A familiar looking face on the Ploiești Tramway

The tramways of Romania usually don’t get much attention from transport enthusiasts of the English-speaking world, but this Tatra KT4D tram in Ploiești, Romania did.

KT4D tram #075 in Ploiești, Romania
Photo by Smiley.toerist via Wikimedia Commons

Thanks to the colour scheme – a copy of the white, yellow, red and blue livery found in Adelaide, Australia.

So how did the a colour scheme end up duplicated on the opposite side of the world?

Welcome to Adelaide

The ‘TransAdelaide’ livery in Adelaide has been used on buses since 2000.

#1112 stops for passengers at Klemzig Station, with another bus doing the same behind

And is also found on their fleet of Flexity trams, delivered in 2005 to the same design as Frankfurt.

Flexity 112 at Currie and King William Streets

Over to Romania

Unfortunately my exploration of Ploieşti consisted of a whistle stop tour by train.

Crossing a tangle of tracks at Ploieşti

Where the only landmark I saw was the Astra oil refinery.

Cooling towers at the Astra oil refinery in Ploieşti, Romania

But Wikipedia has a short history of the Ploiești Tramway:

The tram in Ploiești was opened in 1987 and originally consisted of six routes. 1998 saw route 105 close, and by 2003 only lines 101 and 102 were still in operation.

The initial fleet was Timiș 2 trams made by Electrometal Timișoara and V3A trams by ITB București Main Workshops. However by the late 1990s and early 2000s, they were replaced by Tatra KT4D trams from the town of Potsdam, Germany.

Modernisation works were started around 2014 and in 2016 the tram system was reopened, with modernised and up to date infrastructure.

Digging around the TransPloieşti internet forum gave me one lead – in December 2014 tram #105 was the first of the Tatra KT4Ds to be refurbished.

The first refreshed tram emerged in October 2015, and the comparisons with Adelaide followed soon after – I found this post by Cristian P. on the SkyscraperCity forums:

Schema de culoare e copiata de la tramvaiele din Adelaide.

Which translates to:

The colour scheme is copied from the Adelaide trams.

So why did Ploieşti choose these colours? I finally found an explanation in this article on the refurbishment program by Observatorul Prahovean.

Thanks to an internal program set up at TCE Ploieşti, operator of the Ploieşti Tramways, ten trams out of a total of 24, will be repaired and repainted into the colours of Ploieşti’s coat of arms (white, blue, red) and yellow, the colours of public transport common.

Which begs another question – what does the Ploieşti’s coat of arms look like?

The coat of arms of Ploiești consist of a blue shield, loaded with two golden lions, with a red tongue, which sustain a silver, uprooted oak tree. Everything is put on a red scarf with the inscription of M.V.V. (Mihai Viteazul-Voievod)

Coat of arms of Ploiești

I can see the resemblance, but no way did Ploieşti come up with the livery on their own!

Bonus video

One thing you won’t see in Adelaide is snow – here is KT4D #075 headed through a Romanian winter.

Further reading

Tram diagrams:

Posted in Trams | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Why was this barbecue on the tram tracks?

A few months ago I came across a photo on Twitter showing a barbecue along tram tracks, with a hotplate full of sausages sizzling away on top. So where was the photo taken, and what was the story behind it?


Photo by DelegueLata on Twitter

The barbecue looked cobbled together, just sitting on top of a small set of rail wheels.


Photo by DelegueLata on Twitter

The tweet was posted on May 15, and the caption being in French was my first lead.

Donc les cheminots ont fabriqué un barbecue roulant adaptable au rails du tramway pendant leur manif. Ils sont très forts.

Which translates to:

So the rail workers made a rolling barbecue that could be adapted to the tram rails during their protest. They’re very strong.

And one of the follow up tweets pinned it down to France.

C’est le même écartement entre rails SNCF et tramway, c’est donc un outil détourné !!

It is the same distance between rails SNCF and tram, so it is a hijacked tool!

Further searching online brought me to a photo posted on Reddit on May 14, showing the same event from a different angle.


Photo by nerdastic on Reddit

Where a poster by the name of OoRenega asked:

Mais c’est à Nice ça non?

But it’s in Nice, no?

To which ElWeedoHermano replied:

Absolument, sur l’avenue Jean Médecin!

Absolutely, on Avenue Jean Médecin!

With the location pinned down, I headed over to Google Street View, where I soon found the same ‘Promod’ store seen in the background of the original photo.

As well as the ‘Bocage’ and ‘Crocs’ stores in the background of the photo posted to Reddit.

With the location and date, I was also able to find this news article by the France 3 Provence-Alpes network.

