Even on bidirectional networks, loops are often necessay at busy termini because there is often not the time, nor the incentive to change ends.
Unidirectional trams may use either loops or triangular switching arrangements to turn around and the latter is often available at junctions and especially at depot entrances where they can be used for short working, and furthermore have basic sets of rear contorls that can be used if necessary. With multiple unit controls, they can also be be coupled in opposite handed pairs on lines temporalily truncated for trackwork.

Here in Jacksonville, once the home of Florida’s largest system, The JACKSONVILLE TRACTION COMPANY has been revived and the transit authority is doing a study to get it up and running. Our historic car lines were mostly side of the road, or median greenspace, with very little streetrunnig and only ran in street in downtown. A clip of the downtown system can been seen in Oliver Hardys “Bouncing Baby” short online.

Also remember the 1200 mile Pacific Electric is the grandfather of all LRT systems, yet it ran down the center of Long Beach Blvd… forever.

Bob Mann
http://jacksonvilletransit.blogspot.com/

Modern with maritime theme:
http://www.le-tram.fr/presentation/index.asp?rub_code=72
http://ecologie-images.caradisiac.com/IMG/jpg/2/9/1/4/0/tram-Marseille-ext.jpg

Retro (this is a rebuild)
http://www.prazsketramvaje.cz/obrazky/vozyosobni/8252-039.jpg

High-capacity
http://www.railfaneurope.net/pix/hu/trams/Budapest/Combino/Budapest_Combino_arrival_Hungaria.jpg

It should be noted the trams are uni-directional (as opposed to double-ended) in this system, so a loop would be necessary at either end, but historically this was the case anyway. Further, all buses are uni-directional, so there is no disadvantage in comparison to buses. Further, Amsterdam does also employ controleurs, although they have a smaller staff than pure proof-of-payment (honor system) fare collection schemes.

It would certainly be possible, and certainly in the long run fiscally feasible, to simply convert the whole MTA system to the Paris/Prague/LA (among countless others, including essentially all German transport) system.

I hear what Louis is saying about fare collection being a primary source of delays. Unfortunately, I don’t see a way that that could be improved without switching wholesale to a Paris/Prague/LA style “controleur” system. If you had a farebox in the back of a trolley, it’d be easy to ignore unless you had (a) someone sitting by it the entire route, in which case you might as well have another driver, or (b) a controleur to periodically make sure that everyone’s ticket was composted.

Well, no on wants to turn 15 minute headways into 30 minute headways. Best to limit light rail to a few crosstown routes that could start as Bus Rapid Transit and evolve over time, with high ridership and low headways.

http://www.allianz-pro-schiene.de/cms/upload/media/themen/umweltbericht/workshops/20060919/07-Vortrag_Kehl-060919.pdf
and
http://www.emia.pl/rggg/features_view/article/2007/06/7396/ultracaps_win_out_in_energy_storage.html>

IF that doesn’t work Google “ultracapacitors” and “Mannheim” or find me through my Blog and I will answer all your questions.

There is lots of confusion here but what Louis from Paris said is right on.

In regards to naming something correctly (tram, trolley, light rail, etc.)there are several variants which have not been discussed:

Padua (Padova), Italy and several cities in France used rubber-tyred trams. These are still guided, but with just one track. These are useful for where maximum adhesion is necessary, like a hilly place (not NYC). Google for “Translohr”.

In the historical centre of Padua, there are no overhead lines and the vehicles are operate on batteries for stretches of several hundred metres. This is for aesthetic reasons but also saves money.

For about five years there has been a tram in Mannheim, Germany which uses ultracapacitors (also called supercapacitors). See a good introduction at these links:

and

(I think Vision 42 people are considering some of this)

Batteries and ultracaps allow vehicles to operate independent of overhead lines also during emergencies or repair work, etc.

The ultimate problem for a bus that a good trolley, or light rail, has, is of course fair collection. The reason that MTA buses run so slowly is a combination of the congestion, and the fact that each MetroCard swipe takes about 3-5 seconds. That means that between pulling in and pulling out, and loading, say, 20 people, the bus is stopped for about 2 minutes. A light rail loads from all doors. In Paris, all articulated (accordion) buses load with all doors, thus avoiding the incredible load times of some of New York’s busiest bus lines.

