MTB-82
| MTB-82 | |
|---|---|
 |
|
| Number of pieces: | about 5000 |
| Manufacturer: | Work No. 82 / Zavod imeni Uritskogo |
| Years of construction: | 1945 to 1960 or 1961 |
| Years of use: | 1945 to 1975 |
| Length: | 10,365 mm |
| Width: | 2615 mm |
| Height (with lowered bars) : | 3670 mm |
| Wheelbase: | 6000 mm |
| Ground clearance: | 170 mm |
| Turning circle: | 12.7 m |
| Empty mass: | 9.25 t |
| Top speed: | 55 km / h |
| Starting acceleration: | 1.1 m / s² |
| Engine type: | DK-201 / DK-202B |
| Power system : | 600 volts direct current |
| Hourly output : | 74, 80 or 86 kW |
| Control: | Contactor control |
| Brake: | Resistance brake, direct-acting compressed air brake, hand parking brake |
| Seats: | 38 |
| Standing room: | 48 (eight passengers per m²) |
MTB-82 ( Russian МТБ-82 ) is the name of a Soviet trolleybus type . The solo cars were originally built by the armaments company Sawod No. 82 (Завод №82, plant no. 82) developed and manufactured in the Moscow suburb of Tushino . Series production was relocated to the civil enterprise Zavod imeni Urizkogo , abbreviated SiU, in Saratov Oblast , RSFSR , in 1951 . Today this company operates under the name Trolsa
The series designation is made up of the abbreviation for M oskauer T rolley B together us and the number of developers working. The employees of the transport company gave this car the nickname "Emtebeschka", which is a belittling of the abbreviation in Russian .
The Sawod No. 82 designed the type in 1945 to meet the requirements of the Soviet transport companies for trolleybuses. With regard to contemporary vehicle construction, the MTB-82 had conservative or partially outdated technical solutions. These included the heavy load-bearing floor frame with removable car body and the non-automatic shooter control . The series was considered uncomfortable for drivers and passengers. At the same time, however, they had a simple, robust, durable construction and were reliable if the undemanding maintenance was carried out correctly. These properties, together with its widespread use and its long service life, made the design economically successful. After plant no. 82 resumed armaments production in 1951, the SiU continued building the type. In 1960 this manufacturer was able to complete the work on the successor model SiU-5 . Thereupon the production of the MTB-82 was stopped in the same year.
In total, both manufacturers built around 5000 MTB-82s, 3746 units of which were SiU. The vehicles ran in many Soviet cities and were also exported to some Central and Eastern European countries. Around ten years after the end of series production of the MTB-82, the number of operational trolleybuses of this type began to rapidly decrease. The delivery of numerous SiU-5s, later also SiU-9s and Škoda 9Trs , made the maintenance of the obsolete vehicles superfluous, so that the MTB-82s disappeared from the streets by 1975. Individual copies have been preserved as museum vehicles or technical monuments .
history
prehistory
The Soviet Union's first trolleybus network began operating in Moscow in 1933 . This new form of public transport quickly found acceptance both from government officials and from passengers. Even before the outbreak of the Great Patriotic War in June 1941, the trolleybuses appeared in Leningrad , Rostov-on-Don , Kiev , Tbilisi , Kharkov and Stalino . Even the beginning of the war did not stop this development; in the war years, new trolleybus companies were opened in the cities of Baku , Kuybyshev , Chelyabinsk , Sverdlovsk , Kirov , Alma-Ata and Odessa . The vehicles of the JaTB series manufactured in Yaroslavl formed the basis of the Soviet trolleybus fleet. Its official name was the abbreviation of Yes roslawler T rolley b us. There were four models that were produced in series: JaTB-1 , JaTB-2 , JaTB-3 and JaTB-4 . The JaTB-1 and JaTB-2, as well as the most built JaTB-4, were ordinary monoplane, whereas the JaTB-3, which was produced in small numbers, was a double-decker . The Moscow trolleybus company also owned a few imported vehicles of British origin, as well as cars from the earlier LK series. The latter was the first trolleybus design developed and manufactured in the USSR and suffered from many technical deficiencies.
