Conference PaperPDF Available

Urban Transport in France: The Tramway Revival

Authors:

Abstract and Figures

Interest in Light Rail Transit (LRT) as a viable urban transportation system has been growing worldwide since the late 20th century. Although there is no definite difference between trams and LRT systems, the latter is an evolved tramway system-tracks are often segregated from other traffic, cars run faster, and everyone has easy access due to level boarding. Since the beginning of 1970s, France has developed a significant program of urban transport networks and systems for the major metropolitan areas: a specific policy in favour of investment in urban public transport has been promoted by all local governments in France. In 1971, a new transport tax was created in the Paris region and it was extended in 1973 to all cities with more than 20,000 inhabitants. This tax is levied on companies with more than 9 workers. The tax rate varies locally from 1% to 2.5% of the payroll. The revenue is used to fund in investment and operation of urban public transport. In 2006, the transport tax revenue for France amounted more than 5.3 Billion Euros, divided into 2.7 Billion Euros in the Paris region and 2.6 Billion Euros for the other 260 Urban Transport Organizing Authorities UTOA. The economic justification for the tax is the important role of the public transport that plays an important role in the employment market, especially because employers will have more possibilities to find better jobs if there is an efficient public transport network. At the same, organizing authorities UTOA were created by the local boroughs, and they have responsibility for urban public transport in the cities. UTOA were ratified by legislation in 1981, and received the transport tax revenue and spend it based on the following responsibilities: - Organization of public transport in cities - Creation and management of transport infrastructures - Regulation of transport services (volume, fares) - Development of information systems The 261 UTOA now in existence have important funding and operations at their disposition, and have boosted the development of many public transport networks.
Content may be subject to copyright.
Revitalization of Indonesia Railway Sector
Rebuilding Rail Based Public Transport System
Civil Engineering National Seminar
Tuesday, 21st October 2008, DKI Jakarta
Urban Transport in France:
The Tramway Revival
Francis KÜHN Jeong-Hwa AN
Research Engineer, Ph.D student/Study Engineer
E-mail: francis.kuhn@inrets.fr jeong-hwa.an@inrets.fr
New Technologies Laboratory
French National Institute for Transport and Safety Research
2 Avenue du général Malleret-Joinville 94114 ARCUEIL cedex France.
Tel. :+33-1-47-40-7346, Fax. :+33-1-45-47-5606
Revitalization of Indonesia Railway Sector: rebuilding rail based public transport system “Urban Transport in
France :Tramway Revival in France” Franco-Indonesian Seminar of Jakarta on 21 October 2008,
F. Kuhn & J-H An 2
06/10/2020
Introduction
Interest in Light Rail Transit (LRT) as a viable urban transportation system has been growing worldwide
since the late 20th century. Although there is no definite difference between trams and LRT systems, the
latter is an evolved tramway system-tracks are often segregated from other traffic, cars run faster, and
everyone has easy access due to level boarding.
Since the beginning of 1970s, France has developed a significant programme of urban transport
networks and systems for the major metropolitan areas: a specific policy in favour of investment in
urban public transport has been promoted by all local governments in France.
In 1971, a new transport tax was created in the Paris region and it was extended in 1973 to all cities with
more than 20,000 inhabitants. This tax is levied on companies with more than 9 workers. The tax rate
varies locally from 1% to 2.5% of the payroll. The revenue is used to fund in investment and operation
of urban public transport. In 2006, the transport tax revenue for France totalled more than 5.3 Billion
Euros, divided into 2.7 Billion Euros in the Paris region and 2.6 Billion Euros for the other 260 Urban
Transport Organizing Authorities UTOA. The economic justification for the tax is the important role of
the public transport that plays an important role in the employment market, especially because
employers will have more possibilities to find better jobs if there is an efficient public transport network.
At the same, organizing authorities UTOA were created by the local boroughs, and they have
responsibility for urban public transport in the cities. UTOA were ratified by legislation in 1981, and
received the transport tax revenue and spend it based on the following responsibilities:
- Organization of public transport in cities
- Creation and management of transport infrastructures
- Regulation of transport services (volume, fares)
- Development of information systems
The 261 UTOA now in existence have important funding and operations at their disposal, and have
boosted the development of many public transport networks.
1. New Public Transit Networks
There are three main reasons explaining the renewal of public transport in France:
- the idea that public transport is necessary and that a system based on the car cannot fulfil
the challenge of growing mobility
- the availability of new funding dedicated to public urban transport investments and
operations
- the creation of new metropolitan authorities in charge of urban public transport organization.
So at the beginning of 70s, only Paris had a metro network consisting of 13 lines and the first section of
the first Regional Express Network’s line. No other French city had a metro; only three tramlines
remained in Lille, Marseille and St Etienne. All other public transit networks used buses or in some
cases (Limoges, Lyon, St Etienne, Grenoble, etc.), trolleybuses.
The situation in 2008 is significantly different both for metro and light rail networks. Six UTOA areas
are served by a metro: Paris, Marseille, Lyon, Lille, Toulouse and Rennes. Nineteen cities with Île de
France have developed thirty nine lines of a LRT or modern tramway: Nantes, Grenoble, Bobigny,
Strasbourg, Rouen, Lille, Montpellier, Orléans, Lyon, Caen, Clermont Ferrand, Bordeaux, T3
Maréchaux, Mulhouse, Nancy, St Etienne, Marseille, Valenciennes, Nice et Le Mans. Caen, Nancy and
Clermont – Ferrand had decided to build a rubber-tyred tramway system. The different plans of surface
guided systems are outlined in this communication.
Revitalization of Indonesia Railway Sector: rebuilding rail based public transport system “Urban Transport in
France :Tramway Revival in France” Franco-Indonesian Seminar of Jakarta on 21 October 2008,
F. Kuhn & J-H An 3
06/10/2020
2. The “renaissance” of tramway in France
From 1966 onwards, tram systems were operating in only three cities in France, Lille, Marseille and St
Etienne. However, the “car only” solution has shown its limits and the 1973 oil crisis encouraged a slow
change in mentalities. In early 1975, the Secretary of State for Transport
1
instructed eight cities in France
to develop tram network projects. But it was Nantes, not one of the eight cities, which was the first to
inaugurate a new tram line in early 1985, followed by Grenoble in 1987, with a key innovation copied
in all subsequent projects, namely the low-floor tram. With the Île de France joining the club in 1992, a
tram system boom began. By the end of 2007, 19 tram networks (with 3 trams on tyres lines) were
operational in France and the first “tram-train” system in France interconnected to an urban transit
network is slated to be commissioned in Mulhouse in 2010.
As one of the European countries that gradually abandoned many of its traditional tramways after the
Second World War, France was able to start afresh when the new wave of light rail transit (LRT) began
to be created in Europe through the introduction of segregated alignments and new rolling stock. At the
same time, many other countries were embarking on reconstructing and modernising their existing
networks.
The "fresh start" approach, coupled with some specifically French initiatives and conditions, such as a
local transport tax on business (the versement transport), and the demographic fact that France has
relatively few large cities for a country of its size, has arguably made the Gallic nation the most
successful in Europe in terms of medium-capacity, rail-based public transport.
The first reason is that the French approach has endowed light rail with a role that goes well beyond that
of simple public transport to encompass an integrated approach to transport, urban regeneration and
generally returning the streets to the people instead of the motorcar.
A report on French light rail produced by consultants Semaly and FaberMaunsell for a British public
transport authority condensed the reasons for the undoubted success of French light rail as "money,
commitment, and planning". The report added: “French cities also combine the introduction of a
tramline with the opportunity to pedestrianize their city centres, to reorganise the local road network
and hierarchy and--some might say, most importantly--to restructure the underlying bus network to
support, not compete with, the tramway.”
The second one is the local public transport tax, which can be up to 1.75% of the payroll of a public or
private company employing more than nine people, levied since the early 1980s. It provides a constant
and guaranteed flow of money that in a city like Lyon with a population of 1.4 million can reach 145
million [euro] each year.
Furthermore, French demography favours light rail, as does the concomitant reduction in construction
costs compared with heavy metros. This is reflected in the fact that France has but three heavy metros
in Paris, Lyon, and Marseille, plus three light metros in Lille, Toulouse, and Rennes. Light rail vehicles
operate in 19 networks, projects are under construction in 10 others with Paris where there are 5 lines
around the city under construction, and others are planned or being considered in at least four more.
1
Marcel Cavaillé sent a letter to the mayor of 8 cities: Bordeaux, Grenoble, Nancy, Nice, Rouen, Strasbourg,
Toulon and Toulouse asking them after justifying the choice of a modern tramway, to realize designs of tram
network. 6 months later he launched an international competition about definition of a new electric guided
passenger transit vehicle able to ride in mixed traffic or in a separate right of way.
Revitalization of Indonesia Railway Sector: rebuilding rail based public transport system “Urban Transport in
France :Tramway Revival in France” Franco-Indonesian Seminar of Jakarta on 21 October 2008,
F. Kuhn & J-H An 4
06/10/2020
3. New light rail transit systems in France
The new LRT systems are as follows according to the date of the first opening in 1985:
§ Nantes, 570,000 inhabitants in the urban transport perimeter, was the first city to adopt a new LRT
system with three lines (37.9 km with 79 stations) carrying 225,000 passengers per day and serving
the metropolitan area. A fourth line with a low demand (18,000 passengers a day) was opened in
2006 with a busway operated with 20 natural gas articulated bus on 7 km. Currently, a tram- train
project using SNCF tracks on part of the line is under project (64 km, order for 7 Citadis Dualis, 1st
stage opening in 2009 then 2013).
§ Grenoble, 400,000 inhabitants in the urban transport perimeter, is served by four lines (35.4 km
with 75 stations) carrying 200,000 passengers per day and several extensions to A, B, D lines, a new
tram-train project for the line E will open in 2013 in a first stage. The network could reach 50 km
before 2020.
§ In the Paris region, 11 million inhabitants in the urban transport perimeter, two suburban T1 & T2
LRT lines (Saint Denis, Issy/La Défense) and a urban line T3 (in Paris along the Maréchaux South
Boulevard) and a tram-train line T4 (Aulnay-Bondy) are operated by RATP (33.4 km with 59
stations carrying 300,000 passengers per day and SNCF for T4 line (8 km with 11 stations) carrying
35,000 passengers per day.
