I know this a train forum, but any trolleybuses (trackless trollyes) fans around here?
Here, in Romania, we have a lot of cityes using trolleybuses. The new, non articualated trolleybuses are fast, have good acceleration, they produce a noise level smaller then buses, they don't produce smoke, and since they have electric, not internal combustion engines they are cooler inside then buses.
North America has the following systems: Vancouver, stable, without expansion plans. Edmonton, ditto. Seattle, replaced dual mode buses in the subway to be used jointly with light rail and temporarily closed, with diesel hybrids that will use battery power in the subway. But have expanded the main Trackless system by new line to Ballard. Dayton, Ohio, stable. San Francisco, stable. Philadelphia, few lines left, shaky. Boston area, dual-mode downtown, small remains of a vast system centered on Harvard Square, Cambridge, stable, new vehicles just purchased.
Where light rail cannot be afforded or is impractical, they are great.
Wish we had them in Jerusalem. Less noise. My Dad was born in Yassi (Yash) in 1882 and moved to the USA at age 12 in 1894.
Toronto had some when I lived there in the late 1960's - the system overlapped with the PCC cars and extended into some of the suburbs.
dd
Cincinnati had them as well. Went away in the mid 1960's. The trolley poles are still around.
http://home.cc.umanitoba.ca/~wyatt/etb-systems.html
nokia2110 wrote:I know this a train forum
In Bucharest we had some central trams/streetcars routes replaced by the trolleybuses in the '50's and '60's, but in the '60's, for eg, on an avenue that had bouth streetcars and trolleybuses, only the streetcars remained (they where closed in 1987 because of Ceauşescu's order) - in 1996 trolleybuses where back on that avenue, but streetcars not, because is a busy one - it's the way for Bucharest - Piteşti motorway. In the '80's we also had some trolleybuses routes beeing replaced by streetcars (one of those streetcars where the ones taken from that avenue - the 2 avenues where paralel).
In the '80's, in Bucharest, many streetcar, trolleybus and even bus lines (routes) where shut down, because of the demolishion (it was a martir city, many old houses and quyet streets where destroyed to make room for Ceauşescu's megalomania - no wonder that he eneded up so bad), Ceauşescu's ideea to make public transporation economically efficent and his other dumb ideas like that the trolleybuses should be used only on short routes, or that where is subway there should be no surface transporation (in 1988 they wanted to shut down the big streetcar line tha passes near me 'cause in 1989 the subway line was shceduled for beeing open - in was opened, but thanks God that was a smart guy that pervent line 34 from beeing closed).
In Moscow, they wanted to get read of the steertcars untill the '80's, but....
But, on the other hand, in some cityes of Western Europe tolleybuses are beeing replaced with streetcars!
With all these, I think trolleybuses are still necesarry.
In bus vs. trolleybus, the trolleybus have some advantages:
- It proudce less noice
- The own weight of a vehicle is smaller than in case of a bus
- The electric engine, is more simple than a internal combustion engine, so trolleybuses have a longer life
- The electric engine is more efficent than an internal combustion engine (oh, but there are power loses in the electricity tranporation system, on the other hand electricity can be produced not only by burning fuel)
The disavantages:
- Can move to much from the wires above (some trolleybuses have small engines to allow them to move on short disatnces)
- If the trolleybus runs to fast or pases throu switches to fast, that can couse derailment of trolleys
- If there is now electricity on the wire, the trolleybuses can't run
- There is need for wire maintinance
With all these, I love trolleybuses more than buses.
Bouth surface and underground are state runed. The surface transporation in Bucharest is operated by City Hall, trhou R.A.T.B. (Regia Autonomă de Transport Bucureşti = Bucharest Autonomus Tranporation Administration).