During the war years, all trolleybus production was stopped and the new companies used vehicles that had been withdrawn from Moscow. The former manufacturer of the JaTB series in Yaroslavl was converted to the construction of engines and artillery tugs when the war broke out . In 1943, an attack by the Luftwaffe almost completely destroyed production. When the war ended, the rebuilt factory did not return to trolleybus production, but the transport companies that opened in large cities had a large demand for vehicles. As a solution to this problem, the state leadership issued an order to organize the production of trolleybus vehicles at Plant No. 82 in the Moscow suburb of Tushino . During the peacetime period, this factory remained temporarily without orders - the Soviet air forces had a sufficient number of piston-engined aircraft, but the jet aircraft required were still in the early stages of development and were not ready for series production. So this decision helped the industry in two ways: On the one hand, the construction of new trolleybuses was made possible, at the same time the factory staff remained busy.
development
The development of civil vehicles was resumed as early as 1944, whereby the models from the USA at that time had a great influence on the thinking of the Soviet designers. The large deliveries under the lending and leasing laws during the war, the licenses acquired in the United States for engines and other devices for the company's own automotive industry , and the many specialists working there resulted in a very strong orientation towards the American engineering school. Many of the special features of vehicles from the United States were adopted by Soviet industry. The US trolleybuses have also been the subject of extensive investigations. The most advanced models in particular had spacious self-supporting all-metal car bodies and electrical equipment with automatic contactor control . However, in the Soviet Union the most simple and inexpensive solutions were required that could be ready for production in a short time. As a result, the chassis of the somewhat modified JaTB-5 pre-war prototype went into series production at Plant No. 82. The changes to the construction of the floor frame , suspension and power transmission compared to the original design were designed to accommodate a new car body . The non-automatic contactor control remained unchanged in its mode of operation as it was already implemented with the JaTB-4. Overall, the combination of these technical components can be seen as a conservative or outdated design, but for the Soviet trolleybus construction it had an advanced component - the all-metal car body. The pre-war models like the JaTB-4 were fitted with a quickly wearing wooden car body. The outer shape was based on the JaTB-4 with its sloping two-edged front that was reminiscent of an iron.
The sides with two rows of windows (large rectangular ones for seated passengers, small oval ones for standing passengers) and the rear were similar to those of the American buses or PCC trams of the time. However, the foreign influence on the external design remained limited. The car body was assembled from a light frame and riveted steel plates . In 1945 the first series-produced MTB-82s finally left plant no.82.
In the next year, the manufacturer switched to the subsequent and last variant, the MTB-82D version. The steel car body of the original MTB-82 was considered too heavy by the engineers, so a new, lighter version with a cladding made of aluminum plates was developed. The front part, which looks like an iron, was replaced by a vertical and flat front. The power of the main motor was also increased and the corresponding setting of the contactor control was made. There were no further modifications to the design until the end of series production in 1960 or 1961.
Serial production
Plant No. 82 quickly organized the production of the car bodies for the MTB-82. As early as 1945, their number exceeded the number of chassis available for assembly. Therefore, fully assembled car bodies were used to convert the pre-war JaTB-1, JaTB-2 or JaTB-4 trolleybuses. The wooden body was removed and all mechanical, pneumatic and electrical equipment on the chassis was fully repaired (but without replacing them with more modern samples). After this work, the new car body was installed on the renovated chassis. The trolleybuses modified in this way directly from Plant No. 82 were given the designation MTB-82M. Outwardly, they did not differ from the "real" MTB-82. Some of these bodies were sold to other transport companies for similar upgrades to the old vehicle fleet or were provided with government support.
