CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Topic: Tram latest

CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Topic: Tram latest http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Topic: Tram latest en Thu, 10 Sep 2026 00:49:41 +0000 Tulyar on "Tram latest" http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8710&page=77#post-385777 Wed, 09 Sep 2026 11:30:17 +0000 Tulyar 385777@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ This was a note relating to the Herald piece, & covers a galamaufry of issues so I'll drop my notes here first & then add further comments, based on a career that saw me rebuilding a railway station age 16 as a volunteer, whilst my future boss (John Grimshaw) was building a new railway line, including the ONLY railway spiral in the UK to gain height, with boys from Westminster School, blowing up rock to create the railway route ... in 1968 With some great help from @arellcat dipping in to the RGS records & more we've also tracked the folly of the delivery of the first attempt at the tram tracks from Haymarket to York Place, which had to be rebuilt before it opened, with the delivery of the new electric railway between Edinburgh & Glasgow getting 16 miles of new track completed faster than the 7 miles of tram track to the airport! "I've worked on delivery of cycle routes, & building new rail lines in a varied carer that started in 1964 During 1990's I was also working with the Panel for Historical Engineering Works who did a detailed study of Dean Bridge with further work connected to the unbuilt 1890's project to build 2 rail lines under Princes Street. Using the system proven in 1963 to build Oxford Circus Station whilst traffic continued to flow over the top on Oxford Street & Regent Street Dean Bridge already carries trucks & buses with 9-10 Ton axle loads (trams have 8-9 Ton axle loads which are spread evenly through the rails (unlike tyre loads which are point loads on the flexible tarmac pavement. Below the road surface on Dean Bridge are evenly spaced masonry ribs that fit over the stone arch rings, and the tram track rails should be placed to transfer the loads properly to Telford's well designed structure in an elegant light solution much as his Tay Bridge in Perth uses holes through the arch spandrels The trams should use a single laced track across the bridge alternately, which is easily delivered with a regulated & guided system On the South end, where the rock bed rises from the Water of Leith Gorge the tram route should dive under Queensferry Street to connect with the tunnel under Princes Street & Shandwick Place with extra track(s) to enable tram services to be regulated or turned back to suit the timetables This underground chamber can have a planned spur going South along the middle of Lothian Road, the traditional place for trams for over a century DM for developing this as a wider piece with outline plans & profiles Looking at the broken up concrete of the track slabs running from Haymarket to Waverley Bridge you can record the failed load transfer joints & patched up repairs, with lumps of the upper slab sunken or sticking up to bring down a cyclist, or the street ironwork (valve covers etc) sinking & falling away from the tarmac flexible pavement everywhere I walked the route with Broughton Spurtle a few years ago and recorded the state of the track Essentially to build the Tram track some 200 years of compaction of the supporting ground was destroyed as the sub grade was excavated to expose the weak & wet soils (glacial till lying over fractured (& saturated) shale for much of this distance Manchester's tram route extensions had clear ground stability testing & allowances for remediation built in to the project with bearing strength & vane tests (soil cohesion) before the concrete was laid Obviously much more to debate & discuss for a stage-gate plan for future tram projects Remember also that running trams on heavy rail track can trip up over the steel tyre profiles of trams being very different to those on trains, and modified track (points & crossings) is required if they are sharing the same rails Happy to discuss but be aware that I'm seriously resource poor & need some IT & admin support to keep up with PM's etc wingpig on "Tram latest" http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8710&page=77#post-385764 Tue, 08 Sep 2026 11:52:59 +0000 wingpig 385764@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ Would there be any issues with there being rooms and vaults and things (or nothing, where it crosses the Cowgate) underneath the bridge? Is there enough depth for enough concrete beneath the rails, and enough space for any pipes and stuff at the side, if they have to be moved (if not moved twice, as on Leith Walk)? Apart from the underground car park at Tollcross and the railway tunnels around the WAR junction, is there anything much beneath