§ Strasbourg, 500,000 inhabitants in the urban transport perimeter, is served by five lines (54.09 km
with 101 stations) carrying 250,000 passengers per day: severe competition between the automatic
light rail VAL and LRT caused a politically difficult decision in Strasbourg, but the LRT was chosen
as a method to remove the car from the city centre (pedestrian zone and streets). The Urban
Communauty of Strasbourg CUS also decided to build a tram-train F line a 1st stage could open in
2009 with urban tramways then a link with SNCF track will open for a tram-train operation.
§ Rouen, 420,000 inhabitants in the urban transport perimeter, is served by 2 lines, line 1 with an
LRT (15.1 km with 31 stations) carrying 63,000 passengers and TEOR lines 1,2 and 3, the Rouen
East-West Transport (TEOR), operated with a rubber-tyred wheels vehicule called Civis. Length of
the lines is 25.6 km with 41 stations served by 38 Agora articulated buses fitted with optical
guidance carrying 30,000 passengers per day. The optical guidance system pulls the vehicles to
within 50 mm of the platform offering barrier free access to all passengers and eliminating the
need for wheelchair ramps, etc.
§ Lille, 1.2 million inhabitants in the urban transport perimeter, is served by two lines of tramways
(17.84 km with 36 stations) carrying 32,000 passengers per day: the tracks and the rolling stocks
were renewed between 1991 and 1994, this network was opened in 1904. Since 1983, Lille is served
by another system, an automatic light rail VAL: 2 lines 45 km long, carrying 80 M passengers in
2006. It is the first implementation in May 1983 of the fully-automatic unmanned guideway or VAL
system.
§ Montpellier, 400,000 inhabitants in the urban transport perimeter, is served by two lines of
tramways (35 km with 60 stations) carrying 200,000 passengers per day whose 150,000 on the first
line. A third line (20 km with 30 stations) is under construction and must open in 2010.
§ Nancy, 200,000 inhabitants in the urban transport perimeter, is served by one line of tramways on
tyres (11 km with 28 stations) carrying 45,000 passengers per day. A second line is under design
with probably trolleybuses.
§ Lyon, 1.2 million inhabitants in the urban transport perimeter, is served by three lines of tramways
(40 km with 63 stations) carrying 170,000 passengers per day. The urban community is served also
by four metro lines (two conventional, one rack-and-pinion, one fully automated, D line unmanned,
computer-controlled system. The Lyon’s metro with a total of 29.5 km with 44 stations carries 160
M passengers in 2006.
§ Caen, 250,000 inhabitants in the urban transport perimeter, is served by three lines totalling 15.7
km with 41 stations whose 16 are fully completed and served by 38 Agora buses fitted with optical
guidance: the optical guidance system pulls the vehicles to within 50 mm of the platform offering
barrier-free access to all passengers.
§ Orléans, 300,000 inhabitants in the urban transport perimeter, is served by one line of tramway
(17.9 km with 24 stations) carrying 45,000 passengers per day. A second line CLEO (11.8 km with
25 stations) is under construction and due to open in 2011.
Revitalization of Indonesia Railway Sector: rebuilding rail based public transport system “Urban Transport in
France :Tramway Revival in France” Franco-Indonesian Seminar of Jakarta on 21 October 2008,
F. Kuhn & J-H An 5
06/10/2020
§ Bordeaux, 700,000 inhabitants in the urban transport perimeter, is served by three lines of tramways
(43.7 km with 78 stations) carrying 140,000 passengers per day. A fourth line, line D is under design.
§ Saint-Etienne, 400,000 inhabitants in the urban transport perimeter, is served by two lines (11.54
km with 35 stations) carrying 60,000 passengers per day.
§ Valenciennes, 400,000 inhabitants in the urban transport perimeter, is served by two lines (18 km
with 26 stations) carrying 35,000 passengers per day. A second line (14 km with 23 stations) due to
open in 2011.
§ Marseille, 1 million inhabitants in the urban transport perimeter, is served by three lines of
tramways (1st stage 16.5 km with 42 stations) opened in 2007 carrying 100,000 passengers per day.
The city is also served by two lines of conventional metro 19 km with 25 stations carrying 70 M
passengers in 2006.
§ Mulhouse, 250,000 inhabitants in the urban transport perimeter, is served by two lines (12 km with
24 stations in 1rst stage) carrying 50,000 passengers per day. A second stage for 2010 is under
construction; the network (totalling 20 km with 38 stations) could carry around 100,000 passengers
per day.
§ Clermont-Ferrand, 300,000 inhabitants in the UPT, is served by one line of tramway on tyres
Translohr STE4 (14 km with 31 stations) carrying 40,000 passengers per day. An extension of 2 km
due to open in 2009 and a second line is under design.
§ Le Mans, 200,000 inhabitants in the urban transport perimeter, is served by one line of tramway
opened in 2007 (15.4 km with 29 stations) carrying 50,000 passengers per day.
§ Nice, 500,000 inhabitants in the UTP, is served by one line of tramway opened in 2007 (8.7 km with
21 stations) carrying 70,000 passengers per day. A 1st extension of 4.5 km is under construction for
2010, a second line of 15 km going to the Airport is under design and due to open in 2013.
Legend: Green operating tram network Green & white under-design or under construction network- Black tram on tyres under operation
Source: Connaissance du Rail de Juillet 2008
Figure 1: The map of localization of LRT network under operation, under construction or design, and
LRT on tyres networks
Revitalization of Indonesia Railway Sector: rebuilding rail based public transport system “Urban Transport in
France :Tramway Revival in France” Franco-Indonesian Seminar of Jakarta on 21 October 2008,
F. Kuhn & J-H An 6
06/10/2020
Seven more cities and Paris region (Châtillon – Viroflay in IdF, Villejuif – Athis-Mons in IdF, St Denis
– Villetaneuse in IdF, St Denis Sarcelles in IdF), have already decided to build LRT lines: Angers, Brest,
Le Havre, Reims, Toulon, Toulouse and Douai, the later using a tramway on tyres system called Eveole
(Phileas in Eindhoven). The Eveole vehicle has an electronic lane assistance and precision docking
system, which can be used on routes specifically prepared for this purpose. In these routes, a trail of
magnetic reference markers will be laid in the road surface.
3.1. Network’s line with a demand around 100,000 passengers per day
Among the 19 tramways networks under operation in France we can classify 10 lines that carry every
day around 100,000 passengers or more per day:
- in Grenoble: line A, Lyon: line T1, Montpellier: L1, Nantes: L1, L2, Paris Ile de France:
T1, T2, T3, and Strasbourg: Lines A & D, B & C.
Network / Line
Traffic
pas/day
Offer
at PH
Tram
capacity
Tram number for km
with 2 tracks
Line Cost
M/km
Grenoble LA
90,000
2610
174/275
2.77
25.72
Lyon T1
80,000
2400
201
1.90
24.78
Montpellier L1
140,000
3600
300
2.17
28.91
Nantes L1
90,000
3540
236
2.04
17.41
Nantes L2
112,000
3885
259
1.93
29.32
Paris T1
100,000
2610
174
2.94
32.55
Paris T2
80,000
6870*
2x229
2.30
16.46
Paris T3
100,000
4560
304
2.66
39.16
Strasbourg A&D
116,000
5760
288
1.74
37.8
Strasbourg B&C
104,000
5400
270
1.74
26.00
Source: Connaissance du Rail Juillet 2005 n°286-287 et Octobre-Novembre 2007 n° 316-317- L’année 2006 des transports urbains Gart-
2002, Gart. Website of Transport Authorities of each city- STIF- RATP.
Table 1: 10 lines of LRT carrying 100,000 passengers per day
Nota: * This line must carry in 2009, 30,000 passengers per day more
Source: Connaissance du Rail n°286-287
Figure 2: The main tramway ‘s lines under operation in Paris with the scheme of extensions: T3
must be extended on 14.2 km long to Porte de La Chapelle near Porte de Paris for 2012.
Revitalization of Indonesia Railway Sector: rebuilding rail based public transport system “Urban Transport in
France :Tramway Revival in France” Franco-Indonesian Seminar of Jakarta on 21 October 2008,
F. Kuhn & J-H An 7
06/10/2020
Paris T3: The project the most expensive in this table, is the Tramway T3 (called Marshals’ Tramway)
in south of Paris were the problems of urban insertion cost around 5 to 10 M /km, because an ambitious
program of landscape around 45 meters wide was realized by the City hall of Paris on the Marshal’s
boulevard for the insertion of tramway T3: pavements of quality, specific urban furniture for stations
and along the line, trees, catenary’s poles and public lights. The track of tramway is covered by grass
on two third of its linear. Moreover a specific workshop was build near one terminus of the line T3; the
investment is integrated in the T3 line’s cost. The number of vehicle per kilometre of double track is
high 2.66 so the energy powers of under-stations must be well dimensioned and so more expensive.
Strasbourg A&D: The important cost of Strasbourg’s lines is explained by a tunnel 1200 m long under
the railway station and an highway for line A and some public works for C, D lines stopped during one
year waiting for a new Public Purposes Declaration (DUP).
Strasbourg B&C: For second line, the cost is decreasing since the tracks are on surface and the
workshop is already built.
Paris T1: this is the first new line of tramway built in high dense quarters of north suburb of Paris with
a common workshop with the metro, civil engineering constructions, with 3 tramways per km of double
track, an architectural urban insertion (Chemetov Architect), these facts explain why the cost is just
above the range of 20-30 M/km.
Source: Connaissance du Rail n°286-287
Figure 3: The Line L1 is going partially along the SNCF railway right of way outside the center of
the city; the Line L2 is going through the center from south to north.
Nantes L1: this is the first line opened in 1985, it was constructed near the city center partially on a
former railway platform so with a minimum of public works, with a workshop but the cost is only 17.41
M/km val. 2007 with 2 vehicles per km of double track in the first range 20 to 30 M/km.
Nantes L2: this second line goes through the center of Nantes, on a former busway in the south part but
big public works were made in the center all around the tracks platform on the public right of way for
convivial pedestrians prospects.