Another use for the car body parts was with the tram type MTW-82 . The inside of the tram was completely different from the trolleybus, which it looked like on the outside; the MTW-82 in particular was not developed on the basis of the MTB-82. The Moscow wagon repair plant SWARS designed the floor frame, the bogies as well as the pneumatic and electrical systems of the MTW-82 independently of Plant No. 82. Only afterwards did the engineers propose an unusual solution for using the car body parts of the MTB-82, which were available in large quantities, for the new tram vehicle. It also promised a saving in manufacturing costs for both cars. The first experiences with an elongated trolleybus body on a tram chassis were not very successful - the flat and wide bow made it difficult for two vehicles to meet in the numerous curved tracks on the old narrow streets of Moscow. To remedy this problem, the mostly built variant of the MTW-82 was given a narrower front with sloping surfaces on the sides of the body. This reduced the number of common car body parts. Nevertheless, both vehicles were built in Plant No. 82 and shared many components of the other equipment, for example the passenger seats, the electric heating, light bulbs and ceiling lights, the pneumatic drive for the windshield wipers, some valves, the measuring devices and so on. That was a positive factor for the savings mentioned above.
At the end of the 1940s, Plant No. 82 achieved a stable output of tram and trolleybus vehicles. With both types of public transport becoming more widespread during the post-war reconstruction, the demand from the Soviet economy for such vehicles remained steady and increasing. But tensions in international relations between the former allies worsened during World War II . The Soviet government decided to convert Plant No. 82 back to the manufacture of military aircraft and missile weapons . Civil production should be given to other companies. The Rischski Wagonostroitelny Sawod (Rigaer Waggonbauwerk, Latvian Rīgas Vagonbūves Rūpnīca , former Fenix AG) received the order for the construction of the MTW-82. The resolution of the Council of Ministers of the USSR No. 1761 of February 28, 1950 obliged the Wagonostroitelny Sawod imeni Urizkogo ("Moissei Urizki" wagon building) in the city of Engels to organize the large-scale production of trolleybuses. In August 1951, the first MTB-82s built there were delivered to the customer. A total of 21 vehicles were completed this year. After the start of assembly line production , the plant, now renamed Sawod imeni Urizkogo (Urizki-Werk, SiU for short), was able to fulfill the plans to build the required number of trolleybuses for export and for its own use.
The design of the MTB-82 built by the SiU remained unchanged, only the T-shaped emblem of plant no. 82 was replaced by a five-pointed star. There were no further improvements to the design of the vehicle, all efforts were concentrated on the project of a successor type to be worked out by the SiU engineering team. The main innovations of this new development should be a spacious self-supporting car body and an indirect fully automatic contactor control. This process ran over a few intermediate stages and came to an end in 1959 with the SiU-5 trolleybus . It was accepted by the state commission for series production, even if the design had some teething problems. These were fixed during production on the assembly line, but the MTB-82s continued to be built until the SiU-5 reached an acceptable level in mass production. In 1960 the order was issued to completely convert to the construction of the SiU-5, but the operational sequence was "sluggish" with regard to the consumption of the previously manufactured and stored spare parts. Completed MTB-82s were also stored for some time and still delivered to trolleybus companies after the end of series production. As a result, the last ones were not sent to their recipients until 1961. SiU built a total of 3746 vehicles of this type.
The total number of MTB-82s built is not exactly recorded. The documents of the armaments factory no. 82 are likely to be kept confidential to this day, for the same reason the trams and trolleybus vehicles built there were not given a nameplate with a factory number. On the basis of the low capacities and the production time in Plant No. 82 compared with the SiU, the total production is estimated at 5000 vehicles.
commitment
From 1945 up to and including 1955, the MTB-82 was delivered to all Soviet trolleybus companies that existed at the time under the supervision of the central control. Only in the last five years of series production did an alternative appear. In 1955, the local SWARS wagon repair plant in Moscow began to build the TBES trolleybuses. From 1957, the Kiev factory KSET participated in the production of this model. The Soviet leadership had also decided to import the Czechoslovak Škoda 8Tr vehicles for some trolleybus companies in the Baltic States , western Ukraine and the Crimea . Finally, in 1959, the SiU-5 , the successor to the MTB-82 in large-scale production, was included in the range of types for the trolleybus fleet of Soviet cities. But by the end of production of the MTB-82, their number (including the TBES and Škoda 8Tr) was comparatively small. After the JaTB vehicles were retired, the MTB-82 remained the only type in many cities for a decade or more.