Lothian Road/Earl Grey St which would object to being trammed over? chdot on "Tram latest" http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8710&page=77#post-385762 Tue, 08 Sep 2026 11:28:36 +0000 chdot 385762@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ “so might be wrong“ Unlikely - at least by a factor that would make much difference So, main issue seems to be ‘old thing, don’t mess with it’ Might be a good idea to ban current traffic ‘just in case’ Then add some lightweight track and batteries to remove need for overhead structures Arellcat on "Tram latest" http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8710&page=76#post-385760 Tue, 08 Sep 2026 10:07:29 +0000 Arellcat 385760@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ I still don’t understand why “tram loading” - to some extent spread by the track - is worse than a convoy of buses/HGVs Good question. One CAF Urbos 3 tram weighs 56 tonnes empty. Assuming a 50% loading factor, for 125 industry standard passengers who weigh 75kg each, we get a total weight of 66 tonnes. This is spread across 12 axles, so the axle load is 5.5 tonnes. Alternatively, we can carry 125 passengers using one 20-tonne Volvo Enviro400XLB (the one with three axles that carries 100 pax) and one 18-tonne Volvo Enviro400 (two axles, 85 pax). If each bus is carrying half of the passengers then the total weight on the bridge is 48 tonnes. This is spread across 5 axles, for an average axle load of 9.6 tonnes. In terms of an idealised uniform weight distribution on the bridge, the tram weight is carried over about 40 metres of carriageway (thus, 1.6 tonnes/metre), whereas the two buses in a traffic jam are carried over about 26 metres (1.8 tonnes/metre). If the tram was at maximum capacity (75 tonnes, 250 passengers) you would need three (84 tonnes) of the Enviro400XLB buses, which in a traffic jam would take up almost exactly the same length of road as the tram. The axle loadings for tram and bus would become 6.2 tonnes/axle and 9.3 tonnes/axle respectively, and the distributed weights 1.7 tonnes/metre and 2.0 tonnes/metre respectively. The elephant in the room would be the addition of rails and OHLE. South Bridge is 350 metres long between the High Street and South College Street. Tram rails alone are about 58kg/metre, and you need double track, so call it 81 tonnes of rails. Overhead line equipment is mainly poles and foundations, and works out at about 100kg/metre/track, so altogether weighs about 75 tonnes. But you need to mount those rails on a substructure, which is probably going to be made of reinforced concrete. 350 metres at about 7 metres wide and say 30cm deep is going to weigh nearly 1800 tonnes, and that is a lot even compared with the current loading from cars, buses and trucks. You'd need to have 40 44-tonne artics to deliver that sort of load. Does South Bridge even have an existing weight limit for goods vehicles? But, you are digging up tarmac and replacing it with a tram track. Tarmac (as the surface, plus the binder course plus the granular base) is about 2.4 tonnes per cubic metre. If you remove 350 metres worth over the width of a double tram track, the equivalent amount of material removed is about 1600 tonnes. So what we have is a net increase in weight of about 350-400 tonnes in terms of infrastructure to run trams instead of buses, but a net decrease in vehicle weight of about 10 tonnes for every 250 people carried in each direction. There are probably further decreases in weight because trams would likely displace parked vehicles to some extent too. (Back of the envelope stuff here, so might be wrong) chdot on "Tram latest" http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8710&page=76#post-385759 Tue, 08 Sep 2026 08:38:28 +0000 chdot 385759@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ “ “However, we do not support the use of South Bridge as part of the tram corridor due to its impact on the Outstanding Universal Value (the characteristics, receptors and qualities underpinning Edinburgh’s inscription as a World Heritage Site) and impact on this key heritage asset. “ So current traffic is acceptable/normal?? “ “We note the engineering consultant’s comments that the current structure may not be suitable to carry tram loading without unspecified additional works and strengthening, which, if possible, would be a complex and expensive process. “ “ I still don’t understand why “tram loading” - to some extent spread by the track - is worse than a convoy of buses/HGVs <a href="https://archive.ph/2026.09.08-062754/https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/26527304.edinburgh-world-heritage-citys-bridges-corridor-trams-plan/?ref=edinburghminute.com" rel="nofollow">https://archive.ph/2026.09.08-062754/https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/26527304.edinburgh-world-heritage-citys-bridges-corridor-trams-plan/?ref=edinburghminute.com</a> chdot