Railway workers demonstrated in the center of Nice on Monday “without train”

Laurent Verdi with AFP
Posted on 14/05/2018 at 15:15

Around 800 people, employees of SNCF and workers from other sectors demonstrated Monday in Nice against the reform of the SNCF. The demonstrators blocked a time the entrance of the town hall of the city.

Nearly 90% of the staff of the SNCF are on strike Monday in Nice according to the unions. Management also recognizes a particularly difficult day.

In Nice, a general meeting of the staff of the SNCF took place Monday morning at the initiative of the inter-union near the central station. About 400 people were present to discuss the social movement.

At the end of the general assembly, a procession of 800 people , according to the unions, marched in Nice to demonstrate against the reform of the SNCF. This procession was made up of SNCF staff and other sectors as well as political activists.

The protesters left the central station, went up Avenue Jean Médecin, to finish in front of the town hall of Nice as shown in this report by Nathalie Morin and Yannick Fournigault.

The network also posted footage of the protest.

In which I found the same tramway mounted barbecue that started my search.

Mystery solved!

Posted in Trams | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Rubbing the dog’s nose for good luck

The stations of the Moscow Metro are known for their ornate architecture, but Площадь Революции (Ploshchad Revolyutsii) station on the Arbatsko-Pokrovskaya Line has another form of artwork to offer.

Staircases lead down to the interchange passageway

A series of bronze sculptures.

Bronze sculptures along the Moscow Metro platform

For some reason the dog sculpture is the most popular.

Polished brass on the dog's nose

With every second person seeming to stop on the way past.

Rubbing the dog's nose for good luck

And give the dog a pat on the nose.

Moscow's most loved dog

Presumably thinking it will bring them good luck.

Good luck comes to those who rub the dog's nose

But a nearby rooster is also getting a similar amount of attention.

The rooster is also getting attention from Muscovites wanting some luck

But why so much attention?

«Архнадзор» explains the history of the superstition.

The tradition to touch the statue of a bronze border dog at Ploshchad Revolutsii station arose long ago, but at first it was just a student problem. One can understand: the students in the majority of their people are dark and disorderly, they remember about the exam three days before its end, when all that remains is to hope for only a miracle. And who else can pray for the miracle of the Soviet Komsomol https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Komsomol – not the saints of the saints. So let the mystical patron of a lost Komsomol become a bronze animal, whose polished snout mysteriously flickers in the twilight of Moscow dungeons. In general, at first it was rather funny.

While also detailing the damage this ‘tradition’ has caused to the sculptures.

In the past ten years, the pilgrimage to the underground shrine suddenly became a nationwide action. Check for yourself: out of ten metro passengers passing along the platform, at least three will certainly attach to idols, and if someone does it in passing and in jest, then many are genuinely religiously zealous. At peak hours, the frequency of wiping each dog’s nose reaches 20-30 approaches per minute, and a queue forms.

Once the dog’s noses just glistened, and now they have completely lost the surface relief and are already beginning to lose shape. Pay attention to how finely and conscientiously the texture of these statues is worked out – the roughness of the soldiers’ overcoats, the furry dogs and everything else. The dog muzzles first lost their hair, then their noses – only holes remained, in a few more years they would not be there either. Roosters are rapidly losing feathers.

History of the sculptures

Russian language Wikipedia explains the history of the sculptures:

As Ploshchad Revolyutsii station there are 76 bronze figures depicting Soviet people, located on the pedestals in the corners of each archway. There are 20 different designs: 18 of them are repeated four times, and two – twice.

The sculptures were made at Монументскульптура (Monumentskulptura) in Leningrad under the guidance of prominent sculptor M. G. Manizer, with the team of sculptors including A.I. Denisov, A.A. Divin , A.A. Vetutnev, I. P. Ivanov, E. G. Falco, M. A. Vladimirskaya, V. A. Puzyrevsky.

And the scenes pictured:

The sculptures are arranged in chronological order from the events of October 1917 to December 1937:

Arch I

  • Revolutionary worker with rifle and grenade
  • Revolutionary soldier with a rifle

Arch II

  • Peasant in sandals, who took up arms
  • Revolutionary sailor with a gun

Arch III

Arch IV

Arch V

Arch VI

  • Birdhouse with chicken and rooster
  • Agricultural mechanic

Arch VII

  • Male student
  • Female student with a book

Arch VIII

  • Female discus thrower
  • Footballer

Arch IX

  • Father with a child
  • Mother with a child

Closed arched passage (sculptures are only from the side of the platforms)

  • Pioneer with model airplane
  • Pioneers geographers

All the figures (except the figures of the pioneers) in order to fit into the limited vaulted volume of the arched passages are depicted either on their knees, or bent, or sitting.

Posted in Trains | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Barbed wire and guard towers protecting the bridges and tunnels of the Russian Railways

On my journey across Russia by train I passed through many tunnels and over many bridges, and noticed something strange at each one.