The power line is 750 V d.c. When the first Soviet "MTD" 82D trolley buses runed in Bucharest they had a 550 V d.c. supply network, but since the streetcar runed at 750 V they later rised the voltage at 750 V for trolleybuses too. The first line was opened in Nov. 1949 (the first city in Romania to have trolleybuses was Timişoara, in Nov. 1942). The line (numbered 81) runed between P-ţa Victoriei (Victory Square) and Hipodromul Băneasa (Băneasa Hipodrom - a part of the hipodrom was moved to Town of Ploieşti to make room for an exhibitional complex in 1961). The line had a lenght in bouth direction of 5,700 meteres (aporx. 5816,32 yards). The first trolley buses barn was inside the hipodrom. On the line runed 5 trolley buses. In May 1952 the line was lenghted to Aeroportul Băneasa (Băneasa Airport) - which back then was still otuside the city (Băneasa neiberghood was still a commune). The other end the line was lengted to Gara de Nord (Northen Railroad Staion - main staion in Bucharest), later Cotroceni Palace ( Palace which was called back Young Pioneer's Palace - Young Pioneers was a Communist youth oraganization), and later to Militari neiberghood, and after that switched to Drumul Taberei (Road of the Camp) neiberghood. The line was shorten in the '60's back to Gara de Nord. The original line was closed in 1986 or 1987 because of Ceauşescu :( A new 81 route runed untill aprox 1993 from the former end in the area of the former Băneasa Hipodrom to Gara de Nord, but on another streets.
The second line, and the first line tu use Romanian made trolleybuses was 84 in 1956. The line runed for a time parallel with the streetcars on East- West Axes. The Romanian made trolley buses where mounted by Atelirele Centrale (Central Workshops) - today called U.R.A.C. on "Renault" bus chassie. In fact they had unleass one prototipe converted from an old "Ranult" bus into trolleybus. The trolleybuses where called T12 (troleibuze lungi de 12 m - 12 meters long trolleybuses).
An old "Renault" bus (picture from the '30's)
http://www.ratb.ro/img/auto_05_full.jpg
Here is an T12 trolleybus:
http://www.ratb.ro/img/trolley_01_full.jpg
First Romanian trolley buses produced by a factory where the "T.V." 2E trolley buses. "T.V." camed from "Tudor Vladimirescu" (the plant name, whic in 1962 or 1963 was changed into "Autobuzul" ("The bus") and 1991 into "Rocar", the factory runed out of business in 2002) and E for electric. The next model was 20E. But these where no more than medium capacity trolley buses....
The Golden Age of the Bucharest trolley buses was from the '60's up untill the '80's. More and more lines where opened. In the '70's, higher capacity trolley buses where introduced - the "Dac" 112E (those trolley buses looked like "Roman" buses - only the buses where produced under licence, "Roman" cames from "Romania" + "M.A.N.", and from this some people reffer to the first generation of "Dac" trolley buses as "Roman" trolley buses). In 1981 we had the first articulated trolley buses, the "Dac" 117E (those vehicles didn't look like the old Dac/Roman ones). The 112 and 117 camed from the vehicles lenght, aprox 12 meters and apox 17 meters (1 meter = 0,98 yards).
THE END OF THE GOLDEN AGE
Bucharest had one of the largest and most developed surface transporation sistems in Europe. But in the '80's all that camed to an end. Ceauşescu had some very idiot ideas, like
And there was another of his „big ideas" to make economy evereywhere. So the spare parts, the mantinance (whic had been bad before, no it was awfoul bad). And we must add the distruction of the old city. It was a massacre. Entire areas of the city where wiped out from the face of the Earth. There where lines that runed on side streets. They are no more.
Between Piaţa Unirii (Union Square) and P-ţa Romană (Roman Square), two main points on the North-East axis, in 1982 runed 6 trolley bus lines (74, 82, 83, 87, 94, 95) and 7 bus lines (131, 134, 135, 231, 235, 300, 331), plus 1 trolley bus line (73) and one bus line (313) that runed only at rush hours. After they start working on the subway on that portion (in 1986) only 135 bus line remained. In 1988? the line was moved on another streets.
Another example was the streetcar line number 13 :D that before 1987 linked the East and West part of the city. Today, if you want to reach from Pantelimon (Pantelon) neiberghood and Militari neiberghood you have to change 2-3 lines. And line 13 used P.C.C. type „Tatra" T4R streetcars.
Here you can see a result of the mesures (the pic was taken in 1990)
http://www.mendicott.com/images/romtra1b.jpg (in the pic is a couple of 2 „Tatra" T4R streetcars)
Ater the falling of the Communism, in Dec. 1989 they didn't do much to improve the transporation in Central area of the city... The only normal line bus line (381) that pases on the North-South Axis pases under the Union Square, and the expres bus line (783) that haves the end of line at Union Square haves more expensive tickets... on the other hand the traffic is so busy you better use the subway during working days...