on "Tram latest" http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8710&page=76#post-385716 Wed, 02 Sep 2026 22:21:45 +0000 chdot 385716@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ “Honestly I'm starting to wonder if CEC can't decide“ Well yes Of course “CEC” is a myth/conceit In a sense it’s “the Councillors” Increasingly it’s obvious that that’s not really working - too many decisions to be made Too many conflicting things to factor in - ‘the public’, ‘officials’ - who may have different opinions/agendas/priorities They also collectively (and often individually) have more longevity that politicians (both remaining as Cllrs and also on particular committees- especially as Chairs) Then there are (ever) reducing resources, increasing expectations and also requirements of dealing with legislation/guidelines - from Holyrood, Westminster and beyond All impossible really - especially in the context of being too scared/unwilling to implement laws/policies about (for instance) reducing vehicle use and encouraging ‘active travel’ In Edinburgh the ‘carrot before stick’ arguments have been won So trams (etc) will only be ‘allowed’ in the hope that traffic reduction happens later Sound arguments for better public transport are only valid where a bigger picture is politically ‘possible’ Arellcat on "Tram latest" http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8710&page=76#post-385710 Wed, 02 Sep 2026 18:48:43 +0000 Arellcat 385710@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ Honestly I'm starting to wonder if CEC can't decide whether it wants a tram route that delivers higher speeds between few stops, or lower speeds between many stops. Is the function of Trams in Edinburgh to be actual mass rapid transit, for which former railway routes ought to be tailor made, or just an incredibly expensive, electric alternative to buses, for which the road (or under the road) ought to be the place? If I were a regular user of the NEPN I would probably want the trams on the roads instead, unless there was a cast iron guarantee* that equivalent on-road cycle lanes would be built if the trams were to use the former railway routes. But they have to be high quality cycle lanes, and to a very large extent Edinburgh can't build those either even while other cities are cracking right on. * which would become more of a target, subsequently downgraded to an aspiration, subsequently postponed owing to budget cuts and, y'know, the price of materials is awfully expensive these days and we mustn't take away too much parking for fear that the city will go bankrupt because all the businesses will go out of business and stop paying rates, and after all, you've got to build bypasses, etc. Murun Buchstansangur on "Tram latest" http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8710&page=76#post-385709 Wed, 02 Sep 2026 18:45:04 +0000 Murun Buchstansangur 385709@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ Well said, neddie. "...or are you one of that ilk?" Ye gods. Wind your neck in. neddie on "Tram latest" http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8710&page=76#post-385708 Wed, 02 Sep 2026 17:54:39 +0000 neddie 385708@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ I'm afraid the council cannot be trusted not to destroy cycle paths or modal filters. Neither can we trust them to provide timely, appropriate, alternatives during construction. - 2014 George St segregated lanes...gone - 2020 George IV Br segregated lanes...gone - Silverknowes bus/cycle only roadway...gone - Braid Estate modal filters...gone - North Bridge chance to put in segregated lanes...gone There's no guarantee, when the tram comes to be constructed, it'll be single-track with cycle path. They'll probably claim "operational reasons" at the last minute, and double-track it. And even if made single-track, the path will be badly compromised, and there *will always be* the looming threat of double-tracking at some time in the future. You only need to look at the provision for cyclists they propose on North Bridge to see the contempt and neglect they have towards cyclists - there will be no provision, and cyclists are instead expected to make a mile long, hilly, inconvenient diversion around 3 sides of a square, up the Mound !!! They cannot be trusted! Spokes are absolutely wrong to sit on the fence on this matter - it is their ONE JOB to protect existing cycle lanes You mark my words - if they come for the Roseburn path, they'll be coming for the Ferry Rd path, the Trinity path and the entire rest of the NEPN next! Yodhrin on "Tram latest" http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8710&page=76#post-385706 Wed, 02 Sep 2026 17:35:02 +0000 Yodhrin 385706@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ @stiltskin "destroy the cycle path" - were you taken in by the deranged "Save The Roseburn Path" lies, or are you one