Crossing the River Don at the village of Донское (Donskoye)

Tall barbed wire fences preventing access beneath each major bridge.

Bridge over the River Don at Донское (Donskoye)

And guard houses at every tunnel portal.

Guardhouse for the Железнодорожный мост через реку Дон (bridge over the River Don) by the village of Донское (Donskoye)

I came across a Russian railfan forum, where the reason for these security measures was brought up.

VeschiiOleg wrote:
For example, the approach to any serious bridge is enclosed by a zone of alienation with barbed wire, signs and armed guards.

Vlad wrote:
We photograph the railway bridge, for example. The ВОХРовец is approaching us and politely is interested, but on what basis are you taking these photos?

VeschiiOleg wrote:
ВОХРовец, according to the statute of the guard service they do not have rights to leave the facility, those because of the territory he should not leave. But to call the police – easily. And if on the fence, there are inscriptions about the prohibition of filming, then they will be right.

So what are the ВОХРовец? It’s an abbreviation for Военизированная охрана – also known as Ведомственная охрана, Russian-language Wikipedia describes them as:

Specialised state departmental armed units responsible for protecting buildings, structures, vehicles, and cargo from unlawful attacks. They have the right to use military and service firearms, in addition to service dogs, handcuffs, rubber batons, and spike strips used to stop vehicles. Officials of state departmental protection (established by federal state bodies) have the right to draw up protocols on administrative offences, carry out personal searches, inspect items belonging to individuals, inspect vehicles and other procedural actions established by the Code of Administrative Offences of the Russian Federation.

The Russian Railways are protected by the «Ведомственная охрана железнодорожного транспорта Российской Федерации» (Departmental Security Service of Railway Transport of the Russian Federation) – who describe themselves as such:

The Federal State Enterprise “Departmental Protection of the Federal Agency for Railway Transport” carries out its activities on the basis of the Resolution of the Government of the Russian Federation of June 27, 2009, No. 540 “On Approval of the Regulation on Departmental Protection of the Federal Agency for Railway Transport.”

The Federal State Enterprise “Departmental Protection of Railway Transport of the Russian Federation” for nearly 90 years has ensured the safety of the cargo being transported, the protection of objects and the fire safety of railway transport in the interests of the state, citizens and the company “RZhD” all along the steel highways from Kaliningrad to Sakhalin.

Today the departmental protection of the railway transport has 68,000 employees, with over 2400 objects of railway infrastructure protected, including more than 1900 most important ones.

More than 400 fire inspectors carry out fire prevention at stationary facilities and rolling stock. In constant readiness for action are 307 fire trains, including 67 specialised, with increased tactical capabilities to eliminate emergencies with dangerous goods.

They also show off their work protecting major bridges.


Photo by ‘Departmental Security Service of Railway Transport of the Russian Federation’, North Caucasus Railway branch

In addition to railway tunnels.


Photo by ‘Departmental Security Service of Railway Transport of the Russian Federation’, North Caucasus Railway branch

So why are such extensive security measures in place?

Someone on a Russian railway forum asked the same question, and were given various explanations:

Kirill N.Kravchenko
The fact that the railway bridges are so heavily guarded is understandable, no one doubts this is necessary. But I’ve always wondered: why are automobile bridges not so zealously protected?

Victor Mikhailov
In the event of an accident on the rail such as bridge collapse, the consequences will be much more significant compared to a road bridge. Any car will have time to stop seeing ahead of the obstacle. In addition road bridges are much more numerous than rail bridge, therefore it is impossible to protect all the bridges (where to find so many guards).

Novikov S.V.
It is easier for road vehicles to find a detour, or engineering troops can erect a temporary pontoon bridge. Blowing up a railway bridge means complete paralysis of the route until the bridge is completely restored.

Sura
I understand that we are talking about “big” unique bridges. Standard railway bridge across the small river should be restored in a very short space from pre-prepared sets. Actually, that’s why they are not protected.

But this Russian-language article in Евразия Вести suggests a much more likely reason – Soviet-era paranoia.

Following the October Revolution railway facilities of strategic importance were under the protection of the military department; protection of “external order, deanery and public security” was carried out by parts of the railway guard and the police. Cargoes, property and ways were under the care of watchmen, who were in full subordination to those whose good they had protected.

In order to strengthen the leadership, in March 1918 a special decree was adopted “On the centralisation of management, the protection of railways and the increase of their efficiency”. By the decree of the government of July 17 of the same year, under the People’s Commissariat of Railways (NKPS), the Office of Protection was established.

The squad on the ground included transport experts. They fought decisively against stowaways and those who tried to transport goods without payment, in addition to monitoring the efficiency of rolling stock use. It was envisaged to increase the number of protection staff to 70 thousand people.

