Stonesourscotty wrote: ↑Mon Aug 02, 2021 11:39 pm Busways 7012 has been photod on the pits with 1239 has it transferred to Glendenning?

No, Glendenning does not have charging facilities. Must have just been visiting.

There is also the option that 1239 was at Penrith depot getting maintenance ?

7012 has been on the 786 782 and 770 the last 3 days in that order.

Another contender for the NSW market?:
https://www.busnews.com.au/industry-new ... k-end-2021

boronia wrote: ↑Fri Aug 13, 2021 5:56 pm Another contender for the NSW market?:
https://www.busnews.com.au/industry-new ... k-end-2021

This is coming through a partnership agreement with Bustech who, it seems, will be manufacturing a RHD model in Australia. My feeling is that they're not getting anywhere with development of the ZDi and this will be their electric offering.

I do wonder whether that is still the case now given this reference in the article.

Bus News wrote:In terms of the Australian market, when ABC magazine enquired about the Ebusco brand and product due to come here, a company spokesperson confirmed Ebusco will now be doing so outright itself, with the first new 2.3 variant landed before the end of 2021.

Mr OC Benz wrote: ↑Fri Aug 13, 2021 8:39 pm I do wonder whether that is still the case now given this reference in the article.

Bus News wrote:In terms of the Australian market, when ABC magazine enquired about the Ebusco brand and product due to come here, a company spokesperson confirmed Ebusco will now be doing so outright itself, with the first new 2.3 variant landed before the end of 2021.

Well it's a tangled web:

https://www.busnews.com.au/industry-new ... s-bus-tech

https://www.busnews.com.au/industry-new ... -precision

We'll have to wait and see what emerges.

Normally I wouldn't be publicising a Chinese bus, but this is a very informative video from a general technical viewpoint that helps to illustrate the general concept of the modern low-floor (by true definition) bus, a type thus far little adopted in Australia, even though it's been standard in Europe for the last quarter century. It's a chassis for an electric bus and its design DNA is that of the standard European citybus dating back from the 1990s.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q028AELNgIw

The typical features, whether it's an electric or diesel bus, are that the floor is flat (stepless) from front to back, but the seats behind the rear axle are raised on plinths to house equipment underneath. This is a LHD bus, so the drivetrain (including electric motor in the electric) is on the offside in order to enable an additional rear door aft of the rear axle. So, naturally, if one wanted a rear door in a RHD country, the drivetrain would have to be transferred across to the equivalent RHD offside - something that no manufacturer has yet done for lack of demand in RHD markets, though Custom Denning has said that they are flexible about this. At the very rear is the frame to hold the transverse motor on a diesel bus, or the electronics on an electric bus (as illustrated here).

So this is what we are getting here with the Custom Denning Element and Volgren Volvo. As you can see, there is no need for any high floor, though most of the electric offerings on the Australian market to date have a high floor at the back for unfathomable reasons.

This Brogen Shanghai chassis shown in this video is 11.9 x 2.5 metres, so it loses that additional row of back seats, which seems to be a common shortcoming with the Chinese products, one of those situations where it's not worthwhile for an exporter to modify their product just for a single tiny market. They're pitched towards the specifications of the major markets - European in the case of the chassis in this video. They're also not designed and built for the longer 25 year lifespan that the Australian market expects.

As I mentioned, that Brogden electric chassis is pitched to the European market, so the design standards are European-based, as with also the Custom Denning and Volgren Volvo electrics and the Volvo 7900 in general. Here's another interesting one from a UK company, Equipmate, that reflects British standards and, since we closely follow the "mother country" in our bus practices, it might help explain why we relentlessly stick to low-entry design. This one seems to miss all the obvious, well-established cues about electric bus design. It's like it hasn't entered their minds that there are other, better options. The Argentine clients, if they haven't had much experience of this, probably think they're getting the best. The back door access is by stairs to the high floor (would be openly embraced in Adelaide, Canberra and Hobart then), but they call the bus a "low floor". It's like a cultural mindset.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sCgaMTSFHAU

Ebusco has set up an Australian version of their website but, at this stage, it has the same as the European/UK website content, except that there are renders of RHD versions including passenger capacities based on ADR (a ridiculously low 61 passengers on a 12 metre rigid).

https://www.ebusco.com/au/electric-buses/ebusco-2-2/

Note that this is for the 2.2 model and they've indicated that they're pushing for the 3.0 model, of which a RHD render is shown thus:



Assuming that they're being rigorous with their terminology, the 2.0 is described as low-entry only for the two-door model but low-floor for the three-door rigid and three-door artic models. The 3.0 is listed as low entry for both 12 metre versions but there's something slack in the editing there as an interior render of the three-door clearly shows a fully low floor. It's early days but something is obviously on the move in Australia.