The high production figures led to the dominance of the MTB-82 among the trolleybus models in the USSR. Even after the start of serial production of the SiU-5, their share remained significant for a long time. In the USSR, MTB-82 drove in the following cities:
|
|
|
In many Soviet cities, trolleybuses began using this type between 1947 and 1955. Even a few years later, after the introduction of the new types, the MTB-82s were still well represented. In many companies they were gradually replaced by the types SiU-5, 8Tr or 9Tr in the 1960s . Their technical condition was still quite good; they were retired due to their technical backwardness. Compared with the successor models, they were fraught with disadvantages from the point of view of the driver and the passengers. Only the mechanics were dissatisfied with this, as the robust and simple design of the MTB-82 required significantly less maintenance and repairs.
In some cases, the MTB-82 continued to operate until the 1970s, before they were finally replaced by the next but one generation of trolleybuses - the SiU-9 . As a rule, the infrastructure of a depot or repair shop that was unsuitable for other types of trolleybuses was the reason for the MTB-82 to be in service for a long time. According to the Soviet classification, the SiU-5 and SiU-9 as well as the imported Škoda vehicles were trolleybuses with a large passenger capacity and had larger dimensions than the MTB-82, which was classified as a trolleybus with medium passenger capacity. As a result, exits, vehicle hangars , lifting platforms and workshop pits that were built for the MTB-82 without being designed for future larger models could not simply be used by other vehicles. The necessary renovation of the old depots and the construction of new buildings required financial support and time. Such a situation existed, for example, in Gorki, where in the isolated network segment in the high-lying part of the city, the last series of SiU-5Ds next to the first SiU-9s could not begin traffic until 1972, after a new depot was built. Since the local trolleybus depot was opened in 1947, only the MTB-82s have operated there. Every expansion of this network segment was accompanied by the relocation of the old vehicles of this type from the trolleybus network in the Sormowo district. In Sormowo they were replaced by SiU-5, because the depot there could work with the new fleet.
There was also no need for open-plan cars in individual cities with relatively low passenger volumes.
Double traction and trailer operation
As a rule, the MTB-82 was used alone, but occasionally it was also used with trailers . The first attempts in this regard were carried out with decommissioned buses that served as non-motorized sidecars. At the beginning of the 1960s, the type SiS-155 was used in Moscow and Tbilisi for this purpose, in the Crimea the SiL-158 , whereas in Leningrad MTB-82 without engines was used as a trailer.
The experience gained in this way facilitated the development of double trolleybuses . In June 1966, an MTB-82 team was set up in Kiev on a trial basis, initially with the second car without a drive. However, this caused the engine of the leading vehicle to be overloaded and required the development of a multiple controller. This was available from September 1966 and made it possible to use the double traction on a regular line, the world's first ever. The power was drawn by the leading vehicle, and the brakes also had to be synchronized. In contrast to later train formations with other types, the 21.73 meter long MTB-82 double units could be separated at the end points for operation outside of rush hour . In 1967 another double traction was built in Kiev, which was subjected to intensive testing.
The compilation of further double traction took place at the KSET ( Russian Киевский завод электротранспорта им. Дзержинского , abbreviated КЗЭТ - German Kiewer " Dzerzhinsky " -Werk for electric public transport) that also works. From November 1967 to the end of 1968 a further 47 trains were completed there, with a total of 49 MTB-82 double units being formed in Kiev. The MTB-82 double units were replaced by Škoda-9Tr double units until 1973 . There were no other standard MTB-82 double tractions, in 1970 Moscow put together a double traction for test purposes.