The authorities could not tolerate chaos and theft on the railways. Looters cut the telegraph wires. Profiteers swarmed trains, like locusts. Hidden were robbers, bandits and other criminal element.

The NKPS was forced to take extreme measures. At the stations, warehouses, warehouses temporarily formed non-military protection. As for bridges and other structures not guarded by troops, as well as railway tracks, they went under the tutelage of local authorities, which formed out of brigade workers.

Some few propaganda videos

A video from the Voronezh branch to mark 95 years of railway guards, who protect the South Eastern Railway.

And from the Samara branch, who protect the railway bridge over the Volga River on the Kuybyshev Railway.

Footnote

Ministry of Railways of the USSR directive No-298y «Типовые решения по оборудованию инженерными средствами охраны на искусственных сооружениях, охраняемых военизированной охраной МПС» (Typical solutions for equipping engineering facilities for protection on man-made structures protected by paramilitary protection of the Ministry of Railways) dated 2 February 1990 details the fencing standards around restricted areas.

In accordance with clause 2.1.1, the boundaries of the restricted area are protected by a barbed wire fence (tape or net) in 12 threads 2 m high. In the terrain, they are designated by warning signs 2 m high above the ground surface, installed along the fence line from the inside through every 50 meters in the enclosure of the restricted area can be arranged gates and wickets. In accordance with clause 2.2.3, on the watch posts, guided (rotary) floodlights of the PFS type (without lenses) or other narrow-beam floodlights are designed to increase the equipping of the terrain outside the restricted area. In accordance with paragraph 4.1, posts for the protection of artificial structures.

While the «По организации работы караулов ФГП ВО ЖДТ РФ» (Procedure for organising the activities of Departmental Security Service of Railway Transport of the Russian Federation) dated 21 September 2010 specifies the other security features required.

According to clause 2.4.1 of the manual a protection system is created to provide protection for the protected object, which includes: guard, posts, orders, locations and routes, surveillance sectors, engineering and technical means of protection, posts of service dogs, means and other forces. Equipment posts should provide the guard: a sufficient overview of all sections of the post and the surrounding area; sufficient illumination of the approaches to the object, its most important points; absence of lighting (blinding) by lighting systems of security equipment and guards; the possibility of centralised management of the entire lighting system or a group of fixtures, and in necessary cases, separate lamps (projectors).

Equipment of restricted areas includes: their fencing, checkpoint, warning signs, indicative and delimiting signs, a security lighting system, technical security equipment, postal communication and signalling, guard posts, defensive structures. Depending on the nature of the object and the conditions of its location, the fence is built around the perimeter of the site and the boundaries of the restricted areas. When erecting a fence, it must be taken into account that it must be rectilinear, without unnecessary bends limiting observation, not less than one and a half meters in height. To it should not adjoin any structures. In the darkness of the day, the approaches to the post and the protected object should be illuminated so that the sentry, being on the post or moving along the site of the post, was in the shade. In accordance with the established procedure, security lighting should provide illumination at the borders.

Posted in Trains | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Construction fail at the railway station

Recently I came across a viral photo on Facebook that showed a railway track dropping over the edge of a cliff, then continuing on below. So where was the photo taken, and why is the track layout so ridiculous?

I found a German-language internet forum where people were laughing at the same photo, which led me to the location pictured – Leipzig Hauptbahnhof, the central railway terminus of Leipzig, Germany.


Photo by Clic, via Wikimedia Commons

That sent me down a German-language rabbit hole, that ended on a German model railway forum.


Photo by Marc Andre

Where they were asking the same question I was.

Can somebody tell me for what this “step” in the track is for?

And a half answer.

This is the museum track of the Leipzig Hbf.

The display includes steam locomotives.


Photo by Haering Juergen, via Wikimedia Commons

As well as slightly newer electric units.


Photo by Jörgens.Mi, via Wikimedia Commons

Wikipedia lists the exhibits.

On the site of closed track No. 24, several historical Deutsche Reichsbahn locomotives are on display:

  • Class 52 steam locomotive 52 5448-7
  • Class SVT 137 Diesel multiple unit 137 225
  • Class E04 AC electric locomotive E04 01
  • Class E44 AC electric locomotive E44 046
  • Class E94 AC electric locomotive E94 056

But the reason for the difference in track height eluded me – the answers didn’t seem right.

Apparently the platforms were raised, because in the pictures it is quite flat. I also remember that you had to climb up to the cars and jumped down when you were a kid.

Probably on this platform, for historical reasons, it has been refurbished to show how things used to be.

Until finally – one that made sense:

Because underneath the “elevated track” is the loading dock, garbage disposal, etc.

