Don't forget to turn on subtitles! 😊

Don't forget that famous actor Jean Lefvre, was a troleybus driver at his begining working.

We've been proud of our peculiarity for a long time in Limoges. Trolleybuses make so much sense, who's weird now ! 🙂

When I visited Oradour-sur-Glane (the site of the June 1944 Massacre by the SS and now a memorial to the evils of Nazism and Fascism) I was surprised that this village 25 km from Limoges had before the war a tram service from Limoges going up the main road. In fact a lot of villagers were saved because they worked in Limoges sadly after the war these services were eventually withdrawn. I am however pleased they have a successful trolleybus network and trolleybuses are good for going up hills and steep gradients and from my memory of Limoges it was pretty hilly round there.

@urbanmobilityexplained

7 ай бұрын

Thanks for your comment and for sharing your experience!

SanFran uses them all the time! Also a very hilly city, of course.

In my not-so-hilly 50k inhabitants hometown, they had 1 or 2 tramways lines from the late 1800's up to the 1950's, then they switched to trolleybuses, on the same lines. In the meantime, the city expanded a lot with many new areas requiring public transports. In the early 70's they finally chose to update the transport network and create multiple new lines... I guess both the trolleybus infrastructure cost (overhead lines), and Vetra company being off-business triggered a change to diesel buses. "Green" was no criteria back then. If Berliet and Renault had taken over Vetra's production earlier, maybe we would still have trolleybuses at least on some of our lines. It might seem "overplayed" to some, but I do find these trolleybus overhead lines ugly. Tramways appear to be too expensive for a city this size, gas-powered buses are a good cost-efficiency/flexibility/noise trade-off, I would prefer an emissions-free solution though.

Very interesting. Thanks for sharing.

@urbanmobilityexplained

7 ай бұрын

Thanks a lot for watching!

They still use trolleybuses because they are better than buses. I wish more cities would use them.

(english follows) ce monde est absurde. Alors qu'entre les 2 guerres et durant les années 40 et 50, la plupart des villes françaises avaient des tramways, toutes ces villes ont opté pour des bus diesels durant les années 60, alors qu'un tramway et un trolleybus ont l'énorme avantage d'êtres économiques et surtout, ne produisent pas de fumées (et de nos jours le bruit entre aussi en ligne de compte). Pourquoi toutes ces villes ont choisi des moyens de transport bruyants, polluant (même dans les années 60, la fumée des moteurs diesel était un problème) et guère plus rentables (le carburant ne coûtait pas cher à l'époque mais l'entretien était et est toujours moins cher sur de l'électrique) alors que les réseaux pour alimenter les tramways et les trolleybus existaient? Aujourd'hui tout le monde semble s’émerveiller de l'ingéniosité des villes qui ont gardé ces réseaux et ces moyens de transport (à Limoges la raison est simple : la ville était communiste du sortir de la guerre jusqu'aux années 2010, les autorités n'ont pas voulu investir dans des moyens de transport plus modernes) et désormais on redécouvre les bienfaits des moyens de transport en commun à propulsion électrique (la ville de Paris s'est équipée que très récemment d'un tramway alors que ce réseau de tramway existait avant le deuxième guerre mondiale et il à fallu investir des sommes énormes pour remettre en service un système qui fonctionnait très bien lors de son démantèlement) Pourquoi avoir détruit ces réseaux il y à 60 ans et de devoir être obligé de les reconstruire aujourd'hui alors qu'il suffisait de les laisser, de les entretenir et de s'en servir? Aujourd'hui il faut dépenser des fortunes pour remettre en service ces réseaux this world is absurd. While between the 2 wars and during the 40s and 50s, most French cities had trams, all these cities opted for diesel buses during the 60s, while a tram and a trolleybus have the enormous advantage of economic beings and especially, do not produce smoke (and nowadays noise is also a factor). Why all these cities chose noisy, polluting means of transport (even in the 60s, smoke from diesel engines was a problem) and hardly more profitable (fuel was cheap at the time but maintenance was and still is cheaper on electric) while networks to power trams and trolleybuses existed? Today everyone seems to marvel at the ingenuity of the cities that have kept these networks and means of transport (in Limoges the reason is simple: the city was communist from the end of the war until the 2010s, the authorities did not want to invest in more modern means of transport) and now rediscovering the benefits of electric-powered public transit (the city of Paris has only very recently equipped itself with a tram while this tramway network existed before the Second World War and it took huge investments to put back into service a system that worked very well when it was dismantled) Why did they destroy these networks 60 years ago and have to rebuild them today when all you had to do was leave them alone, maintain them and use them? Today it is necessary to spend fortunes to put back in service these networks

Clean, quiet, now recharging logistics, don’t catch fire like London battery buses 🤣

why the video picture uses a bus from Geneva (Switzerland)?

@urbanmobilityexplained

2 ай бұрын

It is from Limoges, France!

@maximemax8992

2 ай бұрын

Sorry i meant in the thumbnail, you can clearly read on the bus « transports publics genevois » 😅

On peut pas faire des trolleybus APS?

Didn't they have a tram that ran into Oradour Sur Glan which was destroyed by the German SS.

@urbanmobilityexplained

2 ай бұрын

Yes, you are right!