They bringed second-hand streetcars (uh-oh they where better that everithyng we had in Romania) and buses, but never second-hand trolleybuses. However, they converted some old (1968-1970 made) Swiss „Saurer" 5 DUK-A buses into trolleybuses; the reasons: the engines where very used, they dind't have money for new vehicles, the „Saurer" had Aluminium body and the Romanian made trolleybuses where in very bad condition.
The '90's where the period when they could do so much for public transporation. Reason: lack of money (the economy started to improve only about 1997) and the lack of interes...
Maybe if they did more, today more people would use the public transportation in stad OF THE CARS THAT POLUTE AND PRODUCE TRAFIC JAMS.
They reopened some streetcar lines (but they closed others, majority of them beacause of poeple dind't pay the ticket and there wheren't so many people traveling with them), some trolleybus lines.
Another dumb thing they did: they scraped the good old German streetcars and because of this some lines where closed (no track removed).
The futures seems birght. New vehicles (except the new trolleybuses, who are very poor qualty), modernization of streetcar lines, reoepning the trolleybus lines on the North-South Axisis...
IF SOME ONE IS CURIOS, I'LL PUT SOME INFOS ABOUT TROLLEYBUS SISTEMS IN OTHER ROMANIAN CITYES TOO!
please do, we are all interested!
The second big trolleybus network in Romania can be found in Timişoara (Timishoara). First trolleybuses where introduced here on 15th of November 1942. Untill then the only mass public transporation in Timişoara was provided only by the streetcars (buses only camed about 1948) - Timişoara still haves a big streetcar network. The resaon they not used buses was the war: buses where sent on the front and fuel economy was neded. First trolleybus line was instaled by an Italian company, and the first trolleybuses to run where "F.I.A.T.-Marelli". In Timişoara trolleybuses are usually named by the people "firobuze (wirebuses)" - probably because the Italians installed them (in italian the word for "trolleybus" is "filobus"). In the '50's 5 more trolleybuses, this time Soviet made G.M. style, the "MTB" 82D. The "MTB" 82D bringed in Timişoara and Bucharest (in Bucharest 8 trolleybuses) where the lasted imported trolleybuses up untill the '90's. This Italian and Soviet made trolleybuses from Timişoara where scraped in the period 1956-1960.
In 1959 Romanian made "T.V." 2E trolleybuses arived. ("T.V." stood for "Tudor Vladimirescu", later the plant was called "Autobuzul (The bus)"-through all it produced trolleybuses too, and from 1991 "Rocar" - it runed out of business in 2002; "E" stood for "electric"). If you are curios, the oldest Romanian that can be found is made after 1985...
The oldest preserved/runing trolleybuses in Romania are Swiss made, but they where second-hand bought after 1990. The oldest preserved is an 1960 articulated "F.B.W." 3GTr in Sibiu (not good condition) and an 1960 "Saurer" in Timişoara (in Timişoara they had 4 1960 "Suarer" and the idiots scraped 2, the 4th one was taken back in Switzerland). The oldest runing are some 1966 "F.B.W." in Siubiu - I wonder they still run, since in Sibiu the maintinace is so poor. If those 1966 are "old", in Ruse, Bulgaria (not so far away from Bucharest, going South) are runing 4 1956 made "F.B.W." trolleybuses (plus some 1961-1966 ones). I wouldn't like to ride those every day. Because the Swiss roads are good, the Swiss made trolleybuses and buses have very rough suspenions (because of they used they become rougher). On the other hand, any old Swiss trolleybus is better than a 100% Romanian made trolleybus (the only not old trolleybuses in Romania that beats and old trolleybus in not 100% Romaian)
An intresting fact is that Bucharest wasn't the 2nd city in Romania to have trollyebuses, the 2nd one was Craiova; it had trolleybuses between 1943 (May the 9th) and 1944 (October). Don't know why they closed the line (s). A plan is to reintroduce trollybuses in the city.
In 1959 3 Romanian cityes introduced trolleybuses:
- Constanţa (Constantza), plus the line that conected it to the sea side resort of Mamaia (The Grandma) - Constanţa is a sea side city too. In the past there was a train line between the 2. The last passanger train runed in 1944, and the line was closed in 1960 because it passed trhou the city.