The advantage of the double traction was the approximately one-third higher transport capacity compared to an articulated vehicle and the lower staffing requirement compared to two vehicles traveling individually. Compared to the combination of trolleybus and trailer, the trolleybus double traction had the advantage of double motorization and the associated better driving dynamics.
export
The MTB-82 has also been exported to some Central and Eastern European countries, including Bulgaria , Hungary and Romania . Ten copies came to the Bulgarian capital Sofia in 1947, and Plovdiv received some as well . The Budapest trolleybus received a total of 53 copies between 1949 and 1952, with the company numbers T100 to T152. The trolleybus Bucharest in 1949 eight cars were delivered with the numbers 4001 to 4008 for the operation opening in the fall. Five more cars went to the Timișoara trolleybus in 1953 , and they were taken out of service in 1964. According to other sources, they also frequented Yugoslavia .
technical description
Floor frame and car body
The MTB-82D was a vehicle with a load-bearing floor frame. This was assembled by means of welded and riveted connections from two longitudinal and eight transverse beams, as well as supports for various devices. Curved profile steels formed the side members, the design of the cross members depended on the respective function. The heavy girders that ensured the solid construction of the frame were bent steel tubes, while the planking of the car body was supported by light angle steel. The massive frame mainly fulfilled two functions: Firstly, only this frame absorbed static and dynamic mechanical loads and counteracted deformation. Secondly, almost all other important components and assemblies - the car body, the sprung wheel axles, the main motor, starting and braking resistors, the compressor with electric drive, the air tanks and the other pneumatic devices as well as the accumulator housing - were attached to various points on the floor frame.
The detachable car body of the MTB-82D was a completely welded frame made of curved, light profile steels of various thicknesses and cross-sections. This frame was covered with aluminum plates. As a result of the dissimilar materials in the construction of the car body, the frame and panels were riveted together. The connection of the different metals for the structure (aluminum as cladding and iron in the steel of the frame) should have caused galvanic corrosion of the metal with the higher standard potential , i.e. aluminum. But there were no complaints about this structural solution, the car body was sufficiently durable overall. A rubber runner was placed on the roof panel to reduce the risk of slipping and electric shock to the mechanics during maintenance. Inside, the car body was clad in painted veneer wood. The wooden floor was held on the floor frame and had a non-slip rubber covering . If necessary, for example after accident damage, the car body could be replaced with a new one.
The car body can be divided into three parts: driver's cab, passenger compartment and underfloor space. The floor frame with the equipment attached to it formed the underfloor space. For access to these parts and devices, there were some hatches and maintenance openings in the floor as well as a flap in the left side skirt. The electric motor was positioned between the axles and the power was transmitted to the rear axle via a cardan shaft . The vehicle had an entrance with a folding door behind each of the two axles . The door drives were installed in housings above the entrances. The driver's seat was to the left of the center of the car body and was separated from the passenger compartment by a bulkhead with an entrance door. The main engine's indirect control system contactors were installed in a housing on the left side of the driver's cab. The passenger area was formed by the small front door area by the driver's cab, the larger catchment area at the rear door, the running boards, the slightly raised conductor's seat and the two-seater upholstered benches in 2 + 2 seating with a central aisle. The MTB-82 was therefore designed for the flow of passengers , with entry at the rear. Some metal parts in the interior, such as grab bars and handles, have been chrome-plated for aesthetic reasons and to protect against corrosion .
From the outside, the body of the MTB-82D was painted in a single scheme at the factory: yellow roof, upper part with a "decorative pointed" on the front, blue central part and aprons; the MTB-82D in the Nizhny Novgorod Museum has such a paint job. All other variants were repainting as part of repairs in the various trolleybus operations. The “blue trolleybus”, in most cases an MTB-82, was typical of Soviet cities in the 1950s. It became a symbol of that time and found its way into the cultural scene. For example in documentary and art photography, in feature films and in the work of the poet and chansonnier Bulat Okudschawa .