Revitalization of Indonesia Railway Sector: rebuilding rail based public transport system “Urban Transport in
France :Tramway Revival in France” Franco-Indonesian Seminar of Jakarta on 21 October 2008,
F. Kuhn & J-H An 8
06/10/2020
Source: Connaissance du Rail n°286-287
Figure 4: The main line T1 under operation in Montpellier carrying 140,000 passengers with
Citadis 401 of a 300 spaces unit capacity with 4 standees per m2.
Montpellier L1: the first line bears the overcost of changing 28 Citadis 302 in 28 Citadis 401 by adding
two cars to each tram, the cost of the workshop, 4 park and ride, important public works in the CBD and
a number of vehicle per kilometer of double track superior to 2.
Paris T2: this line is built on a former railway line like Nantes L1 without civil engineering construction
so the cost is under the range 20 to 30 M/km.
Grenoble L A&B: this line is the first line built with full accessibility from the platform in the station
to the low-floor vehicles, for its extension some bridges were constructed above national railways and
an highway: the cost is in the mean range 20 to 30 M/km.
Lyon T1&T2: these lines are the first ones of the tram network built in the city center with a tram
workshop: the cost is in the middle range 20 to 30 M/km.
We calculate the number of tramway per km of double track to see the link between infrastructure cost
and the capacity of the line (Strasbourg has 38 km of double tracks and 54.09 km of lines). This table1
allows us to distinguish the cost ranges into 15-20 M/km, 20-30 M/km and above 30 M/km.
Figure 5: Cost per kilometer and spaces kilometer offered per day of the main 10 tramway’s lines under
operation in France
Revitalization of Indonesia Railway Sector: rebuilding rail based public transport system “Urban Transport in
France :Tramway Revival in France” Franco-Indonesian Seminar of Jakarta on 21 October 2008,
F. Kuhn & J-H An 9
06/10/2020
Figure 6: Cost per kilometer and static unit capacity of tramway per kilometer of the main 10 tramways
lines under operation in France
Network’s lines with a demand around 50,000 passengers per day
Among the 19 tramways networks under operation in France we can classify 10 other lines which carry
every day around 50,000 passengers, the threshold to study a tramway’s project to replace the buslines
by tramways, is from 30,000 passengers per day, generally in France:
- in Bordeaux: line A, line B; in Caen: line T1; in Clermont-Ferrand: L1; in Le Mans: L1; in
Marseille: T1,T2; in Montpellier L2; in Nancy: L1; in Nice: L1; and in Rouen: L1.
Traffic
pas/day
Offer
at PH
Tram
capacity
Tram number for km
with 2 tracks
Cost line
M/km
56,800
4500
300
1.75
31.72
40,000
2300
135
1.52
18.30
40,000
3400
170
1.57
21.95
50,000
3300
220
1.49
23.81
44,600
3060
204
2.36
31.76
52,000
1696
212
1.21
25.78
45,000
1620
135
2.27
17.08
45,000
2640
176
1.23
21.19
70,000
3240
216
2.29
39.41
63,000
3000
175
1.85
54.19
Source: Connaissance du Rail Juillet 2005 n°286-287 et Octobre-Novembre 2007 n° 316-317- L’année 2006 des transports urbains
Gart- 2002, Gart. Website of Transport Authorities of each city- STIF- RATP.
Table 2: 10 lines of LRT carrying around 50,000 passengers per day
Revitalization of Indonesia Railway Sector: rebuilding rail based public transport system “Urban Transport in
France :Tramway Revival in France” Franco-Indonesian Seminar of Jakarta on 21 October 2008,
F. Kuhn & J-H An 10
06/10/2020
Figure 7: Cost per kilometer and spaces kilometer offered per day of 10 tramway’s lines carrying around
50,000 passengers par day under operation in France
Figure 8: Cost per kilometer and static unit capacity of tramway per kilometer of 10 tramway’s lines
carrying around 50,000 passengers per day under operation in France
Bordeaux A: the cost of Bordeaux’s A line is explained by the fact that it includes the workshop, the
rolling stocks equipped for the ground electric alimentation (1.5 ME per double km), this cost is just
above the range of 20 to 30 M E / km
Caen L1: it is a first line of tramway on tyres under operation in France, TVR, which offers 2300 spaces
per hour per direction, its cost 18 M /km is under the range of 20 to 30 and it is around the cost of
Paris T2 and Nantes L1 which were built on a former railway right of way. This system is limited by
the vehicles 24 m long and the number of 20 vehicles per hour and direction that is to say 2700
spaces/hour/direction or 55,000 passengers per day.
Clermont-Ferrand L1: it is the third line of tramway on tyres operated in France, a difference with the
first lines of Caen and Nancy (vehicule of 24.5 m long max.) is that this system is a module, narrow
gauge (2.20 m wide) with several length, 25 m for STE3, 32 m for STE4 39 m for STE5). The cost is in
the low of the range 20 to 30 M /km.
Le Mans: it is the first line (generally with an overcost around 5 ME/km) built without the subsidy of
State, suppressed in 2003 (30 ME), so the master of works tried to obtain the best low prices during the
Revitalization of Indonesia Railway Sector: rebuilding rail based public transport system “Urban Transport in
France :Tramway Revival in France” Franco-Indonesian Seminar of Jakarta on 21 October 2008,
F. Kuhn & J-H An 11
06/10/2020
public works bid and the choice of urban insertion and surface’s treatment was made in a sober style
manner. The result is a cost in the low range 20 to 30 M /km / km.
Marseille T1: it is the first new line built, so the cost include an overcost of around 5 ME compared to
a second line or extensions of a first line, and the fleet is sized up to carry up to 100,000 passengers per
day, there are 2.36 vehicles/km versus 1.49 in Le Mans.
Montpellier L2: this line goes along a former railway track (around 25% of the line’s length) where
tram’s second line has only a single track what is a constraint for the headway which is 7 min 30 sec.
That is to say a low offer of 1700 spaces/h/dir. So the cost of 25.78 M /km which is high in front of
the offer can be explained by the big number of civil engineering constructions on this line.
Nancy L1: it is the second line of tramway on tyres under operation in France, TVR, which offers 1620
spaces per hour per direction, its cost 17.08 M /km is under the range of 20 to 30 M /km and it is
around the cost of Caen first line, Paris T2 and Nantes L1 which were built on former railway right of
way. This system is limited by the vehicles 24 m long and the number of 25 vehicles per hour and
direction that is to say 1620 spaces/hour/direction but the headway of 5 minutes could be reduced to 3
minutes or an offer of 2700 spaces / hour / direction.
Orléans L1: its cost is in the low of the range 20 to 30 M /km, the offer with 1.23 tram per km is low
but with the second line under construction, the offer will increase with 1.44 tram per km.
Nice L1: like Bordeaux this network choose a specific vehicle with batteries to go through two sections
435 m and 485 m without catenaries, it is the first line built in the city with an overcost around 5 ME
and like the line T3 there is an overcost of 5 to 10 ME for a rigth of way’s treatment of several tenth
meters wide with modern art public furniture. The number of vehicle per kilometre of double track is
high 2.29 vs 2.66 for T3 line.
Rouen L1: The overcost of this line came from the civil engineering costs of one tunnel (1700 m long)
and 5 underground stations under the CBD, opened 3 years late after of the 1 stage opening.
3.2. Remarks
Among the lines that carry around 100,000 passengers and more per day we find three categories of
lines:
- the lines with a cost range between 15 to 20 M per km which are built on former railway
lines outside the centre to much urbanized (Nantes L1, Paris T2),
- the lines which are the first of a network (overcost around 5 M / km) generally serving the
center of the city with a cost range between 20 to 30 M per km,
- the lines with a specificity like 3 vehicles per km of double track, public works like bridges,
tunnels, underground stations, modern art works, street remodelling on wide surface with
all kind of pavements on the public right of way beyond the tramway’s tracks, have a cost
above 30 M per km.
Among the lines which carry more or less 50,000 passengers but among them some are increasing their
frequentation up to 100,000 in some years with the network’s effect, we find three categories of lines:
- The lines with a cost range between 15 to 20 M per kilometer which are operated by
tramways on tyres like in Nancy, Caen and Rouen (TEOR),
- the lines which are the first of a network (overcost around 5 M / km) generally serving the
center of the city with a cost range between 20 to 30 M per km: with a tram on tyres
(Clermont – ferrand) in the low of this range
- the lines with a specificity like in Bordeaux using a ground level power supply system,
rather than the traditional overhead contact system (OCS), Nice has a vehicle with batteries
for going through two wide beautiful places, and Rouen with an underground of 2000 m
long and 5 stations.
Revitalization of Indonesia Railway Sector: rebuilding rail based public transport system “Urban Transport in
France :Tramway Revival in France” Franco-Indonesian Seminar of Jakarta on 21 October 2008,
F. Kuhn & J-H An 12
06/10/2020
4. New urban transit systems
All new systems aim to improve the efficiency of the service offered to passengers and to reduce total
costs (infrastructure and rolling stock investment cost, and operation costs). The main technical
innovations have been applied to the new LRT systems.
4.1. Modern tramway networks
The system conceived and realized for the first time in France, in Nantes, was a new mode of transport
even if its inspiration’s sources were multiple and it took in the example of foreign networks. Innovation
consisted not only in creating a surface metro adopting a separated right of way excluding car traffic,
but also in integrating harmoniously the transit system equipped of light rail rolling stocks and of more
recent techniques of control (priority to traffic lights, information to passengers in real time…) to the
city.
The care taken from this first realization to the public space, totally rethought of the better efficiency
benefits for all urban functions and a urban landscape and this became the characteristics the most
notable of the tramway “at the French manner”. The tramway technology (electric traction, elastic
wheels, standard rail and groove rail) that had progressed of a notable manner, essentially in the
Germanic world, authorized to insert this system in the more contrasted urban environments, from
highway’s platforms to the history burdened city’s centers.