You can see for yourself if you just turn into the parking garage, or look from outside the station hall.

I think the track was used only as a “stylistic agent” with everything looks like the other tracks.

Further reading

Posted in Trains | Tagged , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Freight trams of Europe

Trams are usually used to carry passengers, but across Europe there are a handful of tramway networks that also carry freight.

Pure freight

The best known in the English speaking world is the ‘CarGoTram‘ of Dresden, Germany.

 CarGoTram auf der Löbtauer Straße in Dresden (photo by kaffeeeinstein, via Wikimedia Commons)
Photo by kaffeeeinstein, via Wikimedia Commons

The CarGoTram commenced operation in 2001, transporting car parts 4km to Volkswagen’s “Transparent Factory” located in central Dresden, from a road served logistics centre. Each bidirectional trams is made up of five units, with services operating along the same tracks used by passenger services.

Lesser known is the ‘Cargo-Tram‘ of Zurich, Switzerland.

Cargo-Tram outside Zürich Hauptbahnhof (photo by Sunil Prasannan, via Wikimedia Commons)
Photo by Sunil Prasannan, via Wikimedia Commons

This service commenced operation in 2003, travelling around the city collecting rubbish and recyclables from pick up points along the way. A redired passenger trams operates the service, towing two flat wagons loaded with rubbish containers.

A different type of freight service was the ‘Güterbim‘ of Vienna, Austria.


Pressefoto Votav via Vienna City Administration

A trial service commenced operation in 2005, transporting freight to Wiener Linien’s tram depots around Vienna, such as driver’s seats, wheelsets and brake blocks. A specially converted works trailer wagon was converted to carry the freight, towed behind a workshop tram. The trial ended in 2007, but I can’t find out what happened to it.

For tramway maintenance

Converting trams to assist with track maintenance is common.

This unit is based out of the Leonova depot (№2) in Saint Petersburg, Russia.

Photo by Mikhail Blyoskin, via Wikimedia Commons
Photo by Mikhail Blyoskin, via Wikimedia Commons

This converted tram is from Nizhny Novgorod, Russia.


Photo by Павел Падалкин, via Wikimedia Commons

This cut down passenger tram is from Tula, Russia.

Photo by Artem Svetlov, via Wikimedia Commons
Photo by Artem Svetlov, via Wikimedia Commons

Blurring the line between trams and trains

But the strangest operation I found was in Kharkov, the second-largest city in Ukraine, where they once used miniature electric locomotives to move mainline freight wagons through the streets.


Photo by Константин Марков, via Харьков транспортный

The “Харьков транспортный” website describes the history of this service:

Operation of tram electric locomotives began in Kharkiv in 1932, when the tram industry received two industrial electric locomotives of the type EPU (Electric Locomotive Industrial Narrow), manufactured by the Moscow Dynamo plant. Such electric locomotives were produced in the years 1926-1938 specifically to work on tram lines and access roads of industrial enterprises and fed from a 550-V contact network.

For many years, electric locomotives were used to deliver rail cars with cargo intended for the Kharkov confectionery factory “Kharkovchanka”. The latter is located one kilometer from the tram-railway “gate” of the station “Kharkov-Passazhirsky”, opposite the former Cargo depot. Wagons were transported along Chebotarskaya Street, where electric locomotives and passenger trams for a long time worked side by side, practically not interfering with each other.

In the second half of the 1990s, due to the fact that such carriages heavily worn out the rails and created problems for the passenger movement, a certain period of time (from 12:00 to 13:00 on weekdays) was allocated, when the passenger cars were sent to a detour along Kotlov street and a pier on Krasnoarmeiskaya street, and electric locomotives could quickly and unhindered to proceed with cargo. After the transportation was over, the condition of the route was checked and the passenger trams again followed their route.

In July 2001, the tram branch along the Chebotarskaya street was closed to the passenger traffic, after which it was regularly used only to deliver wagons to the confectionery factory. In 2009, the factory abandoned the services of “Gorelectrotrans”. The remaining “no-business” electric locomotives were put off from operation and relocated to the territory of the Saltovskaya tram depot. A few years later these cars were decommissioned.

Similar operations also occurred in other cities across the former Soviet Union, with Трамвайно-железнодорожный гейт (tram-rail gate) being the unofficial Russian langauge term for the junction of the tram and rail networks.

And some historical examples

Saint Petersburg, Russia operated a large network of freight trams until 1997.


Photo via Museum of Electrical Transport, Saint Petersburg

Here’s a quick summary via Russian language Wikipedia.