Do you get paid every time you bring up the low floor thing? If you were paid $1 a throw, you would be a very rich man.

The Equipmate (UK video) shows the trade-off for batteries.

Australian buses typically have larger (or have) air conditioning requirements which increases battery size needed, and reduces available space on the roof.

Putting heavy batteries on the roof isn't a great thing either - increases rollover risk (higher CoG), and requires a heavier super structure.

So you put them in the floor at the compromise of a step or angled floor.

This has clearly proven to not need be a trade off anymore though. The Custom Denning Element and the Volvo BZL being launched soon have not needed to compromise. Even in Singapore with their air conditioning requirements (anyone who has sat in a cooler room for more than two mins will know what I mean), the Yutong and BYD products have also not needed to compromise (when compared to the design of the Australian equivalents).

Although the Ebusco 3.0 is still in its early days, it will be very impressive if it is a success. The batteries are supposedly floor mounted and the bus is light enough to only require four tyres rather than the typical six, allowing for a very spacious and flat floor interior. The Zemtec product from NZ also sounds promising, although updates on its progress seem sporadic.

Linto63 wrote: ↑Mon Aug 16, 2021 9:40 am Do you get paid every time you bring up the low floor thing? If you were paid $1 a throw, you would be a very rich man.

Given the obfuscation in sales promotions by the various manufacturers on the Australian market, there's clearly a very important need to expand and clarify the available information so that people can have a clear insight into what is best technology and design and what isn't. Believe me, some of this information is sometimes extremely difficult to obtain from official documentation.

I've been through this with trams where for a while there was quite a big bs phase from manufacturers vying to show that they were best. That sector has settled down now but the Australian bus sector is still in the throes of it.

In response to an enquiry, I've had a communication from TfNSW that advises me that:

Manufacturers may or may not choose a level floor to the rear of the bus and it is not a standard requirement.

and that electric buses, like diesels, will continue to only require minimum necessary compliance with the DDA 2002 standards (at-level entry at front door only). TfNSW's existing design standards require low-floor only to the rear end of the wheelchair space at the front of the bus, not even to any other door. On a general point, they advised that opening of centre/rear doors was at the driver's discretion (risk assessment in each case) only, as guided by individual bus operators' Safety Management and Workplace Risk Assessment Plans. Obviously no agency-led aspiration for more efficient design and operation standards in NSW and no hope that the advent of electric buses will bring any improvements on that front, except where introduced by the manufacturers themselves.

tonyp wrote: ↑Mon Aug 23, 2021 7:37 pm In response to an enquiry, I've had a communication from TfNSW that advises me that:

Manufacturers may or may not choose a level floor to the rear of the bus and it is not a standard requirement.

and that electric buses, like diesels, will continue to only require minimum necessary compliance with the DDA 2002 standards (at-level entry at front door only). TfNSW's existing design standards require low-floor only to the rear end of the wheelchair space at the front of the bus, not even to any other door. On a general point, they advised that opening of centre/rear doors was at the driver's discretion (risk assessment in each case) only, as guided by individual bus operators' Safety Management and Workplace Risk Assessment Plans. Obviously no agency-led aspiration for more efficient design and operation standards in NSW and no hope that the advent of electric buses will bring any improvements on that front, except where introduced by the manufacturers themselves.

The question should be why does Transport For NSW allow the operators to pick their preferred bus chassis/body combo and set bus specifications to their preferred specs rather then the agency setting a government approved chassis/body combo witch in the time of e buses would be the locally built Custom Denning Element and interior specs ie seat coverings seating arrangements and licence to carry totals

Campbelltown busboy wrote: ↑Tue Aug 24, 2021 12:00 pm The question should be why does Transport For NSW allow the operators to pick their preferred bus chassis/body combo and set bus specifications to their preferred specs rather then the agency setting a government approved chassis/body combo witch in the time of e buses would be the locally built Custom Denning Element and interior specs ie seat coverings seating arrangements and licence to carry totals

It's obvious from the reply I received that TfNSW has no interest in setting best-practice standards, other than to comply with the minimum regulation requirements. So they're progressively slipping behind international industry best practice. I think, as with a lot of things with TfNSW, there's an entrenched ill-informed mindset that isn't going to change any time soon. Not that I can say much better about any other Australian bus jurisdiction, except that WA sometimes exudes rays of hope. So it's entirely up to the manufacturers and Custom Denning and Volgren, as always, are in front of the game in that regard - likely soon to be joined by Ebusco. The other manufacturers either have no idea or are from China where the product is cheaper and cheapest wins with State Treasuries in the end.