In Île de France, the Paris Metropolitan Area, the tramway’s development finds its origin in a relative
failure of an ambitious program of busways conceived in 70’s. Busway’s developments struggled to
make consensus. Highly consumer of space, they do not seemed to be able to bring sufficient counterpart,
neither in term of service improving, neither in term of requalification of urban centers. With the notable
exception of TVM
2
busway, conceived at once as a system, the busways stayed under discontinuous
developments sometimes punctual and without effects truly sensitive on the attractiveness of public
transport.
In 1980, the Institute of Development and Urbanism of Île de France region, IAURIF, suggested the
project of a modern tramway on an axis of bypass Saint Denis Bobigny. It was the beginning of a
project with an eventful genesis. The consensus between the actors of the project did not establish easily
including at local level. It is here that the tramway showed its originality. It brought to the project
altogether the capacity to seduce and the capacity to compel. The novelty of the system and above all
its “urbanity” seduced: it is more comfortable, more silent, more “ecological” and more sparing of space
than the bus. It suggests stations instead of stops.
The track with groove rails harmonizes with quality surfaces (paving stones, grass…). The constraint,
it is those of “all or nothing”. Every one knows that contrary to a busway, the project can be realized
only in its whole. All is then in place for a political debate of high intensity. It was what knew Saint-
Denis Bobigny project, like the most of all French tramway’s projects. The impacts of St Denis
Bobigny Tramway, put into service on July 1992 between Bobigny and La Courneuve surprised. The
forecast level of traffic, a long time contested by some experts, was reached in some months then widely
exceeding.
The imbalance peak hour – off peak hour, as usual high on the bus of the suburbs, became blurred with
the tramway. Today traffic stays dense all day long. Frequent and easily opened tramway became a kind
of “moving walkway” in the city.
The capacity to merge into the city while offering a quick and frequent service is at the origin of the
choice of elected members of Hauts de Seine on account of tramway for the improvement of the rail line
Issy-Plaine – Puteaux that became line T2 in 1997. Success went well beyond previsions because the
forecast traffic of 24,000 passengers / day reaches today 80,000 passengers / day. These successes
contributed to do of the Plan 2000 – 2006 contract in Île de France, the “tramway’s contract Plan”. Sixty-
six kilometres of tramway project were the subject of a joint agreement of the State, the Region and the
2
TVM : Trans Val de Marne
Revitalization of Indonesia Railway Sector: rebuilding rail based public transport system “Urban Transport in
France :Tramway Revival in France” Franco-Indonesian Seminar of Jakarta on 21 October 2008,
F. Kuhn & J-H An 13
06/10/2020
concerned Departments. Three operations, T3 line Marshals tramway, T1 continuation in Noisy-le-sec
and the line T4 (tram-train of Aulnay-Bondy) are today under operation and meet the expected success.
In some years, it is a real network that takes place. This development can equip large suburb territories
with a high level-of-service transport system: T3 at the Paris and suburb’s boundary and T1 and T2 in
the near crown.
4.2. Different rolling stocks
The early rolling stock, constructed by Gec-Alsthom (the former Alstom constructor) for the 1st Nantes
line, consists of 2.3 m wide articulated carriages consisting of two light chassis on three bogies. It can
carry 168 passengers with 60 seated. The later 29.40 m long articulated carriages have low floors (340
mm over the top of the rail) and a higher capacity (174 with 58 seated). The first example was followed
by Grenoble - its first line entered into service in 1988, and the second line in 1990. Then it was adopted
on the lines of T1 St Denis Paris, Rouen and Paris T2 Issy – La Défense. Soon Lille’s network adopted
the low floor Breda Tramway. Then Strasbourg adopted the Eurotram with very large windows and a
panoramic driver’s cab at the both ends. It is an articulated vehicle, 33.3 m long, 2.40 m wide on four
bogies of which three are powered, offering 240 spaces with 66 seats: the floor is a single-level flat floor,
340 mm over the top of the rail. This rolling stock is very popular.
However, building tramway lines has become more and more expensive, both due to the very small
numbers of rolling stock and to the high cost of incorporating the system in the urban infrastructure
(special pavements, landscaping, street remodelling, etc.). To get an overview of the cost of the 39 lines
under operation in France nowadays, have a look at the table in the annex of this report.
Revitalization of Indonesia Railway Sector: rebuilding rail based public transport system “Urban Transport in
France :Tramway Revival in France” Franco-Indonesian Seminar of Jakarta on 21 October 2008,
F. Kuhn & J-H An 14
06/10/2020
5. New Research & Development Programs
In an attempt to lower the cost of an LRT line, a number of R&D programs have been developed.
5.1. Citadis
Alstom has developed a new LRT system called CITADIS based on two main innovations: lighter
bogies requiring shallower track beds, and a modular concept for carriages allowing more choices
(number of cars and doors, types of windows).
Source: Connaissance du Rail n°286-287 (cliché: Yves Allain)
Figure 9: Citadis 302 in front of the Railway station of Valenciennes
After 10 years of production, the Alstom’s Citadis has overpassed the threshold of 1000 tramways sold
worldwide. In October 2007, 25 cities were operating tramways Citadis and 50 cities had a project under
design for the next 3 years.
Manufacturer
Alstom
Bombardier
Model
TFS
classic/modern
Citadis 301
Citadis 302
Citadis 403
Eurotram
Incentro
Flexity
Outlook
Length
29.400 m
29.866 m
32.41-32.85 m
45.056 m
33.1-43.0 m
36.422 m
32.500 m
Width
2.300 m
2.320 m
2.400 m
2.400 m
2.400 m
2.400 m
2.400 m
Floor height
(mm)
Extreme: 875
center: 345
Center: 350 mm
bogie motor:
600 mm
350 mm
350 mm
350 mm
350 mm
320 mm
Nomber of
bogie motor
2
2
2
3
3/4
2
2
Number of
bogie porter
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
Doors
4 +2 driv.cab.
8 doors
8 doors
16
12/16
12
12
Capacity
Seats: 54+4
Total spaces :
174(4p/m2)
252(6p/m2)
Seats:40
Total spaces :
176(4p/m2)
261(6p/m2)
Seats:48/64
Total spaces:
170/200(4p/m2)
255/272(6p/m2)
Seats:64
Tot.spaces:
288(4p/m2)
400(6p/m2)
Seats:66/92
Tot.spaces:
230/256(4p/m2)
275/370(6p/m2)
Seats:72
Tot.spaces:
239(4p/m2)
394(6p/m2)
Seats:44
Tot.spaces:
160(4p/m2)
Traction
motor
separate D.C.
current
1 x 275 kW
asynchronous
three-phase
current, auto-
ventilated
2 x 170 kW
asynchronous
three-phase
current, water
cooling
2 x 175 kW
asynchronous
three-phase
current, water
cooling
2 x 175 kW
asynchronous
three-phase
current
4 x 26.5 kW
asynchronous
three-phase
current, water
cooling
4 x 45 kW
Cooled air
4 x 115 kW
Table 3: Characteristics of tramways generally operated in France (source: from the manufacturers)
5.2. Flexity
Bombardier has developed a new LRT system called Flexity with 4 versions: Outlook, Classic, Swift
and Link.
Revitalization of Indonesia Railway Sector: rebuilding rail based public transport system “Urban Transport in
France :Tramway Revival in France” Franco-Indonesian Seminar of Jakarta on 21 October 2008,
F. Kuhn & J-H An 15
06/10/2020
The Flexity-Outlook is the new generation of the integral low floor Eurotram of Strasbourg, Milano and
Porto. The Flexity-Outlook has been ordered by Bruxelles, Genève, Graz, Linz and Marseille.
Source: Connaissance du Rail n°286-287 (cliché P.L.)
Figure 10: Flexity Outlook in Marseille
The Flexity-Classic has conventional bogies, a steel structure and a partial low-floor, this version was
ordered by Dresden, Francfurt, Leipzig, Cracovie, etc.
The Flexity-Swift is designed for express services on former railways: it was adopted in Koln, Croydon,
Istanbul, Rotterdam and Stockholm.
The Flexity – Link is adopted as a tram-train operation; it is under operation in Sarrebrück.
5.3. TVR, Translohr, Civis and Phileas
Another program consists of the so-called Intermediate Transit System, an intermediate system between
a bus and a guided LRT. All three types developed several years ago consist of articulated cars on tyred
axles with electric motors on wheels, but guided in different ways. They were tested on a 1400 meters
long track in South of Paris, which is a part of a busway with curves and gradients under operation called
Trans Val de Marne.
Since 2002, Nancy and Caen adopted the TVR of Bombardier ANF, Spie Enertrans: its guidance system
clings mechanically to a central rail.
Source: Connaissance du Rail n°286-287 (cliché Yves Allain)
Figure 11: TVR of Nancy in St Jean the main street
Since 2006, Clermont – Ferrand put into service the Translohr STE4 developed by Lohr-Industrie: the
cars, guided mechanically along a central rail, are available in a narrow width of 2.20 m and different
Revitalization of Indonesia Railway Sector: rebuilding rail based public transport system “Urban Transport in
France :Tramway Revival in France” Franco-Indonesian Seminar of Jakarta on 21 October 2008,
F. Kuhn & J-H An 16
06/10/2020
lengths, 24.5 m, 31.5 m and 39 m. due to a modular concept with 3 or 5 axles. The floor is completely
flat (340 mm over the rail) with a capacity ranging from 138 to 202.
Source: Connaissance du Rail n°286-287 (cliché P.L.)
Figure 12: Translohr STE4 on Jaude’s Place in Clermont Ferrand
The third system, named CIVIS, has been developed by Iribus (the former Renault VI) Siemens (the
former Matra Transport International). The guidance system is based on an image processing system
following two painted lines on the road. Very wide tyres from Michelin spread the load on the road.
Caen adopted the CIVIS for a second line TEOR, the optical system was adapted on Agora buses.
A fourth system called Phileas in Eindhoven and Evéole in Douai has been developed by APTS (former
DAF trucks). The Phileas vehicle has an electronic lane assistance and precision docking system, which
can be used on routes specifically prepared for this purpose: electronic guidance system is based on
permanent magnets installed in the lane. Moreover there exists a system using the ultrasounds at the
stops to ensure the determination of distance, which allows the vehicles to make the exact positioning
in diagonal direction
5.4. Tram-Train
A tram-train is under operation in Sarreguemines France and Saarbrücken Germany since late 1997. It
uses normal railway tracks and specific tramway rails. In Île de France near Paris between Aulnay and
Bondy, the T4 tram-train line 8 km long is opened since November 2006. Other different projects are
under construction in Mulhouse (2010) and Strasbourg (2009), under consideration in Nantes and
Grenoble.
