|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
General information
|
|
|
General criteria
|
|
|
Environmental criteria
|
|
|
Economic criteria
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vehicle - fix costs: medium |
|
|
|
|
|
At this stage of development, the active running gear will be more costly than conventional technologies, but by the time of acceptance and technological maturity there will be significant reductions. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vehicle - running costs: significant reduction |
|
|
|
|
|
- Reduced energy costs
- Reduced maintenance: reduced wear of wheels and rails / reduced complexity
(Reduced maintenance could especially be an issue for low speed systems
(trams, metros, light rail) having tighter curves)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Infrastructure - fix costs: none |
|
|
|
|
|
(no details available) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Infrastructure - running costs: reduced |
|
|
|
|
|
Minor reduction due to reduced track wear. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Scale effects: high |
|
|
|
|
|
High, if introduced on a broad scale. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amortisation: (no data) |
|
|
|
|
|
(no details available) |
|
|
Application outside railway sector (this technology is railway specific)
|
|
|
Overall rating
|