THe truth is i don’t want them but that’s another story.

This article

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/edinburgh_and_east/7904271.stm

has some info on the trams themselves, never mind the cost etc, They’re gonna be 48 meteres long or 140feet in old money and carry 350 passengers. Well that’ll make for smaller queues at the stops then. Oh and they’ll do 30mph on street (?) and 45mph off street (?). So hands up all those cyclists who fancy going down leith walk with trams travelling at 45mph loaded with 350 passengers and driven by a bus driver. Erm when can i move house?

so they will be doing a max of 30 mph down leith walk – same as the busses but won’t be able to swrve into your path as they are on rails.

I am totally in favour – if they had a proper connection to the airport

Another question – HTF is something that runs on electricity environmentally friendly?

IT was more the 350 passengers and 140feet long part i was shocked at. I’d rather get the 22 every 4 minutes, personally. THe night trams’ll be party trams 🙂

I’m trying to reserve judgement until they’re finished and running. Edinburgh City Council should have spent the £500m on resurfacing every road in the city, providing better bike storage facilities round town, sorting out the traffic flow through the city centre and expanding the park and ride schemes, instead of going for broke with this massive ego-project. But like I said, I’m trying to hold my breath until they’re running.

Well seeing as the german contractors have downed tools it might never happen!

Totally agree with spending the money on resurfacing the roads. Would have been far more valuable.

my ‘layman’ maths tells me the trams don’t add up – financially or environmentally. I’d really like to trust that someone has done those sums a bit better than i could, but it seems that there are so many problems.

I’m prepared to accept that people with a fair bit more training, experience and practical skill than me have done the calculations, but why is it that we award contracts to companies based on some spurious notion of best value, but then they can up the budget by 10’s of millions, and hold the city to ransom?

does the environmental cost/benefit of the trams take into account the doubling of any bus journey along the route during the 5 years of work – and the environmental cost of all those engines idling in traffic?

in my opinion, the problem is that many people just hate public transport, and i don’t believe that the trams will encourage enough people to get out of their cars.

IMO its been too much of a comprimise – n proper connectin to the airport, no prper connection to the mainline railways, does not go far enough out of the city to be useful for park and ride.

However it does give a core to build on – I believe that similar schemes in england have been successful

It’s Transport Scotland decision on what they spend our money on – not ECC. As to whether “trams add up financially or environmentally” the only scheme I’m aware of that didn’t result in a serious financial shorfall and hidiously spiralling sosts was Manchester Metro and that was because the bulk of it was built on exisiting but disused railway line.
As far as environmental factors go electric=green, diesel=pollution as far as politicians and your average sun reader as concerned. It doesn’t matter if it’s green or not as long as it’s percieved as being green.
I biked into manchester city centre every day when I was at Uni and as long as you stay out of the dedicated tram lanes and use a bit of common sense in the mixed use sections they are a damn site less dangerous than busses.

My boss is terrified of trams.

He calls them “silent killers” 😆

Well I hope they are going to be going out to the Airport otherwise I’m wasting my time reviewing the drawings of the tram terminal at the airport!

The Airport section is part of the next phase.

Still all a total waste of time though, the bus link to the airport is fine.

Could be worse – I was reviewing the Airport Rail link. Imagine being able to get the train to an airport – totally ridiculous idea.

I’m just glad I ride in and out of work at the moment, the traffic was absolutely stupid on Lothian Road this morning as they have closed Princes Street but no work going ahead until they sort out a dispute with the contractor.

My understanding was that the trams WILL be going all the way to the airport but could be wrong on that – otherwise hard to see the benefit for most of the city, but would like to see it work out. Less people in cars the better really, it is really not a great city for driving in.

Not convinced how tram lines and bike wheels will fit together – presumably the on-road bits could get a bit dicy where you have to cross the lines at an angle, but I guess they manage everywhere else?

And a side-proiduct is the entertainment, amazement and feelings of superiority you can get from a read of the comments bit on every Scotsman.com tram story – “speke you’re branes” at it’s best.

They put trams into Dublin and they seem to do a pretty good job. Hopefully do wonders for Edinburgh. As for the airport link, Edinburgh must be the only capital city/commercial centre in Europe that does not have a train link to its airport. It’s especially criminal when the railway line actually borders the airport site

n proper connectin to the airport
er, apart from the trams going to the airport.

no pr[o]per connection to the mainline railways
haymarket interchange?