Source: Connaissance du Rail n°286-287 (cliché P.L.)
Figure 13: Tram-Train Avento of Siemens adopted on T4 line
Source: H.Dahl, 2004
Revitalization of Indonesia Railway Sector: rebuilding rail based public transport system “Urban Transport in
France :Tramway Revival in France” Franco-Indonesian Seminar of Jakarta on 21 October 2008,
F. Kuhn & J-H An 17
06/10/2020
Vehicle
Feature
TVR
Bombardier
TRANSLOHR
Lohr Industrie
CIVIS
Irisbus
PHILEAS
APTS bv
CITADIS
Alstom
Guidance technique
Monorail
(Mechanical)
Monorail
(Mechanical)
Optical
(Immaterial)
Magnetic
(Immaterial)
Rail track
Bimodal abilities
Yes,
depending
on the version
No
Yes
Yes
No
Bidirectional abilities
Yes, in guided
version
Yes, in guided
version
No
No
Yes
Types
1 version
STE3, STE4,
STE5
2 versions
3 versions
Several
Length(s) (m)
24,5
24.5, 31.5 and 39
18 and 19.5
18, 24.5 and 26
29 to 45, 2 x 29
Weight (empty) (t)
26
17.7, 28.5, n.i.
18.4, 19.5
15.23, 19.65
40
Weight per meter (t/m)
1,06
0.772, 0.904
1.02, 1.0
0,93 and 0,90
1.38
Unit Capacity (4 p/m2)
131
138, 170 and 202
103 and 115
103, 129 and 141
212
Static/ dynamic gauge (m)
2.50 / 2.8465
2.20 / 2.505
2.47 / 2.65
2.54 / 2.785
2.32 / 2.62
Single / double DKE3
2.8465 / 6.14
2.805 / 5.46
2.95 / 6.46
3.085 / 6.498
2.92 / 5.69
Floor’s Level (mm) / if
kneeling
350
280 / 200
340 / 250
340 / 270
350
Propulsion
Electric /diesel-
electric system
Electric, charge
batteries for
autonomy
Electric, also
through
Diesel or Gas
Electric, through
Diesel or Gas
Electric
Catenary
Yes
Yes
Yes,
depending on
version
No
Yes
Manoeuvrability
Following rail
or steering
front wheels
Following rail or
steering front
wheels
Front wheel
steering
Wheel steering
on each axle
(computerized)
Table 4: Features overview of five guided public transport systems
3
DKE: developed kinematic envelope
Revitalization of Indonesia Railway Sector: rebuilding rail based public transport system “Urban Transport in
France :Tramway Revival in France” Franco-Indonesian Seminar of Jakarta on 21 October 2008,
F. Kuhn & J-H An 18
06/10/2020
6. Current Trends of Light Rail
The tramway revival in France and other countries is not up to date or a fashion; three reasons explain
this continuous expansion:
A. For carrying potential flows of 2000 to 5000 passengers per hour per direction, the
tramway is the public transit mode the most adapted.
Trying to carry the same flows by buses is not impossible but this costs more. Operating cost of the
space per kilometer offered PKO is on an average twice more expensive for bus than for tramway. The
question of vehicles capacity is an essential question but little mentioned. An articulated bus line on a
separate right of way of tramway type costs a little less in investment, but to carry 3000 passengers in
one hour on a given section we need:
- 27 articulated buses (110 spaces with 4 passengers / m2)
- 10 trains of tramway type Montpellier Citadis 401 (300 spaces with 4 pas. / m2).
B. Tramway is an exceptional tool of renewal
On the contrary of the busways and metros, the projects of tramways oblige to handle the public space
from one front to another front including crossed places. For example, at the beginning of the first three
projects of Nantes, Grenoble and T1 of St Denis, this aspect was considered as a constraint but rapidly
adapted by elected representatives as a strong point and a lucky.
To understand that the tramway is an exceptional tool of urban renewal we have to ask ourselves to
whom benefits the expenses realized:
- for the system, the benefit is limited to the customers,
- for the urban landscape, the benefit is stretch to all those who frequent the site.
C. Tramway is a tool well known to fight again the car expansion
The main political strong point of tramway is the main reason of his eviction: the tramway was removed
because it embarrassed the car and we put it again because it embarrasses the car.
The tramway is today the best tool to solve this contradiction:
- removing the cars of a street, if the street does not fill with pedestrians, nobody will
understand why and the cars will return quickly.
- replacing them by rails (with bonus grass) and this decision is understood.
The main advantages of LRT are its commercial speed, its capacity, its attractiveness to car users and a
number of qualitative factors, which are called “image”. LRT is not only seen as a means of transport,
but also a tool of urban design and improvement of public space. LRT also has the important advantage
of running on electricity. LRT is non-polluting mode at the point of use. There is now considerable
evidence that LRT attracts car users.
Surveys of passengers on new LRT systems in France, Canada and UK have shown that although the
majority of passengers were drawn from other public transport, around 15 to 20 per cent formerly made
their journeys by car, with about the same number making new journeys. In the right location, LRT can
be very successful and can justify its costs.
Revitalization of Indonesia Railway Sector: rebuilding rail based public transport system “Urban Transport in
France :Tramway Revival in France” Franco-Indonesian Seminar of Jakarta on 21 October 2008,
F. Kuhn & J-H An 19
06/10/2020
7. The life cycle cost of tramway and urban bus
Across an example, the figures of Montpellier for the year 2003 presented by the general manager of
the operator of Montpellier’s network TaM, we try to show how the LCC and in final, the ratio
receives/expenses is positive for the tramway and only 39% for buses.
PHYSICAL DATA
TRAMWAY (1 line 15 km)
URBAN BUS (15 lines)
Rolling stocks
30 trains
149 buses
Vehicle km 2003
1 613 000 km
5 882 000 km
Spaces km offered 2003
450 100 000 spko
470 700 000 km
Carried passengers 2003
24 600 000 pass.
19 200 000 pass.
INVESTMENT
(In Million Euros)
Compared investment cost
(out of city beautifying)
317 ME
103 ME
Annual deadening
On 23 years 14.0 ME
On 16 years 6.3 ME
Yearly financial expenses
At 5 % 8.0 ME
2.4 ME
ANNUAL COST 2003
Investment cost
22.1 ME
8.7 ME
O&M costs
14.2 ME
28.4 ME
Total (investment + O&M)
36.3 ME
37.1 ME
2003 RATIOS
Cost / SpKO (Inv + O&M)
8.0 Cents E
7.9 Cents E
Cost / passenger
1.47 E
1.93 E
O&M cost / passenger
0.58 E
0.58 E
R / E (without invest. cost)
101 %
39 %
R / E (invest+ O&M)
39 %
31 %
Source: M. Le Tourneur, “Le développement du Tramway en France” Journée ATEC du 3 Juin 2004, Ppt.
Table 5: Comparison between investment and operating costs of tramway
1st line and 15 bus lines with data of 2003 in Montpellier
Revitalization of Indonesia Railway Sector: rebuilding rail based public transport system “Urban Transport in
France :Tramway Revival in France” Franco-Indonesian Seminar of Jakarta on 21 October 2008,
F. Kuhn & J-H An 20
06/10/2020
8. The success of Light Rail transit
After the recommendations of Prof. Vukan Vuchic in “Livable Cities”, and the guidelines of UITP about
the “Light rail for liveable cities”, we list the main parameters, which characterize the light rail transit.
8.1. Capacity
Investment costs are high (we saw in above chapters, costs are between 15 to 40 M per km according
to the localization and the level of spaces offered), and thus the challenge is to develop the right mode
in response to the right transit need.
Light rail is the ideal mode for carrying between 3,000 and 11,000 passengers per hour and per direction.
8.2. Speed and regularity
LRT, thanks to their high performance, light rail vehicles accelerate quickly and can attain good service
speeds. With a segregated right of way and priority at traffic lights’ crossings, which make light rail
congestion free, LRT has a good average commercial speed (which depends also of the length of inter-
stations and the real priority at traffic lights).
Measures to reduce dwell times at stops (e.g. stepless and gapless boarding, wide doors, tickets sold off
the vehicle) increase speed and regularity and also improve the accessibility of the system.
8.3. Reliability
Congestion-free transit is regular and hence reliable. Thanks to this reliability, high frequency time
tables at peak hours can be designed, obtaining better passenger flows. Light rail can also operate when
adverse meteorological road conditions such as snow or ice affect road traffic.
8.4. Environment-friendly
LRT produces no emission at street level with electric traction. Modern traction equipment allows
regeneration of breaking energy and consequently considerable energy saving if the operation of
vehicles is organized on the line (vehicles braking and vehicles accelerating in the same time and the
same electric section).
LRT is a relatively silent transit mode and rolling noise and vibration can be attenuated further by good
maintenance of vehicles and tracks. Floating slabs under the rails can attenuate vibrations, “green” track
reduces noise even more (grass-covered).
8.5. A positive image for the city
LRT can be fine on the aesthetic point of view and gives a strong positive image to the city. Extensive
experience shows that customers’ response is more enthusiastic than with improved bus system.
Using LRT contributes positively to the social dimension of a city, improves the quality of life and
makes it more liveable.
8.6. Impact on urban life
Light rail schemes are not only transit projects, but also city projects. In contrast to bus routes, light rail
tracks are permanent and highly visible. Light rail is thus a strong long-term political commitment of
the authorities in favour of public transit.
LRT contributes to the regeneration and modernisation of urban centre and to the development of new
areas. It attracts real estate development and the creation of new housing, new offices and shopping
centres along its path. It increases the value of existing real estate as well.
Light rail systems encourage the compact and dense development of towns and cities and avoid
unnecessary urban sprawl, increasing their efficiency.
