to the infrastructure. [173] This is analogous to a rail replacement bus service. [174] [72] [175] [176] Typical examples of disruption are construction sites, construction and maintenance work on the overhead cables, traffic accidents, power outages, lightning strikes, strong icing of the catenary, storm damage to the catenary, careless excavator operation, and overloaded lorries. In La Chaux-de-Fonds, for example, there are 15 such disruptions annually which necessitate a replacement bus service. [177] If there is not sufficient operating reserve, omnibuses need to be hired from other operators [178] [179] which is often not possible at short notice and may result in longer operating restrictions on the trolleybus route. [180]

Transport operators who use both trolleybuses and omnibuses have complex issues of personnel disposition as there need to be separate rotas for drivers with, and drivers without a trolleybus licence. In certain circumstances this can lead to omnibuses having to be used simply because there are no drivers available with a trolleybus licence. [181] [182] Should a transport operator desire fully flexible use of employees, then the entire pool of drivers must be trained to drive trolleybuses despite the additional cost. This is the case for example with the Esslingen Municipal Transport Company [21] even though they operate about three times as many omnibuses as trolleybuses.

A trolleybus system does not allow multiple branch routes from rural suburbs to be integrated into high frequency central area corridors, as the infrastructure required is unjustifiably expensive. If it is desirable to run an exclusively trolleybus system in the central area, then passengers from these suburbs will be obliged to change vehicles. [183] This problem is illustrated by the diagram on the right, the notional trolleybus corridor is shown in blue. The problem is similar for single routes that run less frequently at the periphery than in the centre.

Trolleybuses only have a valid claim to being environmentally
friendly when the electrical power used is generated from
renewable energy sources. If on the other hand it derives from
coal-fired power plants, steam power plants, oil-fired power plants,
gas turbine power plants or waste incineration plants, then the
emissions are merely shifted to another location. If the power
source is a conventional coal power plant, the carbon footprint of
the trolleybus is actually larger than that of the diesel bus. [173] A
joint study by Winterthur Municipal Transport (CH) and the Swiss
Federal Office of Energy confirms this, accordingly the carbon
footprint of a trolleybus using electricity from a typical European
primary energy mix is not significantly better than that of a diesel
bus, thereby undermining any justification of the 24% higher operating costs. [184] If the primary energy source is nuclear then this reduces its acceptance in many sections of society. [173] The problem of nuclear waste disposal exists elsewhere than at the point of use. In the immediate vicinity there is the problem of electromagnetic pollution. [185] The decisive factor in the carbon footprint of the trolleybus is therefore the primary energy mix used in the generation of the electricity used. A negative example here is the trolleybus in Tallinn. As late as 2004 the primary energy source in Estonia was still shale oil. [186] The chemicals used to de-ice the overhead cables are also an environmental disadvantage. [187]

On the other hand diesel buses have also become more environmentally friendly over recent decades, partly as a result of stricter emission standards – such as the Euro-standard in the European Union – and also through improved noise encapsulation of the engine. This further diminishes any environmental advantage the trolleybus may have had. Additionally, as a result of further future tightening of standards, we can expect a marked reduction of polluting emissions from diesel bus engines. [148] In global terms, the contribution of the trolleybus to climate protection is negligible. [188] When one considers that compared to a worldwide total of approximately 600 million motor vehicles there are a mere 40,000 trolleybuses.

Subjectively also, the overhead cables are sometimes perceived as unattractive, especially in historic town centres. This is especially true for complex cable arrangements at branches and intersections. The same goes for the often massive catenary masts, especially if they have to be placed in the middle of pavements. [189] This is often referred to as visual pollution. [190] Fire services sometimes complain that the overhead cables prevent the use of turntable ladders in narrow streets. [191] Similarly the use of cranes is made difficult. Additionally the overhead cables must always be adapted to the new traffic conditions during road alterations often with high associated costs, even if this only entails re- labelling of traffic lanes. The demolition of buildings adjoining
the route may necessitate the catenary rosettes being replaced at the expense of transport companies by temporary poles. [192] The construction of new lines brings a high risk of litigation by individual residents who object to the installation of the necessary infrastructure. This is especially true in respect of catenary installation in rural areas. [148]