Petrograd was the first city in Russia where freight electric transport was established using trams, following the construction laid in the fall of 1914 to the Warsaw freight station. The second cargo branch in 1915 connected the warehouses in Badaevsky to Zabalkansky Prospekt. These early freight trams consisted of two platforms attached to a motorised tramcar that acted as a locomotive. Load capacity of each platform was 4 tons. By the end of 1921, the total length of the special cargo way had reached 13 km, and the number of 4-ton cargo platforms had increased by another 100. The average annual volume of traffic in 1918-1921. was about 250 thousand tons.

The place of 4-ton platforms of pre-revolutionary times began to come 10-ton. Thanks to this, in 1930, 40 tram freight trains carried 491.6 thousand tons of cargo. By 1933, the length of its tracks had almost doubled, reaching 5.9 km, including 3.6 km of tramways and 2.3 km of railways.

By 1940 the freight tram fleet consisted of 67 motor and 177 towed cargo platforms. The number of tram per route reached 43, each with a payload of at least 30 tons. In addition to 10-ton wagons, new 12 and 15 tons capacity wagons were entered service.

In 1950, tram trucking reached 1942.7 thousand tons, and in subsequent years remained at the same level. The cargo tram depot in 1956 daily issued on the line 47 trains, which served more than 20 enterprises and organisations of Leningrad. The amount of work done by the park for this year amounted to 40 thousand railway cars.

The maintenance of enterprises by freight trams was discontinued in 1997. The last serviced enterprise was Sevkabel , which has a base on the right bank of the Neva on the territory of the Neva freight station.

Moscow also had a freight tram system, but it was abandoned much earlier.


Photo via retromap.ru

Again, a quick summary via Russian language Wikipedia.

Cargo trams operated over the Moscow tram network from 1915 to 1972. The route was completed in May 1915 from the railway station of the Paveletsky railway station to the “Business Yard” beside Varvarsky Gate.

From 1916 to 1919, the number of freight cars grew from 51 to 167 units. During 1918, 15 motor and 24 trailer cars were converted into freight ones. In 1919, about 17 km of new routes were laid for freight traffic, and followed in 1920 by another 10 km, but from the middle of 1921 the volume of traffic began to decrease in connection with the transition to road transport.

At the end of 1931 there were 139 freight cars in the Moscow tram. The cars were used for the largest construction projects: the Moscow Metro and the Palace of Soviets. Specially constructed trains-trailers with the carrying capacity of 50 tons were used for transportation of metal trusses for the construction of the Crimean Bridge, the Bolshoy Krasnokholmsky Bridge, and the Great Ustyinsky Bridge.

The heyday of the freight tram came during the Great Patriotic War , when practically all trucks were mobilized to the front, by 1942 the total length of purely freight branches was 38 km.

After the end of the war, the volume of traffic began to decline sharply – in 1953 they became seven times less than in 1945. In 1951, 9.3 km of cargo branches were dismantled. Some revival occurred in 1954-1955, when it was decided to use freight trams on housing construction. In 1956, 127 freight cars were on the inventory, in 1960 – 67, in 1966 – 30, and in 1971 – only 7 wagons.

In 1972, the freight tram was officially discontinued – the last 7 cars, which were already used only for the needs of the tram network, were transferred from freight to service trams.

Footnote

The German term for ‘freight tram’ is Güterstraßenbahn – German-language Wikipedia has a summary of former operations in western Europe.

Posted in Trams | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Transporting spent nuclear fuel on the Russian Railways

With a large fleet of nuclear power stations used for electricity generation across Russia, there is also an increasing quantity of отработанного ядерного топлива (spent nuclear fuel) needing to be safely transported to reprocessing or storage facilities, where the useful material can be reused and the remnant radioactivity can be safely managed for the thousands of years required for it to naturally decay. The chosen model of transport – train.


Photo via atomic-energy.ru

The irradiated fuel assemblies are loaded into transport casks inside the nuclear power station, which are then loaded inside specially constructed rail wagons.


Photo via atomic-energy.ru

Heavier than a normal railway wagon thanks to the layers of steel shielding, multiple bogies are needed to spread the load.

Which can then be sent anywhere in Russia.

Footnote

Fresh fuel assemblies are also transported to Russian nuclear power plants by rail – here is a (Russian language) documentary on the process.

Further reading

The Bellona Foundation is an international environmental NGO based in Norway, and has written much about the history of Russia’s transport of spent nuclear fuel.

Russia received one more special train for spent nuclear fuel transportation
November 2003

The US-based Cooperative Threat Reduction Program sponsored construction of six special TK-VG-18-2 type rail cars. The rail cars for spent nuclear fuel passed all the required tests and were certified for operation. Each car can take two 40-tonn containers with spent nuclear fuel. The new train will allow to speed-up the spent nuclear fuel transportation to the storage and reprocessing points. Until recent time Russia had two nuclear trains with four cars each. The Norwegian Government sponsored the second train’s construction.