Mechanical equipment
The mechanical parts of the MTB-82 were typical of the trolleybuses manufactured in the 1940s and 1950s. Included in the equipment
- the front axle with worm steering ;
- the rear drive axle with the differential gear of the subtype of the worm gear differential, which is rare in vehicle construction;
- the power transmission from the armature of the main engine to the differential gear consisting of the countershaft and cardan shaft ;
- the suspension of the axles on the car body - four semi-elliptical leaf springs , two per wheel axle;
- the drum brakes on all wheels
When braking, the contact pressure of the jaws on the drum was regulated by the pneumatic drive and brake return springs. There was also a hand parking brake with rods and levers for holding the vehicle on sloping roads. The use of the hand parking brake while driving was only permitted in the event of a technical failure of the pneumatic brake drive.
Electrical equipment
The electrical equipment of the MTB-82 can be divided into main and auxiliary circuits. The vehicle received the electrical energy from a two-pole overhead line via two conventional rotating pantographs without a retriever . It was designed for a line voltage of 600 volts direct current .
The catenary served as a direct power source for both circles. The DK-201 - double -wound drive motor ( DK-202B in the MTB-82D version), the starting and braking resistors , the reversing switch , the circuit breaker and the contactors of the control systems were the parts of the main circuit responsible for the drive. Another important component was a so-called “radio reactor”. Connected in series, this choke was used for radio interference suppression , i.e. to avoid undesired high-frequency emissions.
In addition to this equipment, there were a number of other consumers and devices that made up the auxiliary circuit:
- the interior lighting of the passenger compartment, the exterior lighting and lighting of the driver's cab;
- the direction indicators , brake lights and horn ;
- the compressor drive;
- the control system for the contactors of the main motor circuit;
- the heating of the passenger compartment;
- the test measurement equipment: voltage and current meter ;
- the stop signal from the passenger or conductor to the driver;
- a set of fuses for overcurrent protection of the devices in the auxiliary circuit.
This equipment was also powered by the 600 volt power source. Some of the components operated at relatively low voltages, e.g. B. the light bulbs of the interior lighting of the passenger compartment, as well as the control circuits of the contactors, designed for a working voltage of 100-120 volts. Nevertheless, the MTB-82 did not have a sub-system that was electrically separated from the overhead line to supply these consumers with the appropriate voltage. Instead, they were connected in series or through series resistors so that the voltage was reduced sufficiently. In the event of a power failure in the overhead line, the pantograph jumping off the wires or stopping with the pantograph lowered, the functionality of these devices was supported by accumulator batteries . Emergency travel with the help of the battery was not possible even for very short distances.
This auxiliary circuit structure had two major disadvantages. First, it was not completely safe in the event of a strong overvoltage in the vehicle's electrical system. Possible causes for such accidents were lightning strikes or high-voltage long-distance lines falling on trolleybus streams. The electromagnetic miniature circuit breaker had a certain reaction time and could not immediately separate the internal circuits of the trolleybus from the dangerous voltage. Before the shutdown without galvanic separation from the overhead line, the strong current could damage or even destroy the low-voltage devices. Second, the built-in series resistors only convert power into heat, which reduces the overall efficiency of the consumer.