Revitalization of Indonesia Railway Sector: rebuilding rail based public transport system “Urban Transport in
France :Tramway Revival in France” Franco-Indonesian Seminar of Jakarta on 21 October 2008,
F. Kuhn & J-H An 21
06/10/2020
8.7. Impact on the overall transit situation
Success of LRT depends on a well-thought redesign of the existing public transit lines, as feeders to
light rail lines, to make the structure more visible, integrated, understandable and consequently user-
friendly. It will lead to an increased use of public transit, and consequently has a positive impact on the
modal split.
8.8. Development by stages
The development of a LRT could be planned and executed in several stages, providing benefits to its
clients and operator from the early beginning of the project. Initial street running operation or “basic”
rolling stocks could reduce high initial capital costs and attract private partnership with a reduced risk
of overspending or prolonged start of operation. Hence, below the critical capacity threshold, buses or
other intermediate transit modes could be more appropriate, securing capabilities for introduction of
light rail at some later stage.
Other parameters of course, should be added to the list above as comfort, accessibility and ease of use,
safety and adaptability.
Revitalization of Indonesia Railway Sector: rebuilding rail based public transport system “Urban Transport in
France :Tramway Revival in France” Franco-Indonesian Seminar of Jakarta on 21 October 2008,
F. Kuhn & J-H An 22
06/10/2020
9. Future developments
9.1. Technology
Over the last 20 years, low floor technology, AC chopper control and modular vehicle design concept
have been widely introduced. Trends for the near future will include the introduction of composite
materials, and measures leading to lower energy consumption and simpler maintenance.
Current collection at ground level or batteries may improve light rail’s visual aspect in historic city
centres (e.g. Bordeaux, Nice, Angers, etc.). Complementary to “classic” or French Standard light rail,
new and innovative “intermediate” forms of guided transit are becoming available. Several types of
“tramways on tyres” are under operation in France (in Nancy, Caen, Rouen, Clermont–Ferrand) and
under construction in Douai.
Dual-mode or hybrid drive systems, combined with onboard energy storage devices like batteries or
flywheels, will allow circulation beyond the bounds of track and overhead catenaries.
9.2. An affordable Light rail
High investment costs dissuade to begin the planning and construction of a new LRT line.
Harmonisation of LRV design, wide constructors bid should result in lower unit prices and a LCC
approach should lead to lower operation & maintenance costs.
New financing techniques such as Public Private partnership could help to fund new projects.
LRT can be very appropriate as a complementary mode in wide metropolitan area: for transit within
suburbs and for links between different suburbs by avoiding the urban centre where the separate surface
right of way is very difficult to obtain.
Tram-trains running on former railways tracks in rural areas and in the suburbs, continuing in the city
on urban tramway tracks allow a journey without break in riding between town and suburbs.
10. Conclusion
We saw in this paper that French transit industry has successfully developed since the 1980’s, the light
rail system even an automatic light rail, the VAL, which is adopted in three cities like Lille, Toulouse
and Rennes. Among the 39 LRT lines on 19 networks under operation we find several kind of light rail
levels.
Systems in Nantes (1985), Grenoble (1987), and Lyon (2000) were built mainly in-street, with urban
renewal and improved beautifying aesthetics of the street as main objectives. Similar to Germany and
Switzerland, urban transit in French cities is managed by a single authority UTOA, that has
significantcontrol over operations and fare policy. By this measure, France’s light rail systems have
been more successful delivering frequent, high-quality service that is well integrated with feeder
services and the built environment.
All French systems are primarily for local travel within a city or built-up area providing many stops with
convenient walk-on access.
LRT is typified by its variety of Right of Ways (RoW), which include:
- 1. a single line (Montpellier L2),
- 2. in-street with traffic (Saint Etienne L4),
- 3. on-street segregated (T1,T2,T3) most of the linear of French LRT,
- 4. various kinds of at-grade but segregated track alongside a road (Lille’s tram along the
Grand Boulevards of Roubaix Tourcoing) or in median (T3 on the Marshal’s Boulevard
South)
- 5. Completely separate private RoW, which may or may not be grade separated
- 6. Tunnels or subways (Strasbourg Line A, Rouen L1 and Lille Line 1 & 2).
This flexibility is the essence of LRT.
Revitalization of Indonesia Railway Sector: rebuilding rail based public transport system “Urban Transport in
France :Tramway Revival in France” Franco-Indonesian Seminar of Jakarta on 21 October 2008,
F. Kuhn & J-H An 23
06/10/2020
Figure 14: The four range of Tramline’s cost per km in M val 07
In the chapter 3 above, we have made the description of different lines of tramways under operation
today in France. Among these lines we distinguished the high flow lines around 100,000 passengers per
day and new lines being as yet around 50,000 passengers a day.
We found three categories of lines:
- the lines whose cost is in a range of 15 to 20 M per km, generally built on former railway
tracks in Paris Trans Val de Seine T2 or Nantes 1rst line. We find also in this range the lines
of tram on tyres TVR of Nancy and Caen (cf. Figure 14 above).
- the lines whose cost is in a range of 20 to 30 M per km, we find in this range most of the
new lines built on surface these last years, Orléans, Le Mans, Clermont Ferrand (Tram on
tyres), Montpellier L1 & L2,
- the lines whose cost is in the range of 30 to 40 M per km, we find in this range the first
lines with a specific equipment i.e for Bordeaux the ground electric alimentation, for
Marseille it is 2.36 vehicle / km vs 1.49 for Le Mans L1, for Paris T1 it is also 2.94 vehicles
/ km and an architectural insertion (cf.Chemetov), Strasbourg A & D it is a tunnel built in
the sands of Rhein river, Paris T3 it is also an architectural insertion in Paris Marshal’s
Boulevard and Nice choosed a specific vehicle with batteries to go through 2 magnificent
places.
At last we find a network out of range, the first line of tramway in Rouen (cf. bibliography: 2 km and 5
stations underground costed the same price than 9 km of surface line and 15 stations, the 11.6 km costed
2500 MF or 381 M with the economic conditions of 1990).
If we examine the lines in the first range below 20 M per km, even if the cost is low the space kilometre
offered per day on line T2 and Nantes L1 are respectively 1. 863 M and 1.064 M per day. This offer is
of the same level than the tramway of Strasbourg line A & D, Nantes L2, Montpellier 1st line (140,000
passengers per day).
For the tram on tyres of Caen and Nancy the offer is respectively 0.763 M and 0.534 M per day what is
correct to carry 50,000 passengers a day.
As it is said in “La Gazette des Communes” (cf. Bibliography), Systra, project manager, indicates that
a tramway line costs nowadays around 20 M per km without big public works like bridges, tunnel, etc.
and specific beautifyings outside the RoW of 6 to 12 meters wide. Extension of a line is generally 25 %
less expensive than the former line for which the master of works should pay a workshop and a fleet of
vehicle.
For the flows around 20,000 passengers and below the UTAO could choose a project by stage, building
a busway and operating a BRT with articulated or sometimes bi-articulated buses for some years. When
frequentation will increase enough a project of tramway could be realized.
Revitalization of Indonesia Railway Sector: rebuilding rail based public transport system “Urban Transport in
France :Tramway Revival in France” Franco-Indonesian Seminar of Jakarta on 21 October 2008,
F. Kuhn & J-H An 24
06/10/2020
Bibliography
Amarcande, Certu, (2005), « Impacts du tramway sur le commerce dans différentes agglomérations
françaises, monographies », 155 p.
C. Blancon, (2008), “Le retour du tramway en France : un premier bilan des trois premières lignes de
tramway en Île de France », dans la revue générale des chemins de fer, Mars 2008, p15 à p19.
Contrat de Plan Etat Région Île de France 2000 : 2006 “Pour un aménagement durable de l’Île de
France”, partie 1 p 11 to p 14.
H. Dahl, (2004), « Use and optimization of public transport vehicles, aspects of bimodal systems in
urban areas », report for International Management project at the MBA Technology management
Program Août 2004, 50 p.
G. Dobias, (1998), « Urban Transport in France », in JRTR 16, June 1998, p 20 to p 25.
F. Enver, (2008),“ Tram de Reims: la première concession française en chantier”, dans Ville &
Transports-MAGAZINE – 2/07/2008 p36 to p39.
Gardner G., Rutter, J., Kuhn F., (1994), The performance and potential of light rail transit in developing
cities. In TRL Project Report N° PR69, TRL, Crowthorne.
Gazette des Communes, C-F, T. (2008), « Transports : les nouveaux tramways dopent l’intermodali»,
article du 04/02/2008, 8 p.
P. Godon, C. Crespolini, (1995), “ Métrobus, Un metro léger pour l’ agglomeration rouennaise: de l’idée
à la mise en service”, livre, edition Vie du Rail, Août 1995, 190 p.
Hue R. (2004), « Strategic justification of three existing modes of transportation in Rouen », in JRTR
38, March 2004, p17 to p 21.
Hylen, Bertil and Tim Pharoah, (2002), « Making Tracks –Light Rail in England and France », Swedish
National Road and Transport Research Institute, march 2002, 95 p
M. Knutton, (2005), “LRT in France”, in IRJ March 2005, 6p.
F. Kühn, (2002), “Bus rapid or light transit for intermediate cities ? », in CODATU 2002 in Lomé, 10
p.
F. Kühn, J-H An, INRETS-LTN, (2008), “Effects of insertion and operation of a new guided surface
transit system: Philéas and Evéole guided transit systems”, report to KRRI, July 08, 61 p.
M. Le Tourneur (2004), Dir. TaM (Transports de l’ Agglomération de Montpellier), « Le
Développement du Tramway en France », au Congrès ATEC, Paris, ppt, 18 p.,3 Juin 2004
Moniteur, (2008), “Tramway: histoire et place du tramway dans le paysage français des transports en
commun”, dossier 23 p, accessible sur : http://www.lemoniteur.fr/dossierWeb/2/imprime.asp
STIF, Annexe financière 1 par grands projets et par operations 2007 – 2013
Systra, Erea, LaCUB, (2004), « Etude de faisabilité des extensions du réseau communautaire de TCSP
(3ième phase) », rapport annexe – etape 2, août 2004, 39 p.