- Braşov
- Cluj-Napoca
In Constanţa + Mamaia, and in Braşov the trolleybuses where introduce by I.T.B. (Întreprinderea de Transporturi Bucureşti - Bucharest Transporation Enterprise). The reason for introducing trolleybuses was mostly because back then buses produce a lot of smoke at they where noiser then the trolleybuses; plus, they wanted to exporte fuel and electricty could be produced by burning inferior coal (that coal could not bee exported) or in hidro-electric power plants.
Up untill the '80's, Braşov and Constanţa reached to have one of the biggest trolleybuses networks in the country. In Constanţa, at a population of 315,000 people in 1985, only in the city they had about 6-8 trolleybus lines (plus 3 streetcar lines; Constanţa had streetcars in 1943-1944, they where captured from Soviets, but after Romania turned weapons against Germany they where bought back into the U.S.S.R; the streetcars reopened in Nov. 1984). But all fall down after 2000. The Mayor of Constanţa, considered that the trolleybuses are consuming to much electryicity and that the wires where in bad conditon and replaced all lines except one with buses, he also closed 1 streetcar line, replacing it with buses (the funny thing is that the mayor's name is Mazăre (Peas) and the bus he bringed are "M.A.Z." 103). In Braşov mayor Scripcaru (The violine player) shut down the only streetcar line - the truth is that the rails where in very bad shape... and the other reason is that the 2 plants that in the '80's worked at full capacity had now less then half the numbers of employees comparing to the '80's; thanks god, he reintroduced trolleybuses, not buses; but now he also is replacing trolleybuses lines with buses...
Here are cityes in Romania that have/had trolleybuses (I'll talk about the rest other time) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_trolleybus_systems#Romania
My opinion is that the automobile is the enemy of trams/streetcars. Public transit modes should complement each other. Were it not for generally unbalanced government policies which favored the automobile over public transportation, many of the conversions of heavy passenger rail or trams/streetcars to non-rail modes would not have taken place. And many of the abandonments of rail, with or without an interim electric trolley bus conversion, would also not have taken place.
Patrick Boylan
Free yacht rides, 27' sailboat, zip code 19114 Delaware River, get great Delair bridge photos from the river. Send me a private message
JT22CW wrote:Trolleybuses appeared at approximately the same time as electrified streetcars, as their chief competition. While they are more tolerable than internal-combustion-engine buses, they are still buses and are in fact the enemy of trams/streetcars in many respects.
oops. I forgot to include your quote. Again, my opinion is that the automobile is the chief competion and enemy of public transportation, which includes passenger trains, streetcars, and several non-rail modes.
Personally, I love 'em. Would hate to know that Toronto gave up all its trolleybuses. I think up there they use the term "trolleycoach" instead, coach being an acceptable British locution for an (omni)bus. It has been more than 15 years since I visited "Tranna," but the trolleybus was an impotant part of our stay - one line ran (runs?) from Union Station to the east side of town, right in front of the place we stayed. That area is quite built up and skyscraperized today, but back then once you left the Toronto business core to the east, it went low-rise very quickly. How could I forget the fact that we stayed in a charming but cheap hotel called "The White House"? There was also a line on or to Annette St. I am going to research the TTC.
When I was in Mexico City -- some people have trouble believing this -- near the Zocalo (downtown plaza) there is or was a trolleybus traveling south on a one-way, avenue-wide street. But all the other vehicluar traffic was only allowed to go north! There was a sign hanging over one of the trolleybus wires like a street sign, and it merely said in Spanish, "The trolleybus (el trolebus) runs in the opposite direction." Clearly the residents were used to it, because as they saw the trolleybus approaching, three streams of rush-hour cars, cabs and vans, all parted into two even-sized streams on opposite sides of the street, yielding the dead middle to "trolebus." Good grief: if this happened in Chicago, rush hour would probably entail three cops and generate five fender-benders! My general opinion of the urban Latino car driver went way up on that trip.
I visited Guadalajara, Jalisco, Mexico for the first time in the late 1980s -- the week BEFORE the light-rail line opened. Darn! But I got to see trolleycoaches at their busiest. Along the main drag, especially at rush times, passengers might or might not fit onto the first coach, but there were always two or three within sight. Articulated, and all painted beige -- or maybe they had been pre-sold and needed to be absent livery?? The trolleybuses were overloaded, but in the period they entered service and 1989, I am told, Guadalajara and suburb's population went from roughly that of Indianapolis' to bigger than Chicago's. It was a classic instance of the planner's rule-of-thumb that trolleybuses work best in medium-high traffic areas, more traffic than bus routes but less than rapid-transit. I would have to say los Trolebuses de Guadalajara had probed the limits of capacity, yet I never had to wait more than five or six minutes if the preceding one was too full.