of that ilk? That little stunt frighting a bunch of children into producing propaganda for the campaign certainly helped you "defeat" the only practical option for the tram so congratulations are in order for that I suppose. The cycle path was never going to be "destroyed" - it's telling that Spokes took no stance either way - and all you've "won" is ensuring that one of the most deprived and fastest growing parts of the city won't get the mass transit it needs. chdot on "Tram latest" http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8710&page=76#post-385700 Wed, 02 Sep 2026 08:24:23 +0000 chdot 385700@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ From Edinburgh Minute <a href="https://www.edinburghminute.com/the-edinburgh-minute-2-september-2026/" rel="nofollow">https://www.edinburghminute.com/the-edinburgh-minute-2-september-2026/</a> “ The new report, by Gareth Barwell, the council's Corporate Director of Place, says the 'priority' is currently not the £2.5 billion line to Granton: "One of the shortlisted options in the Strategic Business Case settled on an alignment for a southern section of route (between city centre to BioQuarter / Royal Infirmary) and that this section can complement the South Suburban Railway feasibility work currently being advanced by Transport Scotland and Network Rail." The plan will be voted on by councillors on the Transport and Environment Committee next Thursday, 10 September, which you can find the <a href="https://www.edinburghminute.com/r/03952884?m=c15a3a0d-e507-4bde-ab71-4fad92d4699f">agenda of here</a>. On last year's consultation results, the report says (on page 10/19): "Many in the consultation were also very concerned about using the Roseburn Path as a tram route between Granton and the city centre, and many also raised concerns about the alternative candidate route option via Orchard Brae, raising issues about impacts on traffic and buses, on the historic Dean Bridge, and the environmental impacts on the area around and under the bridge. The consultation, though not the market research, has shown there are public acceptability issues with both alternative routes considered between Granton and the city centre. This suggests further work is needed on this section, as the Strategic Business Case is clear there is a case for a direct tram connection between Granton and the city centre." The report also outlines the estimated costs associated with each option: “ chdot on "Tram latest" http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8710&page=76#post-385693 Tue, 01 Sep 2026 19:27:33 +0000 chdot 385693@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ “ ‘I am absolutely convinced we need a grand and bold vision’ - Cllr Stephen Jenkinson Work on building Edinburgh's new £2.5bn North-South tramline could begin in four years' time, with officials recommending the southern leg is built first. Transport convener Stephen Jenkinson estimated that, with a "fair wind" and financing in place, "spades in the ground" for the project could happen by the end of the decade in 2030. “ <a href="https://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/edinburgh-new-north-south-tramline-officials-recommend-prioritising-southern-section-saying-granton-route-needs-more-work-8952593" rel="nofollow">https://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/edinburgh-new-north-south-tramline-officials-recommend-prioritising-southern-section-saying-granton-route-needs-more-work-8952593</a> stiltskin on "Tram latest" http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8710&page=76#post-385692 Tue, 01 Sep 2026 13:57:25 +0000 stiltskin 385692@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <blockquote>The council's transport convener, councillor Stephen Jenkinson, said the Roseburn Path option remained the local authority's "preferred route". He said the local authority has exhausted all other possibilities beyond the two suggested. "It's not off the table and I would like it to be delivered," he said. "My preference is the Roseburn Path route</blockquote> No **** Sherlock. He'd made his mind up on day 1 that he wanted to destroy the cycle path for this plan, and came up with any argument he could think of to push it forward, not forgetting trying to stifle debate & opposition if at all possible (see the noticebaord at Ravelston Dykes). It makes me very happy that we have defeated him. chdot on "Tram latest" http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8710&page=76#post-385691 Tue, 01 Sep 2026 12:01:16 +0000 chdot 385691@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ Don’t know if there is anything’new’ here <a href="https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/26510475.edinburgh-councillors-asked-prioritise-southern-trams-spur/" rel="nofollow">https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/26510475.edinburgh-councillors-asked-prioritise-southern-trams-spur/</a> chdot on "Tram latest" http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8710&page=76#post-385562 Mon, 24 Aug 2026 08:40:59 +0000 chdot 385562@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ “ The northern section of Edinburgh's proposed new North-South tramline looks likely to be shelved due to disagreements over the route. Councillors are due to vote next month on whether to take forward the Capital's latest tram project, costed at between £2 billion and £2.9 billion for the full line from Granton to the Royal Infirmary and the BioQuarter. “ <a href="https://archive.ph/2026.08.24-052705/https://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/edinburghs-north-south-tramline-northern-section-likely-to-be-shelved-amid-controversy-over-roseburn-path-plans-8933704" rel="nofollow">https://archive.ph/2026.08.24-052705/https://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/edinburghs-north-south-tramline-northern-section-likely-to-be-shelved-amid-controversy-over-roseburn-path-plans-8933704</a> LaidBack on "Tram latest" http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8710&page=76#post-385406 Tue, 11 Aug 2026 19:56:47 +0000 LaidBack 385406@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ Was musing on Bluesky how Edinburgh Airport with 15 million passengers per annum has a few bus options at its front door. (They pay the airport apparently to get through the security barriers) LRT into city and Ember, 747, Citylink and others going to towns and cities elsewhere. Changing to tram and other modes pretty poor at Waverley really (23 million passengers per annum). Haymarket easier but tram platform far too small for demand of buses and trams - particularly at moment. chdot on "Tram latest" http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8710&page=76#post-385399 Tue, 11 Aug 2026 14:40:51 +0000 chdot 385399@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ “ Frustrated passengers who normally rely on the tram to get around now face waiting for Princes Street to be reopened, which the council is aiming to do by August 26. “ <a href="https://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/princes-street-fire-hopes-of-temporary-service-between-city-centre-and-newhaven-are-dashed-8875625" rel="nofollow">https://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/princes-street-fire-hopes-of-temporary-service-between-city-centre-and-newhaven-are-dashed-8875625</a> Morningsider on "Tram latest" http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8710&page=76#post-385207 Tue, 28 Jul 2026 18:42:27 +0000 Morningsider 385207@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ Ah, yes - the famous "Schrodinger's tram". Simultaneously a loss making white elephant, yet also so essential to transport in the city that the partial suspension of services poses an existential threat to the viability of Leith businesses and the city's tourist economy. Arellcat on "Tram latest" http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8710&page=76#post-385205 Tue, 28 Jul 2026 17:31:44 +0000 Arellcat 385205@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ Most public transport operators, train operators especially, don't pass on their full operating costs to travellers, and the notion that they 'must' return a profit is perverse. Publicly funded public transport exists to provide a service to the public. chdot on "Tram latest" http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8710&page=76#post-385204 Tue, 28 Jul 2026 16:57:18 +0000 chdot 385204@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <a href="https://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/edinburgh-trams-make-ps9-million-loss-despite-record-revenue-and-passenger-numbers-8826411" rel="nofollow">https://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/edinburgh-trams-make-ps9-million-loss-despite-record-revenue-and-passenger-numbers-8826411</a> chdot on "Tram latest" http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8710&page=76#post-385198 Tue, 28 Jul 2026 09:33:53 +0000 chdot 385198@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ “ Princes Street fire: Council considering moving trams by road to enable Leith service “ <a href="https://archive.ph/ko8ee" rel="nofollow">https://archive.ph/ko8ee</a> chdot on "Tram latest" http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8710&page=76#post-385152 Thu, 23 Jul 2026 14:52:10 +0000 chdot 385152@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ Well (part of) problem is fear of things (fires etc) that are mostly(?) caused by illegal bikes And (apparent) inability to enforce existing laws and/or amend laws as required Dave on "Tram latest" http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8710&page=76#post-385151 Thu, 23 Jul 2026 12:37:58 +0000 Dave 385151@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ IIRC the government were consulting about recognising ebikes as mobility aids in some context or other (the bar for a building, or a tram operator or train station to ban an electric mobility aid seems to be extremely high, whereas for the same battery installed on a bike, the bar is very low). Not sure where that's at, or if it would generally undermine ebike bans. My current office allows you to bring anything in, but not charge it. We no longer transport the kids by ebike/trailer or e-cargo bike, but there was a point in time where an office ebike ban would have meant driving them to nursery and taking a bus or regular bike on from there, the kind of social impact that a government wanting to promote greener travel might be interested to legislate to protect.. Arellcat on "Tram latest" http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8710&page=76#post-385142 Wed, 22 Jul 2026 09:09:36 +0000 Arellcat 385142@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ Tulyar is right to call out the gig worker economy for encouraging unchecked proliferation of electric mopeds masquerading as e-bikes, and whatever underground movement exists to service that demand – but to bring the argument back to trams, the likelihood of such an e-bike catching fire onboard a tram is surely the same as one catching fire not onboard a tram. How often does that actually happen? I'm sure it must do occasionally; I've never seen one in flames but I'm not in town 24 hours a day. And how often does an e-bike from a reputable brand catch fire? I've even less seen that happen. Arellcat on "Tram latest" http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8710&page=76#post-385134 Tue, 21 Jul 2026 09:43:33 +0000 Arellcat 385134@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ @Yodhrin, I'm sure I've posted about this before in here but the search function is broken. It would be instructive to ask CEC to show their risk assessment criteria. Back of the envelope thinking here, but an e-bike battery fire onboard a tram may be rare or unlikely in terms of likelihood – itself a combination of likelihood that a bike onboard is an e-bike and that the e-bike is a bit shonky. The inherent likelihood of a shinky e-bike is reduced because those bikes are mostly not being brought onboard trams in the first place. At any rate, combine that likelihood score with a major or severe impact were it to occur and you still get an overall risk that is three or four times smaller than the highest possible risk. The control measure would therefore be simply to remove the source of risk altogether (that is, "NO E-BIKES"), since "NO BIKES" would be an unreasonable level of mitigation. There is possibly some confirmation bias on both sides, since e-bikes in Edinburgh may constitute a higher proportion of bikes in daily use compared with other cities with trams that allow bikes onboard, if there are any. One counter argument I often thought about is how the scoring of impact ought to allow for the fact that an e-bike battery contains far more energy than most other lithium batteries we carry every day, in our bags, pockets and on our wrists. But even a phone battery contains enough energy to produce quite a decent little fire, enough probably to cause panic amongst passengers, probably not enough to set a tram on fire though. Yodhrin on "Tram latest" http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8710&page=76#post-385133 Mon, 20 Jul 2026 22:58:09 +0000 Yodhrin 385133@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ @Tulyar Yeah sorry man, I don't buy it. The actual risk is statistically nonexistent(I've currently got an FoI request in with Merseyrail about their supposed "safety review" to find out what evidence and criteria they used in their ban, and Edinburgh Trams will be getting the same if Spokes can't get them to back down - I suspect the answer in weaselly terms will be "sweet FA" and that this is happening almost exclusively at the behest of one particular union who are using a single incident on a platform on the London Underground as an excuse to push a full ban with operators nationwide as they did in London, why I have no idea). Powered wheelchairs are still allowed, mobility scooters are still allowed - their batteries are at least as large as any EAPC, and I've known people who've replaced old failed battery packs in mobility devices with "shonky foreign jobs" because the official replacements were so expensive when out of warranty. Laptops and mobiles are still allowed despite the fact that there have been scandals in recent years where both types of device exploded or caught fire either injuring people or burning down buildings. Lithium batteries and their risks are simply part of modern life, there is no rational, evidence-based reason I've yet seen to specifically single out ebikes and hold them to a different standard. I've seen suggestions that the various bans are less about battery safety and more about the wider context; they always seem to be happening in places that are working to enable more cycling and encourage multimodal journeys but where operators have invested in infrastructure and rolling stock with poor provision for bicycles, and banning ebikes which are quickly becoming the main kind of bicycle people use for utility transport is a way of simply not having to deal with the increased demand for capacity, a way for their staff to not have to deal with customers forced to wait on a platform because a train or tram only has space for two bikes. A cop out, essentially. chdot on "Tram latest" http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8710&page=76#post-385130 Mon, 20 Jul 2026 18:51:58 +0000 chdot 385130@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <a href="https://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/transport/edinburgh-trams-to-newhaven-must-be-resumed-urgently-after-debenhams-fire-in-princes-street-8810802" rel="nofollow">https://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/transport/edinburgh-trams-to-newhaven-must-be-resumed-urgently-after-debenhams-fire-in-princes-street-8810802</a> Tulyar on "Tram latest" http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8710&page=76#post-384988 Sun, 05 Jul 2026 13:53:19 +0000 Tulyar 384988@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ @chdot Lee Harrison seems to have jumped from the frying pan into the fire with his move to replace Jane Cole - wife of Barry Cole who was a railway manager covering the WCML routes in Lancashire & other transport projects, as his move to Blackpool Trams landed at the same time as their heritage tram base (the old Rigby Road depot was condemned, and then the wheel condition for their new Flexcity tram fleet was given a safety close-down order by ORR, due to the raised risks of derailments with worn tyres Blackpools trams are Alsthom - Edinburghs are CAF but I've noted some internal rows concerning the tyre wear & thus risks of flange climbing & derailments All this is somewhat technical & would relate to operating trams on railway tracks, where pointwork & other detail requires certain adaptations. Happy to discuss off CCE forum with engineers, as I've been building railways & tram tracks since 1968 (when I was building a new railway as a volunteer in N Wales, alongside John Grimshaw, before he started building cycle routes! Tulyar on "Tram latest" http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8710&page=76#post-384987 Sun, 05 Jul 2026 13:36:28 +0000 Tulyar 384987@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ @yodhrin as with the rampant abuse of e-mopeds through the unregulated commercial use of public roads with illegally 'employed' gig workers where the principals (Just Eat etc) fail to keep records We also fail miserably with trading standards (Edinburgh Council) failing to regulate the sale of illegal (for road use) and dangerous (wiring & control circuits) battery powered vehicles The Dutch, at government level have impounded container-loads of dangerous battery powered machines, and the local councils closed down retailers selling these machines In the UK all electric MOPEDS should be sold with a form V5 to register these as motor vehicles & ensure the legal criteria are delivered at the point of sale Eliminating the sale of dangerous lithium ion battery powered kit should reduce the fire risk through eliminating the high risk of short circuits & cell failures in these batteries with bad & cheap circuits The Union Street fire in Glasgow also highlighted a serious hole in legislation for storage of lithium battery equipment which needs the same levels of fire containment as flammable products like organic solvents & gas cylinders etc A wake-up call which is being ignored? chdot on "Tram latest" http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8710&page=76#post-384933 Wed, 01 Jul 2026 09:34:50 +0000 chdot 384933@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ Elph “ Among his many community and social projects, Brian worked with North Edinburgh Arts in Muirhouse, Lothian Cat Rescue and a project to brighten the city during tram construction works. His small mural ‘The Fairy Boy of Leith’ on Leith Walk was inspired by a 17th century folk tales of a young child believed to have second sight, who would commune with elves on Calton Hill by night. Brian continued to make long ‘joiner’ pieces beside the Newhaven tram tracks up until very recently with Many Style Crew members. “ <a href="https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/health/26233111.talented-street-artist-huge-heart-dies-aged-48/" rel="nofollow">https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/health/26233111.talented-street-artist-huge-heart-dies-aged-48/</a> <a href="https://archive.ph/nw0qE" rel="nofollow">https://archive.ph/nw0qE</a>