Tramway de Montpellier, infos lignes 3, 4 et 5 sur site web
http://pagesperso-orange.fr/edouard.paris/ligne3.htm
J. Veinberg, RATP, (1989), “Le tramway de Saint Denis à Bobigny”, article de la Revue Générale des
Chemins de Fer n°4 d’April 1989, p 27 to p 44.
P. Ventejol, RATP, (2008), “ Le retour du tramway en France : Renouveau et développement du
tramway en Île de France », dans la revue générale des chemins de fer, Mars 2008, p11 à p14.
S. Zalkind, (2008), « Le retour du tramway en France : le renouveau du tramway dans la revue générale
des chemins de fer, Mars 2008, p7 à p10.
Revitalization of Indonesia Railway Sector: rebuilding rail based public transport system “Urban Transport in
France :Tramway Revival in France” Franco-Indonesian Seminar of Jakarta on 21 October 2008,
F. Kuhn & J-H An 25
06/10/2020
STP, Direction des investissements, note DR n°1235c (1998),“Création d’une ligne de tramway en
rocade sud de Paris”, rapport final 32p, modifié en février 2000, on internet.
S. Zalkind, (1998)”Le nouveau tramway du Val de Seine (TVS) ligne T2 de la RATP in RGCF p53 to
58 RGCF 1998.
Gart.Website of Transport Authorities of each city- STIF- RATP- http://extension-
reseau.ratp.fr/tlag3/index/les_acteurs_et_le.html
http://www.lemoniteur.fr/archives/article.asp?id=5430:289&ds=2&p
http://www.reimsmetropole.fr/rubrique.php?id_rubrique=37 ; TEOR: http://www.agglo-de-
rouen.fr
http://www.stif.info/les-developpements-avenir/les-projets-du-contrat-plan-etat-region-
cper/rocade-tramway
Revitalization of Indonesia Railway Sector: rebuilding rail based public transport system “Urban Transport in France :Tramway Revival in France” Franco-Indonesian Seminar of
Jakarta on 21 October 2008,
F. Kuhn & J-H An 26 06/10/2020
City/ UPT inhabitants /Opening
Line
Length
(km)
Stations
Traffic
Pas./day
Sps/hour/dir
Headway
Peak Hour
(min.)
Rolling Stock
Fleet/bra nd
Gauge
(m)
Length Capacity
(m)/(spaces)
Power
(kW)
Cost’s line
M HT/ km val econ omic conditions 2007
Angers 300,000 June 2010
12
1/25
35,000/2895
4’
17 Citadis 302
2.40
32.42 / 193
248 M val. 06 or 21.28 M val.07
Bordeaux 700,000 Dec 2003
A/19.9
A/41
56,800/4500
4’
62 Citadis 402
2.40
43.99/ 300
6x120=720
1st st: 24.6 km; 678.7 M val.03 or 31.72 M val. 07
2nd st 19.1 km ; 558.2 M val.06 or 30.11 M val.07
B May 2004
B/15.4
B/20
55,600
C April 2004
C/ 8.4
C/17
19,000
12 Citadis 302
2.40
32.85 / 218
4x120=480
Brest 250,000 June 2012
14
24
45,000/ 2400
5’
20 rolling stocks
298 M or 21.2 M/km val. 07
Caen 230,000 Nov. 2002
15.7
34
40,000/2300
210 ‘’
24 TVR Bomb
2.55
24.50 / 135
300/Dies.200
286 M val.07 or 18.30 M
Clermont Ferrand 300,000 06
14
31
40,000/3400
3’
22 Translohr STE4
2.20
32 / 170
400
290 M val 06 or 21.95 M 07
Douai 200,000
1st stage 2009
12
21
18,000/883 or 1100
7’
10 Eveole 18 m
2 Eveole 24.50
2.55
18 / 103
24.50/129
Hybrid Diesel-
batteries
117 M val 2004 or 10.92 M val. 2007
2nd stage 2012
16
24
124.8 M val 2007 or 7.8 M
Grenoble 400,000 Sept. 1987
A /12.7
A / 29
90,000 / 2610
4’
53 TFS-2
2.30
29.4 / 174
2 x 275 = 550
A & B 552 M val.06 or 25.72 M
Nov. 1990
B / 9.4
B / 20
59,000
Or 25.72 M / km
May 2006
C / 9.6
C/ 19
30,000 / 4125
4’
35 Citadis 402
2.40
43.73 / 275
720
450 M val.05 or 24.06 M/km val.07
Oct. 2007
D / 3.7
D / 7
2013
E /18.5
420 M with Workshop and rolling stocks
Le Havre 280,000 2012
12.5
24
56,000 / 2914
3’30
17 rolling stocks
30 / 170
260 M val. 05 or 22.05 M/km
Le Mans 200,000 Nov. 2017
1 / 15.4
1 /29
50,000/ 3300
4’ , 8’
23 Citadis 302
2.40
32 / 220
4 x 120 = 480
337 M val. 2005 or 23.81 M/km val.07
Lille 1.2 M Mai 1994
17.84
36
32,000 / 3260
3’30 , 7’
24 Breda
2.40
29.9 / 190
410
220 MF val.94 or 19.73 M/ km val. 07
Lyon 1.2 M T1 Jan. 2001
10.5
24
80,000/2400
5’
57 Citadis 302
2.40
32.416/201
480
T1 + T2 = 515.92 M val.01 or 24.78 M / km val.07
T2 Jan. 2001
14.9
29
70,000/2400
5’
T3 Dec. 2006
14.6
10
13,000
8’, 16’
172 M val. 06 or 12.3 M val.07
T4 Jan. 2009
10
18
22,000
13 Citadis
185.3 M val.06 or 19.08 M val. 07 o
LESLYS* Sept. 2009
21.7
4
3,000
6 Stadler Tango
100 M val.06 for 7.1 km or 14.50 M / k m val. 07
Marseille 1 M T1 Juin 2007
5.9
14
44,600/3060
4’
26 Flexity Outlook
2.40
32.50 / 204
460
1st & 2nd stage 468 M (val. 03) or 3 1.76 M val. Jan.07
T2 Juin 2007 2nd stage
5.1
13
42,600
T3 2nd stage
5.4
12
14 Flexity
Montpellier 400,000 L1 July 2000
15.2
27
140,000 /3600
5’
30 Citadis 401
3 Citadis 302
2.65
2.65
40.9 / 300
32.51 / 212
6 x 140 = 840
348.8 M val. 00 or 28.91 M /km val 07
L2 Dec 200 6
19.8
33
52,000/ 1696
450’’,15’
24 Citadis 302
2.25
32.51 / 212
429 M val. 02 or 25.78 M
L3 2010
20
30
60,000
20 rolling stocks
450 M val. 02 or 26.77 M /km val07
L3 bis 2012
5
70,000
23 rolling stocks
120 M
Mulhouse 250,000L1 May 2006
2nd stage 2010
9
10.97
10
21
25,500 / 3465
4 ‘, 8
20 Citadis 302
32.50 / 231
480
249 M val 01 or 25.62 M / km 1st stage
L2 May 20 06 1st stage Tram
3
14
22,000
7 Citadis 302
2nd stage 2010
8.75
17
87,000
1st & 2nd stage 2012
19.72
38
340.2 ME val. 2001 or 17 ME / km
Tram Train Suburban line 2010
20
18
20 ‘, 10’
17 bicurrent Avanto
2.65
36.678 / 242
800
1st stage 147 M for 20 km
Nancy 280,000 2002
11
28
45,000/1620
5’