I always think what happened in Chicago is a sad story, even though it's impossible to second-guess history. I am told that my adopted town was hit with a bad ice storm in the early spring of 1973, before I moved here. The storm severely damaged the wires of the few remaining trolleybus lines, including the very busy Belmont Ave. line, and the CTA chose that time to decommission the last trolleybuses and tear down the catenary. I sometimes wonder what would have happened if the storm hadn't hit; with the Seven-Day War that initiated the OPEC oil shocks six months ahead, would the CTA have scrupled to keep its last trolleybus lines? It would certainly be a nice anti-hydrocarbon gesture, especially since, even back then, Chicagoland was getting much more than half its electricity courtesy nukes.
For that matter, does any company in N. America (incl. Central America) manufacture trolleybuses, to the 750 v DC standard or otherwise?
Hey, I prefer streetcar, LR, or even cable cars but their low-stress impact on the environment is just one of the things that makes me say, "Viva Los Trolebuses!"
Don U. TCA 73-5735
DMUinCT wrote:The "Trackless Trolley" solved a problem in the days when the Street Cars were operated by a private company (Boston Elevated Railway)(United Electric Railway). Street car companies were required to Plow Snow the streets they used. Some used Plows, some used Sweepers. By going "Trackless", that became the City's problem (until the city took over the Street Car operations).
I never knew that politics figured in that way; thanks for the enlightening info.
Also to previous poster: I really appreciate Cambridge's reliance on the TT. Thanks, al
(Sorry, no imbeds; these following url's are just addresses, not links.)
(1) ttc homesite: toronto.ca/ttc
Here is what I have been able to find about Toronto Transit Commission ("TTC") routes:
(2) This "ride guide" opened up in .pdf and is so small I couldn't get anything out of it: http://www.toronto.ca/ttc/pdf/rideguide.pdf. Anybody got a monitor about, oh, sixty inches diagonal that can run .pdf??
(2a) So I blew up the picture to 125 percent and trolled along the bottom: It shows a key to Rapid Transit (subway, rapid transit and GO commuter trains); in other words, anything on rails counts as Rapid Transit, the same as here in the USA.
(2b) I then went to Routes, the key on the map just below Rapid Transit. It shows the bus lines and streetcar lines. (I suspect that the 500-series routes are all streetcar routes but am not sure.)Alas, no segregation or separate annotation for trolleycoach (TT).
(3) Will attempt to track the elusive TT -- have not yet found a "Contact Us" site of yet.If you're good on computer, you could probably get further than I did. If so, let us know, please!
(4) Here is a specific site that might be of interest to streetcar fans or people just warming up to the ttc. It regards the #511 Bathurst streetcar line:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/511_Bathurst_(TTC). IMO Wikipedia picked a good example to show as a streetcar line. (This and the following item do not regard trolleycoaches, I just hate to throw the info away!):
(5) Toronto's intriguing "blue light" service--makes nite traveling safer: www.toronto.ca/tttc/pdf/fluenight.pdf
But as to trolleycoaches in Toronto, the mystery continues.......... - a. s.
Boston has 28 Trolley Buses (Trackless Trolleys) working 4 routes.
Also, in street cars, Boston still have 10 PCC Cars and 200 LRV Cars. I would still think most passenger volume is on the 4 Subways and the Commuter Rail.
DMUinCT wrote: Boston has 28 Trolley Buses (Trackless Trolleys) working 4 routes.Also, in street cars, Boston still have 10 PCC Cars and 200 LRV Cars. I would still think most passenger volume is on the 4 Subways and the Commuter Rail.
[Aren't PCC streetcars cool? If I understand what I'm reading from the Kenosha (WI) website, PCC's of various liveries are being used as "antique" trolleys there. Some people might resent that term, because at worst PCC's are obsolescent but not obsolete. At any rate, they use regular trolley-pole PCC's and run an important route, from downtown and parking to the Metro-UP North line that runs south thru Waukegan and Evanston to the Ogilvie Center (where C&NW station once stood) in downtown Chicago.]