TfNSW published a ZEB transition strategy today.

https://www.transport.nsw.gov.au/system ... rategy.pdf

iamthouth wrote: ↑Tue Aug 24, 2021 10:12 pm TfNSW published a ZEB transition strategy today.

https://www.transport.nsw.gov.au/system ... rategy.pdf

Apart from the strategy itself, a rare detailed current summary of the bus sector in NSW. It's a shame that TfNSW has no interest in setting improved minimum design standards, for which this presents an unprecedented opportunity. Also missing among projections into the future is that, while there may be no available electrified midi, articulated or double deck buses in NSW at present, the technology is established and in use elsewhere and should be incorporated in any long-term planning. A future based entirely on 12 metre buses would mean that light rail and metro strategies need to be revisited and expanded for significant corridors where capacity will become a major issue as a result.

Update: Additional information:

https://www.transport.nsw.gov.au/projec ... sion-buses

https://www.busnews.com.au/industry-new ... k-welcomed

Also, the Optare Tempo 11.5 metre has been added to the Panel list of electric buses. I can find no information on this bus model whatsoever. The Bustech ZDi Mk 2 must be slowly emerging as an order for 16 has been placed for Hornibrook in Qld, delivery in 2022-23.

tonyp wrote: ↑Also missing among projections into the future is that, while there may be no available electrified midi, articulated or double deck buses in NSW at present, the technology is established and in use elsewhere and should be incorporated in any long-term planning. A future based entirely on 12 metre buses would mean that light rail and metro strategies need to be revisited and expanded for significant corridors where capacity will become a major issue as a result.

Don't think there is any suggestion that only 12 metre electrics will be purchased, merely that as at July 2021 only 12 metre electrics have been put forward by manufacturers for inclusion on the list. The list will likely expand to include midis, artics and double deckers as and when manufacturers put them forward.

tonyp wrote: ↑Also, the Optare Tempo 11.5 metre has been added to the Panel list of electric buses. I can find no information on this bus model whatsoever.

Optare are marketing their electrics under the Switch Mobility banner, perhaps a search there will generate something.

Linto63 wrote: ↑Wed Aug 25, 2021 8:50 pm ]Optare are marketing their electrics under the Switch Mobility banner, perhaps a search there will generate something.

This has only similar information to the Optare website. The Tempo is no longer in the product range, leaving the Solo and Metrocity, both of which have electric drive options. The largest model is the Metrocity 11.5 metre low entry citybus.

https://www.optare.com/wp-content/uploa ... 8AW6pp.pdf

The Tempo is no longer in the product range but the Tempo Sr is still available for the Australian Market I hear. It is only available for the Australian Market though.

tonyp wrote: ↑Wed Aug 25, 2021 9:17 pm

Linto63 wrote: ↑Wed Aug 25, 2021 8:50 pm ]Optare are marketing their electrics under the Switch Mobility banner, perhaps a search there will generate something.

This has only similar information to the Optare website. The Tempo is no longer in the product range, leaving the Solo and Metrocity, both of which have electric drive options. The largest model is the Metrocity 11.5 metre low entry citybus.

https://www.optare.com/wp-content/uploa ... 8AW6pp.pdf

In terms of opening up the product range available for the RHD market, Singapore acquired in 2018 a couple of Linkker (Finland) 12 metre electric buses with bodies by Gemilang Malaysia. What's really interesting is that, I think for the first time in a RHD jurisdiction, these are a European-type three door bus with the third door behind the rear axle.



[from landtransportguru.net]

There is evidently some mechanical compromise in the conversion (I can guess at the possible reasons) in that there is a high floor between the second and third doors but the door thresholds themselves are low-entry (stepless). Not quite there, but obviously the concept of improved passenger handling is being approached in Singapore. These practices are slowly returning to RHD operations, step by step (pardon the pun) towards having no steps.

These buses have pantograph opportunity recharging at termini, not sure why. Maybe very long routes or greater power consumption because of air conditioning loads(?).

Without knowledge of Singapore's operation, I can only suggest the vehicles are expected to spend very lengthy periods of time away from the depot - e.g. where drivers are relieved enroute instead of buses running to and from the depot, and therefore need a means of topping up to get through the day.

Such arrangements are typical to varying extents in cities like Perth too, so this is one way of alleviating 'range anxiety' issues.

Merc1107 wrote: ↑Sat Aug 28, 2021 3:54 pm Without knowledge of Singapore's operation, I can only suggest the vehicles are expected to spend very lengthy periods of time away from the depot - e.g. where drivers are relieved enroute instead of buses running to and from the depot, and therefore need a means of topping up to get through the day.

Such arrangements are typical to varying extents in cities like Perth too, so this is one way of alleviating 'range anxiety' issues.

Probably more an issue of distances rather than periods of time. If it's a common 300-400 km daily operation, a typical battery bus can get through on one overnight charge.