25 TVR Bombar.
2.50
24.50 / 135
300 /Dies. 150
140 M val 98 or 17.08 M val.07
Nantes 570,000 L1 Jan. 1985
17.6
32
90,000
3540
4’
34 TFS high floor Alsthom
2.30
29.62 / 236
550
10.4 km Cost 94.34 Mval.1985 or 17.41 M val 07
5 km d’ext 52.14 M val2000 or 13.14 M / km val.07
L2 Sept. 1992
16.1
33
112,000 /3885
4’
33 Incentro
2.40
36.40 / 259
8 x 45 = 360
57.6 M val. 2004 2.2 km or 29.32 M val.07
L3 Aug. 2000
6.4
17
35,000 / 2520
4’
L3 cost :116.2 M val.00 or 22.87 M /km val07
Revitalization of Indonesia Railway Sector: rebuilding rail based public transport system “Urban Transport in France :Tramway Revival in France” Franco-Indonesian Seminar of
Jakarta on 21 October 2008,
F. Kuhn & J-H An 27 06/10/2020
L4 Busway 2006
7
18,200 / 1650
4 ‘
20 Bus Citaro
2.55
18 / 110
75 M val. 2005 or 11.35 M /k m val.07
Tram-Train 2013
64
7 Citadis Dualis
144 M val 05 or 2.385 M / km val.07
Nice 500,000 L1 2007
8.7
21
70,000 / 3240
4 ‘, 8
20 Citadis 302
2.65
33.021 / 216
480
333 M val.06 or 39.41 M /km val.07
2nd stage 2010
4.5
890 M for 2nd stage 26.5 km or 33.58 M / km val 07
Orléans 300,000 L1 Nov. 2000
17.9
24
45,000/2640
4’
22 Citadis 301
2.32
29.87 / 176
560 kW
301 M val. 00 or 21.19 M / k m val.07
L2 2011
11.8
25
22,000/ 2640
21 Citadis 302
2.40
32.50 / 231
297 M val. 06 or 25.98 M / km val.07
Ile de France 11M
T1 St Denis-Noisy Dec 1992
11.9
dont 3
26
4
100,000/2610
9,000
4’
35 TFS-2
2.30
29.40 / 174
550
186 M val. 89 pour 9 km et 35 TFS or 32.55 M val.07
Ext. Noisy 80.95 M val. 98 or 35.07 M / km val. 07
T1Noisy Val de Fontenay
7.95
15
40,000
279.35 M val. 00 for infras, or 44.27 M07 / km
A1bT13 rd stage Gennevilliers 2011
4.9
10
43,000
9 Citadis
163.73 M val 06 or 34.41 M / km val.07
T2 Issy-La Défense July 1997
11.3
13
8 0,000/6870
4’
13 2 unit Citadis
2.40
65 / 458
480
132.9 M val. 1996 or 16.46 M /k m
Ext.T2 to Porte de Versailles 2009
2.3
3
30,000 / 6870
4’
10 Citadis 302
2.40
32.70 / 229
480
110.59 M val. 03 or 55.29 M / km val.07
A1a Ext to Bezons bridge 2011
4.2
7
58,000
4’
276.49 M val 2005 or 69.84 M val 07
T3 Maréchaux Sud 1st st Dec 06
7.9
17
100.000 / 4560
4’
21 Citadis 402
2.65
49.70 / 304
720
267 M val.02 or 39.16 M /km val.07
2nd st to Porte de La Chapelle 2012
14.2
22
155,000 / 4560
4’
615 M val 06 or 44.6 M / km val.07
A2b T4 Aulnay-Bondy Nov.2006
8
11
45,000
4 - 6’
15 Avanto
2.65
36.36 / 242
800 k
124.23 M val. 2003 or 17.84 M / km val.07
A3c Châtillon-Viroflay 2010 & 12
13.6
21
82,000/3429
210’’, 7
30 Translohr STE5
2.20
39 / 200
445.7 M val. 06 or 32.79 M / km val. 07
A3b Villejuif-Athis Mons 2012
11.2
18
36,000 / 3648
5 ‘
19 Citadis 402
2.65
49.70 / 304
720
337 M val 06 or 30.99 M / km val.07
Athis Mons-Juvisy 2013
3.5
160 M val. 06 or 47 M / km val. 07
A3g St-Denis-Villetaneuse Y 2013
8.46
18
55,000 / 3600
3 ‘ 6’
20 Rolling stocks
180
230.4 M val. 00 or 33.09 M / km v al. 07
St Denis-Sarcelles 2011
6.6
16
30,000 / 1800
4’
15 Translohr STE3
2.20
25 / 120
215 M val. Jan. 2006 or 33.5 5 M / km val.07
Reims230,000 L1 2011
11.2
22
45,000 / 3075
4’ , 10’
18 Citadis 302
2.40
32.70 / 205
480
Total cost 34 2.78 M val. 2004 or 34.27 M/km 07
Rouen 420,000 Déc. 94
15.1
31
63,000 / 3000
210’’
28 TFS-2
2.30
29.40 / 175
2x275=550
381 M val.90 pour 11.6 km or 54.19 M / km val. 07
L2 TEOR 2001/06
25.6
41
35,000/2100
3’
38 Agora art. Bus
2.55
18.50 / 105
164 M val 04 or 7.17 M / km val.07
St Etienne 400,000 L4 Dec 1881
9.34
30
35,000 / 4440
2’
35 Alsthom-Vevey
2.12
23.19 / 148
2x140=280
L5 Oct. 2006
2.2
5
18,000
75.6 ME val.03 or 34.50 M / km val. 07
Strasbourg 500,000 A Nov. 1994
12.6
22
A&D/116,000
8100
2’ , 3
9 Eurotram
14 Citadis 403
2.40
2.40
44.10 / 270
45.00 / 288
12 x 28= 336
720
297.75 M val. 94 or 37.8 M /k m val.07
B Sept. 2000
14.88
27
B&C/104,000
3 ‘, 6’
26 Eurotram
44.10 / 270
B&C: 247.7 M vaL.99 for 12 km or 26 M / km val. 07
C Sept.2000
10.39
21
18 Eurotram
402.54 M val. 99 for B ext, C,D,E, 13.5 km
or 37.5 7 M/k m val.07
D Aug. 2007
5.62
11
9 Citadis 403
37.57 M/km val.07
E Aug. 2007
10.6
20
18 Citadis 403
37.57 M/km val.07
F Tram train 2009
40
15’ 30’
212 M val. 99 or 6.89 M val.07
Toulon 320,000 2011/2013
18
37
50,000
5’
28 rolling stocks
2.40
32 / 200
515 M val.03 or 32.36 M val.07
Toulouse 800,000 LE 2010
10.8
18
30,000 / 3180
4’
18 Citadis 302
2.40
32.70 /212
480
266 M val 05 or 26.10 M / km val 07
Valenciennes 400,000 July 2006
9.5
19
25,000 / 3180
4’
21 Citadis 302
2.40
29.66 / 212
480
1st stage 269 M val. 200 6 or 29.16 M / km val 07
2nd st. Sept. 2007
8.5
7
10,000
2nd stage 69 M val. 2006 or 8.36 M/km
Edition:2/10/08 Source: Connaissance du Rail Juillet 2005 n°286-287 et 2007 n° 316-317- L’année 2006 des transports urbains Gart- 2002, Gart.Website of Transport Authorities of each city- STIF- RATP
Characteristics of 39 tramways lines (19 networks) under operation or 23 lines under design (7 networks) in France
.Nota: the investment costs of projects realized on different years have to be homogenized, so we present the costs on current value 2007, the present value factor is 3% per year.
- Bordeaux: the comparative costs between GPS and catenary is 1.5 M / km for GPS and 0.45 M / km for the catenary val. 2004
- Lyon: LESLY S Light rail going to the Airp ort from the center of Lyon with T3 line’s platform and LESLYS platform on separated Right of way
- Nice: Load of battery for one vehicle 900 kg and equipment 600 kg per Citadis life cycle 5 years. 45 moduli of 12 V each that is to say 540 V with 37 0 A maximu m intensity which rep resents a ma ximum
power of 200 kW during 13 minutes vs 480 kW for the Citadis traction’s motors so the speed is limited to 30 km/h in auton omous mode. The life cycle is esti mated to 5 years of operation. The operator ask ed that
the transition between the autonomous and catenary modes should be managed by the driver an d not automatically changed
Revitalization of Indonesia Railway Sector: rebuilding rail based public transport system “Urban Transport in France :Tramway Revival in France” Franco-Indonesian Seminar of
Jakarta on 21 October 2008,
F. Kuhn & J-H An 28 06/10/2020
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any citations for this publication.
Technical Report
Full-text available
This report looks at the performance of Light Rail Transit (LRT) systems and tramways in developing cities. Case study and estimation procedures have been used to examine the maximum passenger carrying capacity of various types of LRT. This report complements other work by TRL on metros (Fouracre et al., 1990) and on high capacity busways (Gardner et al. 1991). The traditional tramways surveyed in India, Egypt and China all carry flows of less than 7,000 passengers par hour per direction (pphd). The more modern systems in Tunis. Budapest and Alexandria carry up to 13,000 pphd. Only the system in Manila, which is elevated (and hence segregated) along its entire length ca carry flows over 18,000 pphd. The main problem for LRT in developing cities appears to be the level of interference fro other road users, together with the difficulty of controlling and organising a regular headway service. The inability of vehicles to overtake when others are delayed, and long turn around times at terminals compound the problem. Despite their technical limitations under developing country conditions. LRT systems are very popular, and can have advantages in improving the quality of life and civic pride. They should not however be seen as an ideal solution for a poor developing city.
Article
Full-text available
Performances and costs of BRT & LRT systems are examined. A variety of benefits and disbenefits is considered. An analysis of planning, design, passenger satisfaction and development potential try to compare them. In conclusion, BRT presents an investment opportunity for intermediate cities in developed and developing countries: some cities have already adopted it with success. In a second term, when the BRT attains a high patronage on some well identified corridors, an LRT could be adopted while buses operate as feeders. RÉSUMÉ : Les performances et coûts des systèmes d'autobus en site propre et métro léger sont examinés. Une panoplie d'avantages et désavantages est considérée. Une analyse de la satisfaction des usagers et du potentiel de développement essaie de les comparer. En conclusion, les autobus en site propre présentent une opportunité d'investissement pour les villes intermédiaires : quelques villes les ont déjà adoptés avec succès. Lorsque le site propre atteint un haut niveau de fréquentation sur un axe bien identifié, le métro léger pourrait y être installé, les autobus opérant alors sur le réseau d'alimentation de ce métro léger.
Le retour du tramway en France : un premier bilan des trois premières lignes de tramway en Île de France », dans la revue générale des chemins de fer
  • C Blancon
C. Blancon, (2008), "Le retour du tramway en France : un premier bilan des trois premières lignes de tramway en Île de France », dans la revue générale des chemins de fer, Mars 2008, p15 à p19.
« Use and optimization of public transport vehicles, aspects of bimodal systems in urban areas », report for International Management project at the MBA Technology management Program Août
  • H Dahl
H. Dahl, (2004), « Use and optimization of public transport vehicles, aspects of bimodal systems in urban areas », report for International Management project at the MBA Technology management Program Août 2004, 50 p.
« Urban Transport in France
  • G Dobias
G. Dobias, (1998), « Urban Transport in France », in JRTR 16, June 1998, p 20 to p 25.
Tram de Reims: la première concession française en chantier
  • F Enver
F. Enver, (2008)," Tram de Reims: la première concession française en chantier", dans Ville & Transports-MAGAZINE -2/07/2008 p36 to p39.
Métrobus, Un metro léger pour l' agglomeration rouennaise: de l'idée à la mise en service
  • P Godon
  • C Crespolini
P. Godon, C. Crespolini, (1995), " Métrobus, Un metro léger pour l' agglomeration rouennaise: de l'idée à la mise en service", livre, edition Vie du Rail, Août 1995, 190 p.
« Strategic justification of three existing modes of transportation in Rouen
  • R Hue
Hue R. (2004), « Strategic justification of three existing modes of transportation in Rouen », in JRTR 38, March 2004, p17 to p 21.
« Making Tracks -Light Rail in England and France », Swedish National Road and Transport Research Institute
  • Bertil Hylen
  • Tim Pharoah
Hylen, Bertil and Tim Pharoah, (2002), « Making Tracks -Light Rail in England and France », Swedish National Road and Transport Research Institute, march 2002, 95 p M. Knutton, (2005), "LRT in France", in IRJ March 2005, 6p.
Effects of insertion and operation of a new guided surface transit system: Philéas and Evéole guided transit systems
  • F Kühn
  • J-H An
F. Kühn, J-H An, INRETS-LTN, (2008), "Effects of insertion and operation of a new guided surface transit system: Philéas and Evéole guided transit systems", report to KRRI, July 08, 61 p.