Due to the long service-life of trolleybuses, innovations in vehicle construction cannot be implemented as frequently as with diesel buses. This is illustrated by the fact that many cities still operate high-floor trolleybuses, where the omnibus fleet has long since been converted to low-floor vehicles. Another example is the development of passenger information displays, which has left many trolleybuses operating roller-blind displays which are now considered outdated. The long life of a vehicle fleet can be detrimental to passenger satisfaction. [148] In addition, the maintenance and operating costs of an older vehicle are higher than that of a newer one. [15] In order to meet the changing needs of passengers and transport operators, many trolleybuses are frequently retrofitted for their last years in service. [81] As vehicles age, the procurement of spare parts becomes more and more problematic especially when electronic components become obsolete after a few years. Modern trolleybuses no longer have the life expectancy of the technically simpler but robust classic old timers hence a further loss of advantage over the omnibus. In contrast, omnibus and coach engines have become more reliable over the decades, and accelerate faster than previously.

Furthermore, the higher unladen weight of a trolleybus affects the maximum permitted number of standing passengers, which is determined by the combined mass of vehicle and passengers. In Germany for example, a three-axle articulated vehicle must not weigh more than 28 tons. So the 1963 vintage 600kg articulated trolleybuses of the Offenbach municipality were only allowed 104 standing places compared to 114 standing places for the structurally identical diesel bus equivalent. [193]

Due to the high voltages and currents necessary for powering
the trolleybus, there is a risk of fire in the electrical system. A
certain amount of this risk is due to voltage surges caused by
lightning strikes to the overhead cable. Consequently,
thunderstorms often bring with them significant operational
disruption. Damage here can be to both stationary elements such as cable junctions and to any vehicles caught in the area of excessive electrical charge. [194] With rising commodity prices for non-ferrous metals, especially in economically weaker states, the risk of catenary theft during breaks in the service such as nighttime is increasing. This can lead to prolonged gaps in the serviceable route and causes additional repair costs. [195] [196] Furthermore, trolleybus lines are more susceptible to the effects of war /terrorism than omnibus lines and correspondingly in contrast to omnibuses have no potential civil defence utility. [47]

Disadvantages compared to the tram

Like the omnibus the trolleybus has a poor passenger capacity in comparison with trams or trains so an articulated vehicle can only carry about 150 persons. By contrast a 75m long tram or light rail train can transport up to 500 passengers at a time. Multiple unit trolleybuses are only feasible in limited circumstances, in Germany for example they are not permitted. This raises the staff to passenger ratio in comparison to rail transport. [148] Another common disadvantage of both the omnibus and trolleybus is the dependency on road traffic conditions. Where there is no bus lane available there is the constant possibility of being stuck in a traffic jam. [197] On the other hand, where bus lanes are created these require more space due to greater vehicular width than does a segregated tram line. Furthermore, the bi- polar cable system for trolleybuses is both more complex and more susceptible to technical problems (than the single cable on railways) [198]

When experiencing technical difficulties the trolleybus is also less flexible than a rail vehicle which can in exceptional circumstances be steered from the rear back to the nearest set of points or junction. In addition, trolleybuses need space intensive turning loops at the end of the routes which are not needed by reversible rail units. When it comes to passenger comfort the trolleybus is also at a disadvantage when compared to a tram. Although the horizontal movement is similar to a train, it suffers the same vertical oscillations as a diesel bus. [148] In addition, the Road Traffic Act grants the trolleybus – unlike the tram – no authorised right of way.

