|
|
|
Track length |
= | 40 km |
|
Round trip length |
= | 80 km |
|
Average vehicle speed |
= | 20 kph |
|
Service per vehicle |
= | 0.25 veh/hr |
From this we can see that a single vehicle would offer 0.25 of a tram-per-hour service. In other words, 4 trams operating on the system will give an hourly service to each point on the system in a given direction.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The relatively high fixed costs of a tramway system favour long operating hours and low fares to give the optimum revenue. A service is proposed which will prove attractive and will integrate effortlessly with other modes because it automatically offers short waiting times and return journeys at unsociable hours.
|
|||||
|
|
(mins) |
|
|
vehicles |
|
| Night |
|
|
|
|
|
| Morning off peak |
|
|
|
|
|
| Morning peak |
|
|
|
|
|
| Daytime |
|
|
|
|
|
| Afternoon peak |
|
|
|
|
|
| Evening off peak |
|
|
|
|
|
| Night |
|
|
|
|
|
| Total 467 | |||||
|
|
|||||
|
|
(mins) |
|
|
vehicles |
|
| Night |
|
|
|
|
|
| Daytime |
|
|
|
|
|
| Night |
|
|
|
|
|
| Total 240 | |||||
Assuming the weekday service also operated on Saturdays (although the peak periods might differ), the total operating hours per week =
(6 x 467) + (1 x 240) = 3024 Vehicle hours per week
With a crew of 2 this gives 6048 Crew hours per week
For an example of staffing wages the data from
Midlands Metro have been used.
Midlands Metro employs only salaried staff, every member of the
staff is qualified as a driver and takes a turn on the driving
rota, thereby ensuring the service is uninterrupted in the event
of illness or non-availability of drivers. Midlands drivers' salaries
+ overheads (Taken from the 1994 'Section 56' grant evaluation
document Table 5.4 and converted to 1999 prices by assuming 5%
p.a. inflation) come to £18,049 p.a. or £347
per week
This is approximately equivalent to £10-00 per hour over a 35 hour week.
Using the figure of £10-00 per hour, the crewing costs (including overheads) of the proposed Bath system are:
Crewing costs = 6048 x £10-00 = £60,480 per week
Using the Midlands Metro figures for other staffing
| Manager | Head of engineering |
| Assistant manager | Head maintenance engineer |
| Controllers | Vehicle supervisor |
| Senior inspector | Technicians |
| Inspectors | Safety / training officer |
| Enquiry staff | Storekeeper |
| Finance manager | Secretaries |
Salary costs total £1,496,864 p.a. = £28,786 per week at 1994 prices, converted to 1999 prices
Other salaries = £36,739 per week
TOTAL WAGES COSTS = £97,579 per week
Repayment of debt
Assuming the finance will come from a Public-Private Partnership arrangement and that the track costs will fall on the public purse (Section 56 grant), the tramway operator will have to bear the remaining costs as a debt.
Assuming this debt is £50 million and the repayment period is 25 years (half the running life of the system to allow for income being used for replacement costs as the system ages).
|
Debt repayments |
£2,000,000 p.a. |
|
Interest @ 10% p.a. |
£2,500,000 p.a. |
|
Total |
£4,500,000 p.a. |
DEBT REPAYMENTS + INTEREST = £86,539 per week
Power costs
|
Vehicle weight empty |
= 15 tonnes | |
| Assume average 30 passengers per vehicle @ 15 passengers per tonne |
||
|
Average passenger weight |
= 2 tonnes | |
|
Average vehicle weight |
= 17 tonnes | |
| Power consumption is approx.
1.5 kw per tonne (Ref I.C.S. 22) |
||
|
Power consumption |
= (17 x 1.5) = 25 kw per vehicle | |
|
Weekly vehicle running hours |
= 3042 | |
|
Weekly power consumption |
= (3042 x 25) = 76,050 kw hours | |
| Assume power costs £0-10 per kw hour | ||
|
Vehicle power costs |
= £7,605 per week | |
| Assume depôt consumption is 5% of system power | ||
|
Depôt power costs |
= £380-25 per week |
TOTAL POWER COSTS = £7,605 + £380-25 = £7,985 per week
Total major costs
|
Wages |
|
£ 97,579 per week |
|
Debt |
|
£ 86,539 per week |
|
Power |
|
£ 7,985 per week |
|
TOTAL MAJOR RUNNING COSTS |
£192,103 per week |
This only represents the major expenditure
items, it does not include the cost of replacements, system expansion,
changes brought about by legislation etc.
|
|
The major source of income is the 'fare box', payment by passengers for the right to make a journey by tram. This cannot be calculated from presently-known data. (No account has been taken of additional sources of revenue such as advertising, it is assumed this will be used to pay for upgraded facilities such as tram-stop shelters)
We can, however, estimate the number of person-trips likely to be made on the system which can then be used to calculate the necessary average fare in order to break-even. By selecting two values of ridership/break-even fare levels, a general overview can be obtained.
Figures given in Bath & N.E. Somerset Provisional Transport Plan, July 1999, (Appendix 'C', P11 - 12) form the basis for this estimation.
The B&NES figures are for the number of person-trips made across the 'Inner Cordon' during a 12 hour survey period whilst data for the 'Multi-Modal Model' was being collected 1998 - 1999.
As the Inner Cordon corresponds approximately with the entry points to the City Centre Circle of the proposed tramway system, these figures would form a good basis for the estimation of passenger journeys which might be expected. Two different estimates have been used for the percentage of persons from each mode who would switch to tram, in both cases extremely pessimistic figures have been used.
These are based on:
| High fare - The fares are at least as high as the existing bus fares and give no incentive to change modes. Any tram use is due to other factors such as reliability, speed, comfort, avoidance of parking charges or lack of an alternative. |
| Low fare - The fares are relatively low and offer a real incentive to use the tram. The perceived change in life-style may inhibit change for some people at the outset, but experience shows that this is soon overcome and tram use builds up rapidly. |
|
per day |
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The car capture ratio will vary considerably,
according to the fares charged. See 'Supply
& Demand' for further information It is reasonable to assume that 10% of drivers will use the tramway for its speed and reliability, even if fares are very high. It is also reasonable to assume that some car trips could not be undertaken by tram no matter how low the fares, an arbitrary figure of 50% has been used to account for this. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It is assumed that 80% of the bus trips into the centre of Bath are on local routes, which will become tram routes. The demand for buses is relatively inflexible, most passengers would use an alternative if they were able. Is has been assumed the tramway fare structure will not significantly alter the use by these passengers. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The P+R routes would be entirely taken over by trams and the fare structure would be (within limits) irrelevant. |
|
Total |
|
|
|
|||
|
Total |
|
|
|
|
|
A multiplier of 6 has been used because it has been assumed that the total of Saturday + Sunday is equivalent to 1 weekday. |
With running costs of £192,103 per week, the minimum single journey fare can be calculated from the above weekly total journeys.
|
||||||||
Examples of fares on other systems