The main part of the electrical equipment of the MTB-82 was the drive motor of the type DK-201 with 74 kilowatts nominal power, or 80 or 86 kilowatts strong type DK-202B in the sub-series MTB-82D. Both variants were DC machines and double- wound motors with a collector . The driver used the pedal travel switch to gradually regulate the amperage in the rotor and field windings of the motor and consequently controlled the acceleration when the trolleybus starts up and its travel speed. This device was the core of the indirect contactor control of the MTB-82. The position of the brake and accelerator pedals determined the switching on and off of the contactors, i.e. the current strength in the various circuits of the main motor and thus its operating mode. But the driver himself should observe the correct sequence of the manipulated variables when accelerating, driving at constant speed or braking. The drive switch had some protection against erroneous actions, e.g. B. against the simultaneous brake and accelerator pedal pressure, but it did not work automatically, so the control of the revolutions and torque of the drive motor for its safe operation remained the task of the driver. There were 11 start-up and three braking levels in the device; only the 8th and 11th start-up stages were suitable for unlimited use at constant (medium or high) speed. The electrical circuit at the 11th start-up stage was specially designed so that the revolutions of the armature of the traction motor do not increase further if the speed exceeds 55 km / h. The armature was connected to the rear axle by means of a countershaft and cardan shaft, in fact a form of recuperation brake was implemented in which the excess kinetic energy of the vehicle was converted into electrical current that was fed back into the overhead line. So the top speed of the MTB-82 was limited to 55 km / h. When actually braking, the motor and resistors act as an electrodynamic brake through a special circuit . In an emergency, the vehicle could brake down to five to ten kilometers per hour even if there was no voltage in the power supply system; complete standstill was achieved using the handbrake or compressed air brake. In contrast to tram vehicles, however, the resistance brake was only an aid due to its effect on the rear axle. The main braking mechanism of the MTB-82 was pneumatic.
Pneumatic equipment
The MTB-82 trolleybuses had pneumatic systems for operating the braking system , as well as the door drives and the windshield wipers . This equipment included a compressor (driven by an electric motor), an air filter , a manometer , three air tanks, a main air line with an electropneumatic pressure regulator , and mechanical safety and check valves . The normal operating pressure was in the range of 4 to 6 atmospheres . The safety valve was designed for emergency venting in the event of a dangerous rise in air pressure above eight atmospheres as a result of the failure of the pressure regulator. The non-return valves in the pneumatic system were used to maintain the air pressure in the event of a pressure loss through the leaking outlet valve of the switched off compressor. There were also other valves, fixed steel pipes, flexible rubber connecting hoses and the aforementioned compressed air consumers.
Substructures
The MTB-82 was produced in three variants:
- The basic model MTB-82 , also called MTB-82A in some sources . This variant can be recognized by its sloping two-edged front section. The main features were the steel car body and the type DK-201 engine with 74 kilowatts of power.
- The most built subspecies MTB-82D . This variant had a car body with aluminum cladding and a vertical and flat front. The motor was replaced by the more powerful DK-202B version with 80 or 86 kilowatts of power and the corresponding adaptation of the control circuits.
- The modernization of old vehicles of the types JaTB-1, -2, or -4, designated as MTB-82M . In this variant, MTB-82 or MTB-82D car bodies were built on a repaired JaTB chassis. Externally, these conversions did not differ from the production cars.
The special model MTB-82WSChW for the former trolleybus line existed only in very small numbers on the site of the All-Unions Agricultural Exhibition , today's All-Russian Exhibition Center . This variant was a bit more comfortable compared to the standard version. In the case of the ribbon window, the combination of a rectangular pane below and an oval above was replaced by a single large pane for better visibility. The upper edge of the row of windows was decorated with light bulbs.
Various engineering factories, trolleybus companies and repair shops also produced trolleybuses similar to the MTB-82. Sometimes they used spare parts from real MTB-82s in their designs. For example, Gorkier Plant No. 21, a manufacturer of fighter planes, built a trolleybus in 1947 as a gift for city residents. This vehicle, very similar to the MTB-82, was used to open trolleybuses in the city, but it was unreliable in operation and, at a million rubles, it was four times more expensive than the production cars from Tushino. These own constructions or conversions are not regarded as MTB-82 variants. In addition, the Moscow repair shop SWARS upgraded used JaTB trolleybuses using MTB-82 spare parts, these vehicles were designated as MTB-10.