References
15.
Bericht der Arbeitsgruppe Trolleybus, abgerufen am 25. Dezember 2013
http://www.vvl.ch/files/7113/6129/2222/VL_Trolleybusbericht Gesamtdokument_19april02_1.54MB.pdf
21.
Sonst schlägt’s Funken – Esslinger Zeitung vom 6. September 2010 http://www.esslinger-zeitung.de/lokal/esslingen/esslingen/Artikel597802.cfm
47.
Trolleybusse (Obusse) auf www.saar-nostalgie.de http://www.saar-nostalgie.de/Obusse.htm
72.
Obus-“Ersatzverkehr” in Solingen auf www.obus.info http://www.obus.info/obus/solingen/berkhof/
81.
Kostengünstig zu mehr Trolleybus auf www.bockonline.ch http://www.bockonline.ch/september—dezember-2008/kw-40-08/kostenguenstig-zu-mehr- trolleybus/index.html
148.
Trolleybusstrategie des Verkehrsverbunds Luzern, veröffentlicht am 12. Februar 2013
http://www.s-bahn-luzern.ch/files/6413/6129/2584/VVL_Trolleybusstrategie_12Feb13_2.31MB.pdf
163.
Welche Vorteile hat ein Obus / Trolleybus gegenüber anderen Verkehrssystemen? auf www.berliner- verkehrsseiten.de http://www.berliner-verkehrsseiten.de/obus/OTechnology/OTech1/body_otech1.html
164.
Infras-Studie: Diesel-, Gas- oder Trolleybus? – Schlussbericht Bern, 20. Februar 2006, Mario Keller, Matthias Lebküchner und Natascha Kljun in Zusammenarbeit mit Günter Weber, Seite 14 (PDF; 718 kB)
http://www.bs.ch/mm/img-299-f.pdf
165.
Obus-Geschichte auf www.sobus.net http://www.sobus.net/index.php?seite=4|6
166.
Tag- und Nachtbusse verwirren Fahrgäste, Rheinische Post online vom 9. Oktober 2007
http://www.rp-online.de/nrw/staedte/solingen/tag-und-nachtbusse-verwirren-fahrgaeste-aid-1.401189
167.
Vilnius: Keine Unterstützung vom Bürgermeister, Bericht auf www.trolleymotion.ch vom 10. Dezember 2012
http://www.trolleymotion.ch/index.php?L=0&id=115&n_ID=1563
168.
Mehr Mut zu weniger Diesel!, Meldung auf www.trolleymotion.ch vom 25. Februar 2013
http://www.trolleymotion.ch/index.php?L=0&id=115&n_ID=1720
169.
St. Gallen – Neue Maßstäbe im Stadtverkehr, MEldung auf www.trolleymotion.ch vom 6. November 2009
http://www.trolleymotion.ch/index.php?id=115&L=0&n_ID=857
170.
Bus-Linie 683: Neue Hoffnung auf Verlängerung, Solinger Tageblatt vom 10. September 2010
http://www.solinger-tageblatt.de/Home/Solingen/Bus-Linie-683-Neue-Hoffnung-auf-Verlaengerung- 5db79a80-2940-4d42-b95f-07f47f210b66-ds
171.
Der Trolleybus Genève auf www.bkcw-bahnbilder.de http://www.bkcw-bahnbilder.de/PictureGallery/pix/ch/trolleybus/genf/zzz/pix.html