Transport of nuclear materials requires more public awareness and legislation
October 2006

In July 2006, activists from Greenpeace’s St. Petersburg office discovered several unguarded trains containing uranium hexafluoride at the station at Kapitolovo in the Leningrad Region, where Izotop is based. The train cars were parked directly next to passenger platforms. Moreover, Greenpeace measured the radiation dose on the platforms where passengers were standing at 800 microrontgens per hour, or more than 40 times the normal background radiation level.

“Nuclear and radiation safety is at a level such that transportation of nuclear materials presents no danger to the public,” Shishkin said. “A person would have to stand on the platform at Kapitolovo for 400 hours to receive the maximum yearly dose that would cause no harm to his health.”

Dmitry Artamonov, head of Greenpeace’s St. Petersburg office, disagreed with Shishkin’s reasoning.

“This sort of transportation could be a great present for terrorists, either as a source of nuclear materials, or as a direct target for an attack,” he said. “Such an attack could lead to very serious consequences, since it would not be too difficult to destroy the containers. And even without terrorists, an ‘everyday’ accident could produce an effect just the same.”

Radioactive waste train still in St. Petersburg – protesters threatened at gunpoint
March 2008

The protesters with Bellona and other Russian environmental groups were accosted by the guard bearing an AK-47, who cocked and pointed the weapon at the environmentalists who were filming the results of their radiation measurements – which exceeded background radiation levels by 30 times. The armed guard was travelling with the load as specified by law.

Bellona and Ecodefence have been following the load of uranium tails since it put into the port of St. Petersburg on Friday filled with waste from Germany’s Urenco enrichment facility in Gronau. Bellona and other Russian environmental groups demand the transport of the radioactive waste be ceased immediately.

Environmental protesters where hanging a banner emblazoned with the phrase “No to the import of nuclear waste” on the train platform in Avtovo, a thickly settled suburb of St. Petersburg where the train had come to a stop

Russia’s plan to move spent nuclear fuel to Siberia raises safety concerns – and fails to solve the mounting waste problem
December 2011

A special-purpose train carrying 80 tons of spent nuclear fuel (SNF) from Leningrad Nuclear Power Plant (NPP) near Russia’s second largest city of St. Petersburg is soon to head out to a closed town in Siberia – a first shipment in an envisioned large-scale SNF relocation project that environmentalists fear will turn Siberia into a nuclear dumpsite and drastically increase overall safety risks, while helping none to address the exacerbating threat of nuclear waste accumulation.

Up to 22,500 tons of spent nuclear fuel generated in Russia’s altogether eleven RBMK-1000 reactors still in operation may be relocated from the country’s European regions to Zheleznogorsk, on the banks of the river Yenisei. Two hundred and ninety “nuclear trains” will be required to transport that much waste – assuming that all three Russian NPPs employing this type of reactors will continue to operate beyond their design-basis useful life terms.

Decades of piled up nuclear fuel bids farewell to Andreyeva Bay
June 2017

During the 1990s a green four-car train would make the rounds every few months to Russia’s snowy Kola Peninsula to cart nuclear fuel and radioactive waste more than 3000 kilometers south from the Arctic to the Ural Mountains.

At the time, the lonely rail artery was the center of a logistical and financial bottleneck that made Northwest Russia, home of the once feared Soviet nuclear fleet, a toxic dumping ground shrouded in military secrecy.

Infrastructure, technology and the Kremlin were failing to keep up with the mushrooming catastrophe. The nuclear fuel train could only bear away 588 fuel assemblies at a time three or four times a year – little more than the contents of one nuclear submarine per trip. Even if the train ran on schedule, removing broken or deformed nuclear fuel elements at Andreyeva Bay was still seen as impossible.

Spent nuclear fuel trains elsewhere

Countries who operate nuclear reactors of Soviet design often export their spent nuclear fuel to Russia – Ukraine and Bulgaria have agreements in place; while including Finland, Hungary, Slovakia and the Czech Republic have done so in the past.

Canada’s Nuclear Waste Management Organization published a report in 2015 estimating spent nuclear fuel consignments worldwide:

  • Canada: five per year by road.
  • ​USA: 3000 to 2015 by road, rail, and ship.
  • Sweden: 40 per year by ship.
  • UK: 300 per year by rail.
  • ​France: 250 per year by rail.
  • Germany: 40 per year by rail.
  • ​Japan: 200 to 2013 by ship.

A Twitter bot tracks the progress of progress of spent nuclear fuel trains around the United Kingdom.

Posted in Trains | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

Circular station vestibules in Russia

Russian metro stations are best known for the ornate design at platform level, but the entrance vestibules back at ground level can also be quite amazing.

