Has the first one running under its own power made it any further?
Here is 6001 in the new PTV livery.It does look good!
I'm guessing that as they will be owned by the State of Victoria, as is all of YT's fleet, who also own PT> that these might be the first to appear from new in the PT> livery style. If the Citadis launch was anything to go by the vinyls won't be added until the day before the public launch.I'm looking forward to seeing more of those trams, and other trams around town - resplendent in the new tram PT> livery.
My understanding from the press releases is that the new trams have to do more than four thousand kilometers on the network in test before revenue service - so you can expect to see them out and about on the network quite a bit over the next few months (including driver training, etc.). I think the plan is revenue service from October, with up to five trams in service by the end of the financial year - with all 50 in service by 2018. The information is all online in various press releases and statements. While the first tram was delayed seven months, my understanding is that they will deliver the rest of the trams faster (eg. while the date of introduction for the first tram has slipped, the last tram will be delivered on time). It will be interesting to see whether additional E class trams are ordered.I saw the first one today at the Preston workshops, the warning bell is the same as the Citadis, also, the tram is very quiet. I did hear a slight high pitched squeal during the powered run, it's like hearing a mouse in a church.
I haven't seen the Melbourne one yet, but as I mentioned above, I've been on the same vehicle type in Porto which is just amazing - which operates coupled (which forms a VERY large tram). One of the reasons I went to Porto is that I wanted to see the seven section tram in service that visited Melbourne about a decade ago (when they were trying to sell it to us). When you see the seven section tram and this design of tram next to each other you quickly work out how much better the three section design is (which is about the same length as the seven section). Worth a look if you are interested: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Porto_Metro It really shows how you can combine street running with a 'metro' style feel. Quite similar to 96 in many ways (mixture of street running and reserved track).The Porto model is only 70% low floor, the internal platforms (over the bogies) only having step access. The seven section tram you mention is the Eurotram, with fixed bogies and short body sections. The ratio of floating the axled sections on the Eurotram differs from other fixed bogie tram in that the floating sections are longer (as far as I can see) and even the outer axled section aren't substantially longer than the bogies.
With no doors right at the front or back, I presume this is because the platform stops are not long enough?
I have learned not to make any assumptions, but this one works for me
The Eurotram is an industry standard LRV, except for Milan, none of the Eurotram clients were continuing with the use of existing tracks nor reusing parts of them. Nor does it have system wide technical compliance with our tramway network, when it ran here it was subject to restrictions because could not negotiate tighter curves than the standard LRT minimum.It was permitted to turn from Spencer Street into Flinders Street on a "substandard" radius curve but only under strictly controlled conditions with ground staff observing the compression and extension of components between the modules and at less than walking pace. The only reason it was allowed to make that turn was to get it onto MCG event shuttles using Simpson Street siding as a turnback. It was not permitted to make any other right-angle street-corner turns due to the radius of our older track and its greater width posing a slight risk of striking an adjacent vehicle on the opposite track.