Plovdiv – Erweiterung des Trolleybusnetzes, Meldung auf www.trolleymotion.ch vom 30. November 2009
http://www.trolleymotion.ch/index.php?id=115&L=0&n_ID=881
Mit dem Strom Bus fahren von Bert Hellwig auf www.bockonline.ch, KW 50/09
http://www.bockonline.ch/juli—dezember-2009/kw-50-09/mit-dem-strom-bus-fahren/index.html
Omnibusverkehr in Potsdam auf www.historische-strassenbahn-potsdam.de http://www.historische-strassenbahn-potsdam.de/index.php?id=23
Jürgen Lehmann: Berichte von den Trolleybusbetrieben in und um Deutschland, Nummer 68, April 2007
http://home.arcor.de/gile1967/okb68.pdf
Jahresübersicht 1997 auf www.obus-es.de http://www.obus-es.de/ov_1997.htm
L’ATE déplore l’abandon des trolleybus à La Chaux-de-Fonds, Le Courrier vom 2. Februar 2012
http://www.lecourrier.ch/l_ate_deplore_l_abandon_des_trolleybus_a_la_chaux
Obus-Ersatzverkehr auf der Linie 861 mit BVG-Bussen, Bericht auf www.obus-ew.de http://www.obus-ew.de/d4618.htm
Esslingen: Lösungsansätze für ‘TrolleyPlus’, Meldung auf www.trolleymotion.ch vom 10. Juni 2013
http://www.trolleymotion.ch/index.php?id=115&L=0&n_ID=1754
Obus-“Ersatzverkehr” in Solingen auf www.obus-info.de http://archive.is/6BVHa
Arnhem: Linie 2 wieder elektrisch, Bericht auf www.trolleymotion.ch vom 13. September 2010
http://www.trolleymotion.ch/index.php?id=115&L=0&n_ID=1099
Genova: Trolleybuslinie 30 verkürzt, Frequenzen ausgedünnt, Bericht auf www.trolleymotion.ch vom 18. März 2013
http://www.trolleymotion.ch/index.php?L=0&id=115&n_ID=1727
PlanosOsnabrück will Obusse auf den Hauptstraßen, Osnabrücker Zeitung vom 14. Dezember 2013
http://www.noz.de/lokales/osnabrueck/artikel/436084/planososnabruck-will-obusse-auf-den- hauptstrassen
Ernst Basler und Partner im Auftrag der Verkehrsbetriebe Winterthur und des Bundesamts für Energie: Systemvergleich Trolley-, Diesel- und (Bio-)Gasbus, Studie für die Buslinie 4 in Winterthur, 18. Dezember 2002, online einsehbar http://hydeparkonline.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/Ernst-Basler.pdf
Wir bleiben auf Draht! Das Ende einer Affäre? in Üsi Meinig 4/2009 (PDF; 895 kB)
http://www.vcs-sh.ch/fileadmin/user_upload/Sektion_Schauffhausen/PDF/UM/2009- 4_Wir_bleiben_auf_Draht.pdf
Die Ölschiefernutzung am Beispiel von Estland
http://oelschiefer.twoday.net/topics/I.+Die+Ölschiefernutzung+am+Beispiel+von+Estland/
Jürgen Lehmann: Kurzbesuche in der Schweiz – 12. Dezember 2011 und 13. Februar 2012 http://home.arcor.de/obus269/s842RbCH.htm
Allianz Auto und Reise
https://www.allianz.com/de/produkte_und_loesungen/ihr_fokus/auto_und_reise/index.html
Neapel: Bauarbeiten für die achte Trolleybuslinie verzögert, Meldung auf www.trolleymotion.ch vom 14. Januar 2013
http://www.trolleymotion.ch/index.php?L=0&id=115&n_ID=1606
Shanghai: 97-jähriges Jubiläum, Meldung auf www.trolleymotion.ch vom 21. November 2011
http://www.trolleymotion.ch/index.php?id=115&L=0&n_ID=1369
Obus-Forum, abgerufen am 14. Dezember 2013
http://64773.forumromanum.com/member/forum/forum.php?q=solingen_alt_vs_neu- obus&action=std_show&entryid=1107634786&mainid=1107578041&threadid=2&USER=user_64773
Jahresübersicht 2012 auf www.obus-es.de http://www.obus-es.de/ov_2012.htm
Stadtverkehr, Jahrgang 1963 – Neue Gelenkbusse für Offenbach http://img73.imageshack.us/img73/1902/a500fy4.jpg
Störung des O-Bus-Verkehrs durch Blitzschlag auf www.obus-ew.de, abgerufen am 27. Juni 2012.
http://www.obus-ew.de/d50057_20030723.htm
Lisichansk – Linie 3 wiedereröffnet, Meldung auf www.trolleymotion.ch vom 11. März 2013 http://www.trolleymotion.ch/index.php?L=0&id=115&n_ID=1690
Veliko Tarnovo – Vorläufige Einstellung wird durch Diebstahl endgültig, Meldung auf www.trolleymotion.ch vom 31. März 2011 http://www.trolleymotion.ch/index.php?id=115&L=0&n_ID=1228
Peter Haibach: Salzburger Obus – die leistbare Straßenbahn, Vorrang für seine Attraktivität schaffen in Regionale Schienen 9/2013 (PDF; 1,7 MB) http://www.salzburger-verkehrsplattform.org/pdf/2013-E-09.pdf
Klaus Koch: Endstation für den Trolleybus, NZZ am Sonntag vom 2. Juni 2013
http://www.swisscleantech.ch/fileadmin/content/MEM/SCA_MEM_NZS_20130602_SIG.pdf
172.
173. 174. 175.
176. 177. 178. 179. 180. 181. 182.
183. 184.
185.
186. 187. 188. 189.
190 191.
192. 193. 194. 195. 196.
197. 198.