It’s more of a pain in the tits for those of us that don’t live in edinburgh. I live in beautiful clackmannanshire and the trains into edinburgh go straight past the airport – just a shame they don’t stop.

With Princes St closed for a year and pedestrian access only on the shop side of the road, the festival will be a bit of a shambles!

Marty – I have been corrected on the airport connection – its in phase 2 apparently. Its still utter nonsence as there is a train track on the airport site already

As for the interface with trains – haymarket is not good enough – it means tram passengers wanting to go on many trains such as those to the south will need to get off the tram at haymarket, get on a train to Waverley, change trains there. The trams should and could have interfaced with rail at waverly not haymarket.

Compared to the integrated transport in most European capitals its a very half hearted system.

I am broadly in favour of the trams – but I see these proposals as decidedly flawed.

Agree with TJ. The scope of the trams – phase 1 at least – doesn’t do anything that buses don’t already and I’d be well surprised if the costs are justified. Subsequent phases must be good…

All work stops during the festival, and it all goes back to normal for the month.

That’s part of the contract, that is if the work actually starts…

TJ – there will be a stop at the top of Waverley Steps as well I believe, which really isn’t very far from Waverley station is it?

And very useful indeed if you have impaired mobility or lots of luggage and stuff.

Having lived in two places with trams (Croydon and Nottingham) I am all for them. Fantastic things and as has been touched on, a lot more predicable than a bus.

Perversely, I believe that although the Manchester Metro was one of the trams schemes that had the least financial trouble it is less successful overall than many other schemes.

The Croydon Tramlink is so successful that they are now facing an under-capacity problem and are trying to borrow extra trams whilst new ones are being built (lead times for a tram being about 3 years) to assist with the over-crowding issues.

Tandemjeremy, are you this ill-informed about every topic you post on?

Trams will be worse than the bus for the station – none of them go into Waverley either. Even rail replacement buses go from Waverley Bridge sometimes. I guess there is simply not space to put trams into the station, and no space on either side as it’s the bottom of a valley and then you couldn’t go down Leith Walk as Calton Hill is in the way.

Stu_N – Member

Tandemjeremy, are you this ill-informed about every topic you post on?

Hypothetical question – right?

I think there were a load of bike accidents in Sheffield when the trams were put in. Not just the ‘silent killers’ but also the slippery rail surfaces and the opportunities for wheels to get trapped.

Looks like a moot point though. As the trams won’t be finished until some time after heat death of the universe.

Erm If the trams go down Princes Street why would you not just get off there and walk down the steps into Waverley Station? Am I missing something here?

StuN- before you accuse me try reading what I wrote – I did not say trams would be worse than the bus. I said IMO they are flawed and they do not integrate with rail and air services as well as in many other cities.

Andy – as above how about if you have impaired mobility?

I was thinking more of your assertion that there was no airport link and no interchange with Waverley (which is half true), but probably as good as can be done given constraints imposed by geology and the desire to go north of Calton Hill.

Was out at lunchtime and Princes Street is a mess, really sad looking – going to end up with even more empty units and tourist tat shops at this rate. If I was a retailer I’d be livid.

Andy – as above how about if you have impaired mobility?

OK fair comment – so what do people do now?

Stu – I was corrected as I said above on the airport link – its in phase 2 apparently. Was the use of the old tunnel from cannonmills to Waverley considered? I believe there is a tunnel still there as it goes thru solid rock. I’d also like to see the trams interface with / use the south suburban circle where the rails are still on the ground. ’tis a shame that is not being used.

To me it feels too half hearted – spend twice ans much for a ten times better system.

Still – its a start point I suppose and I am broadly in favour. Just dissapointed its not as good as it could be.

Both me and my missus work with people with disabilities of many srts so that colours my thinking about ease of use and access.

Andy – struggle or use taxis.

THe tunnel at cannomills is being re-opened as a cyclepath/pedestrian path. Assuming that its the one that pops out next to Tesco.

I was pro trams but think the idea is half-hearted. Felt that the use of congestion charge money could have been used to make work better.

Oh and smaller trams please, short ones and often not huge ones every so often.

There was a petition knocking about to re-open the south sub. Would be a good idea I think, although it wouldn’t impact me too much. The line has always been in use so the principal cost would be new stations, which were all knocked down years back. This would be peanuts relative to the tram expenditure.

kevonakona – thats the one but I think there is a further section that goes right to waverley – but I’m not sure

TJ – you’re thinking of the Scotland Street tunnel.