But mainly, You really know your stuff! It is great learning from you.
SactoGuy188 wrote:Trolleybuses are still used in San Francisco for one reason: the electric drive motors offer enough torque to tackle the numerous hills in the city. In fact, MUNI in city built a new trolleybus line through Chinatown some years ago because the diesel-powered bus that used to ply that line didn't have enough torque in the engine to make it up the hill!
Yes, I always enjoy riding the trolley bus in S.F. (only when there aren't streetcars to take us where we're going). When it stops on one of those steep hills and we have a full bus it's fun to feel the bus just glide away-no smoke, no noise and no hesitation; just away we go.
Kevin C. Smith wrote:Yes, I always enjoy riding the trolley bus in S.F. (only when there aren't streetcars to take us where we're going). When it stops on one of those steep hills and we have a full bus it's fun to feel the bus just glide away-no smoke, no noise and no hesitation; just away we go.
The reason why they built the trolleybus line through Chinatown was that the regular diesel-powered bus required a number of passengers to get off the bus when it climbed the hill, and that didn't go over well given the large number of elderly Chinese living in that part of town!
daveklepper wrote:Have you not also have a cable car line in that part of town?
Yes SIR, but at the risk of splitting hairs, at least two intersecting lines. As if you didn't know !
When I was last in S.F., people were waiting 45-minutes plus to get on the cable car at Fisherman's Wharf -- and almost that long to turn it around and get on at the other end.
(One day I got disgusted with the overcrowding and walked west of Fisherman's Wharf--more than a little, it was well past Ghirardelli's--and caught a trolleybus back into town. Smooth! I "landed" with the Tenderloin to my right and downtown to my left.)
But if one MUST ride a cable car, I recommend the California line. More locals than tourists use it and the plunge off Nob Hill seems more precipitous. - a.s.
Athens Greece had trolley buses in the mid 1980's.
The Mexico DF "contraflow" Trolley Bus route actually makes sense. Bus and traffic can see each other, then you don't turn in front of the bus.
Does anyone know whether Philadelphia's SEPTA still runs Trackless Trolley (trolleybus or TT) lines in the city or suburbs.
Just paid $9.30 for a comprehensive SEPTA map but that "detail" was not addressed. - a.s .
SunsetLtd wrote: Athens Greece had trolley buses in the mid 1980's.The Mexico DF "contraflow" Trolley Bus route actually makes sense. Bus and traffic can see each other, then you don't turn in front of the bus.
Contraflow bus lanes were tried in downtown Chicago for a few years on some east-west streets (Adams and Jackson, IIRC) but were later dropped.
JT22CW wrote: nokia2110 wrote:I know this a train forumThen with all due respect, why did you post a question about trolleybuses here, which are buses and not rail vehicles? Trolleybuses appeared at approximately the same time as electrified streetcars, as their chief competition. While they are more tolerable than internal-combustion-engine buses, they are still buses and are in fact the enemy of trams/streetcars in many respects.
Its kinda a split between Streetcars and buses, just as rare today as the streetcar.
about politics, some streetcar systems were "broad" gauge or Narrow, this was to keep the steam roads from running freight over the lines...
BTW Illinois Railway Museum has operating trolleybusses
Philly's SEPTA runs diesel in place of electric trolleybuses right now, but most of the wires are still up on the 5 routes. The apparent plan is to buy new coaches for the 3 routes (59, 66, 75) that run in the northeastern part of the city, but keep the 2 routes (29, 79) that run in south Philly as diesel. 29 and 79 do not have any wire connection to 59 66 or 75, and at times 59 and 75 did not have any wire connection with the storage yard at the Frankford Elevated's terminal because of construction.
The coaches that had run these routes were all American Motors General vintage late 1970's, I think 1978 or later, but I think they were all delivered by 1980.
The immediate reason for the latest suspension of electric coach service was construction of a new elevated station at Frankford terminal, which disrupted the coac storage yard and a good deal of the wires on Frankford Avenue. There had however been several diesel suspensions for just about any old excuse over the years.
Now here's an interesting thing. The pfd files, and I assume the printed schedules, all say "SEPTA BUS ROUTE", and they have the same photo of a diesel bus, but on a street which obviously has 2 sets of trolleybus wires.
http://www.septa.org/service/sched/pdfs/bus_41_80/059.pdf
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.