This is the original entrance to Park Kultury station, opened along with the first phase of the Moscow Metro in 1935.

Looking across the road to a Moscow Metro entrance vestibule

The vestibule building is an ornate rotunda.

Circular entrance rotunda on the Moscow Metro

Housing a pair of curved staircases inside.

One way traffic up a staircase on the Moscow Metro

Continuing the theme is the Saint Petersburg Metro, which has a collection of 1960s stations that share the same circular entrance vestibule design.

Park Pobedy station of Saint Petersburg Metro (photo by Florstein, via Wikimedia Commons)
Photo by Florstein, via Wikimedia Commons

the work of architects A.S. Getskin and V.P. Shuvalova. Three remain today: Park Pobedy, Elektrosila and Frunzenskaya.

The fourth example was Gorkovskaya station, which has since been rebuilt.

Station vestibule at Gorkovskaya (Го́рьковская) station on line 2

Originally opened in 1963, in 2009 the original circular concrete ‘bunker’ that houses the station centre was replaced something at looks more like a UFO!

Station vestibule at Gorkovskaya (Го́рьковская) station on line 2

Posted in Trains | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Kiev’s metro tunnel that is actually a bridge

On the Kiev Metro there is a curious section of tunnel that doesn’t run underground – instead the concrete tube is carried over a deep railway cutting by a bridge, only to head straight back underground.


Image by AMY, via Wikimedia Commons

Called the Гаванський шляхопровід (Harbour Overpass) the bridge was completed in 1971 to carry the M1 Sviatoshynsko–Brovarska line of the Kiev Metro inside a concrete tunnel over the Kyiv-Volynsky – Pochayna mainline railway, with the four eastbound lanes of Проспект Перемоги (Prospect Peremohy) passing over the top.

But for passengers on the metro, the Harbour Overpass is a non-event – the concrete tube means trains pass between Nyvky (Нивки) and Beresteiska (Берестейська) stations in the dark, with nothing to suggest they have momentarily returned to ground level.

Island platform at Nyvky (Нивки) station on Line 1

Further reading

Posted in Trains | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

Ghost stations of the Kiev Metro

Hidden beneath the streets of Kiev, Ukraine is something unusual – a trio of unused metro stations that see train pass through, but never stop.

Львiвська Брама (Lvivska Brama)

Львiвська Брама (Lvivska Brama) is the best known of the three ghost stations.

Interior of the ghost station Lvivska Brama on the Kiev Metro (photo by AMY 81-412, via Wikimedia Commons)
Photo by AMY 81-412, via Wikimedia Commons

Work on the station began in the early-1990s as part of the northern extension of the M3 Syretsko–Pecherska line, but due to the lack of funds and indecision about the ground level entrance to the station at Lviv Square, work on the station stopped.

The metro line through the station opened in 1996, but the station lays empty today, the two platform tunnels and central hall of ‘three-vault deep pylon” design visible to passengers onboard passing trains. Access to the station is sometimes granted, with one notable use being a 2013 fashion show held by Ukrainian brand “Obrani”.


Photo via Gennadiy Moysenko

Various plans have been floated to complete the station, the most recent listing a 2018 completion date. This would require the construction of an escalator tunnel to the surface, station buildings at ground level, and fitout of the incomplete platforms.

Теличка (Telychka)

Теличка (Telychka) is the second ghost station on the Kiev Metro.

Interior of the ghost station Telychka on the Kiev Metro (Photo by AnkelKoss, via Wikimedia Commons)
Photo by AnkelKoss, via Wikimedia Commons

Work on the station began in the early-1990s as part of a southern extension of the M3 Syretsko–Pecherska line, but due to the industrial nature of the area the decision was made to only build the shell of a station. Of Колонная станция мелкого заложения (shallow column station) design, two flanking platforms were provided, easily visible to passengers of passing trains.

Various proposals have been made to turn the shell into a finished station, but all have been dependant on the redevelopment of the surrounding industrial area as a new residential precinct.

Герцена (Herzen)

Герцена (Herzen) is the least developed of the Kiev Metro ghost stations.


Photo via zametkin.kiev.ua

The construction of the station began in the mid-1990s as part of a northern extension of the M3 Syretsko–Pecherska line, under the working title of Заго́рівська (Zagorovskaya). The economic downturn lead to progress stalling, with the decision made to abandon the provision of a station at the site. Trains commenced passing through in 2000 with the extension to Дорогожичи (Dorohozhychi) station.

Today the only sign of the station is a ventilation shaft provided at the site, along with a traction power substation.

Sources

All are either Ukrainian or Russian language.

Львiвська Брама (Lvivska Brama):

Теличка (Telychka):

Герцена (Herzen)

Posted in Trains | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment