• alcoholicorn
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      Trolleybuses are busses with overhead power, this doesn’t seem to use pantographs or poles.

      • Jeena@jemmy.jeena.net
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        Sure because it has a huge battery on board which needs to be driven around, seems to me that the trolleybus is superior if you’re building infrastructure for this bus specifically anyway.

        • alcoholicorn
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          7 months ago

          Trollybuses have their place, when you want a trolley, but the slopes too steep for metal on metal. Because you don’t have a track for ground, they either need a double pantograph or 2 trolley poles, which adds some complexity and can cause delays if they come off.

          Battery (and ICE) buses are cheaper and more flexible since they don’t require pantographs.

          Battery buses have their own issues: recharge time/complexity of exchanging batteries, range, battery lifespan, heating/AC. These don’t make battery buses infeasible, but they’ve caused significant issues for some implementations.

          For instance, moscow replaced their trolleys with battery buses. Because running the heater during winter would deplete too much of the battery, they added gas heaters.

          There’s a few cities that have tried battery trollybuses, that charge the battery when a pantograph is available. This seems like the worst of both worlds.

  • PowerCrazy
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    7 months ago

    Tracks are much better for the environment and long-term sustainability then roads. Not having to build track shouldn’t be seen as a plus side, but as a compromise that had to be made.

    • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆OP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      7 months ago

      It gets cars off the road immediately, so I think that’s the main value. I agree that tracks are a better long term solution.

      • PowerCrazy
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        7 months ago

        That’s true. If this were america, I’d suspect the tracks would never come, but in China, maybe it is indeed an intermediary step towards light-rail or other non-road based people transport.

  • entropicdrift@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    7 months ago

    This is interesting in the way it has specialized traffic lines but otherwise works as like a more modern hybrid of a trolleybus and a light rail system.

    It’s definitely an interesting and worthwhile iteration, but it’s not exactly revolutionary.