Further, I recently took a guided tour of the T3, and it was mentioned that while a bus has a capacity of 100 (this is roughly the capacity of a New York bending bus), the T3 Tram holds 300. It also has 7 doors on each side for loading and unloading.

The final advantage that the T3 line in Paris has is signal prioritization. The line is designed (and succeeds) to NEVER stop at a red signal, but to always receive the green. And this line traverses several of the great Portes of Paris (incredibly important points of access for autos entering the city).

Also, as far what a streetcar is and what a light rail is, a streetcar runs principally on or in the median of a street. I suppose we could just use the word tram. At any rate, the St. Charles and Canal Street lines in New Orleans both run on medians, not on the actual street.

The bus is overcrowded and cramped, and the metro is dark and smelly.

If you want to get people out of their cars, you have to spend on comfort.

I’d recommend avoiding both “light rail” and “streetcar” (not to mention “tramway”) and just using “trolley.” To older people it may conjure up images of antiquated systems being sold for scrap by triumphant 1960s city administrators, and to younger people it may only suggest transvestite buses. But I think it’s ripe for reclamation, like “queer.” There are enough people who feel nostalgia for the trolleys of old, or who are frustrated that they were taken away, that “trolley” is no longer a dirty word.

The source of much of the confusion is that, as I mentioned above, there are very few examples of “pure” streetcars that share their right-of-way for the entire route (Philadelphia’s Girard Avenue trolley?), and almost no examples of “pure” light rail systems that have separated rights-of-way for the entire line (the Newark City Subway?). If you want to be specific about the amount of shared right-of-way, you can say something like “a trolley with 15% of its route grade-separated, 40% at-grade and sepearated and 45% shared.” How does that sound?

Yes, car-free autobus boulevard. Let’s find some backers!

“I really don’t see how figures from a project about complete autofree redevelopment of one of the most desirable commercial strips in NYC have much to do with putting the B69 bus back on rails.”

I really don’t see how everything has to be about this B69 bus route? Rail excites people more than bussing, and naturally inspires auto-free thinking that mass-transit automobiles do not. But I’m glad you think that vision42 is such a goldmine–I couldn’t agree more.

After we’ve pedestrianized 42nd and added surface rail, people might start clamoring for the same on other major crosstown streets, not necessarily to the exclusion of autos but marginalization. And from there, farther flung bus routes? But we aren’t there yet. Perhaps some kind of bus will always be the best thing for circuitous routes. My only request is that they stop sounding an alarm before “kneeling”; people aren’t diving under busses unless they want to get crushed anyway.

Angus, Maybe Henry Stern took the bus once but based on his two CT-plated cars parked 24/7 in the middle of Central Park, I think he favors private auto travel

Good point, Steve, and I admire you for your tenacity on this issue. It seems to me that he realizes how much of a pain it is to drive in NYC, so he just leaves the cars there and takes the bus instead.

Does the Acela really need to be ten times heavier per seat than a lightweight auto … ?

No, it doesn’t. The FRA has clung to outdated safety standards because its administrators have no interest in seeing passenger rail succeed.

The real practical efficiency of streetcars or light rail in NYC seems to be their ability to load and discharge customers (especially those in wheelchairs or otherwise unable to leap up steps). Or are there buses that could do this as well?

There are, Hilary. Have you ridden the new low-floor hybrid buses? They take care of all those problems except fare collection. The fold-out wheelchair ramp is particularly nifty.

I really don’t see how figures from a project about complete autofree redevelopment of one of the most desirable commercial strips in NYC have much to do with putting the B69 bus back on rails.

The vision42 project, linked from this post, has a cost estimate and expected benefits. The world is your oyster.

Examples could include JFK to Flushing/Citifield via Jamaica, Pelham Parway/Fordham Road, and the LIRR cut through Brooklyn (or a platform over it).

Given the cost, and the way NY is hosed on capital projects, however, BRT is more realistic.