Design analysis
The assessment of the design differs from different points of view. As mentioned above, the MTB-82 was technically obsolete soon after its appearance. The combination of a solid floor frame with a lightweight, detachable car body and a non-automatic contactor control typical of trolleybuses of the 1930s became obsolete in the next decade. Then new constructive solutions appeared, which were already widely used in electrically powered vehicles of the 1950s. In addition to the disadvantages caused by its basic design, the MTB-82 had a number of other negative features. They had their origins in the development phase. The most serious technical defects were:
| Characteristic values | MTB-82D | LOWA W 601 |
| Year of construction (s) | 1946-1960 | 1951 |
| Length in meters | 10.4 | 10.4 |
| Seats | 38 | 29 |
| Standing space for 8 passengers / m² | 48 | 45 |
| Mass including payload, tons | 15.6 | 16.0 |
| Power kW | 80 | 120 |
| Power / mass with passengers, kW / t | 5.1 | 7.5 |
- The large empty mass in connection with the insufficient power of the main engine. The more spacious SiU-5 with a length of 11.8 meters had a curb weight of around 9.8 tons compared to 9.2 tons and 10.4 meters for the MTB-82. The contemporary GDR trolleybuses from LOWA of the W 601 / W 602 series, which were similar to the MTB-82 in terms of weight and passenger capacity, had a more powerful main engine (see table).
- The lack of power steering . Together with the previous defect, this made the driver's work very tiring.
- The lack of low voltage circuits. The contactors were turned on and off by a 100 volt auxiliary circuit, but this subsystem was not electrically isolated from the 600 volt high voltage circuit. As a result, the driver operated a travel switch that operated on a dangerous voltage. In the event of a malfunction, there was a possibility of electric shock or fire.
- The contactor control of the main motor did not work automatically and only two speed levels were suitable for unlimited use at constant speed. Incorrect shifting when accelerating and especially long driving in unsuitable gear steps could lead to overheating and damage to the starting resistors . In the worst case, it could lead to fires. Therefore, the driver should have some experience in order to drive the MTB-82 safely; the vehicle was not easy and safe to drive for beginners.
- The disproportionately large driver's cab could only be heated poorly in winter. Former workers at the Nizhny Novgorod trolleybus company remembered that the driver should wear a large fur coat in frosty weather, and he watched the traffic through a slit in the icy windshield next to the weak heater. They compared this experience to driving a tank. Working in such harsh conditions was particularly difficult for the numerous female drivers on the farm.
From the passenger's point of view, the MTB-82 was also not comfortable:
- The narrow doors and the very small front door area prevented a quick change of passengers, especially for people with bulky luggage or strollers. The narrow passage between the seats made it difficult to move around the passenger compartment and also made it difficult for the conductor to work .
- The small windows, the deep ceiling and the tight seating made tall people uncomfortable. Since there was also no public address system available, it was sometimes difficult to identify the desired exit stop when there was a large crowd.
Regardless, the MTB-82 was a significant success from a transportation standpoint in the late 1940s. In terms of capacity, it surpassed almost all other Soviet trolleybuses, buses and trams, with the exception of only the four-axle open-plan tram cars of the types LM-33 and MTW-82 . However, series production of the LM-33 ended in 1941, and this model only ran in Leningrad. Its successor, the LM-49 , appeared in 1949 and was also available for other cities from the mid-1950s. The MTW-82 was not yet widely used in this period and required a lot more money, raw materials and effort in production compared to the MTB-82.
| Characteristic values | MTB-82D | JaTB-4A | Ch / M | KM / KP | LM / LP-33 | GAS-03-30 |
| Means of transport | trolleybus | trolleybus | tram | tram | tram | omnibus |
| Years of construction | 1946-1960 | 1938-1941 | 1928-1941 | 1929–1935, 1945/1946 | 1933-1941 | 1933-1941, 1945-1950 |
| Type | Solo bus | Solo bus | Train from Tw and Bw | Train from Tw and Bw | Train from Tw and Bw | Solo bus |
| Axle or wheel formula | 4 × 2 | 4 × 2 | Bo + 2 | Bo'Bo '+ 2'2' | Bo'Bo '+ 2'2' | 4 × 2 |
| Length in meters | 10.4 | 9.3 | 9.8 + 9.8 | 12.6 + 12.6 | 15.0 + 15.0 | 5.3 |
| Seats | 38 | 35 | 24 + 24 | 38 + 38 | 49 + 52 | 16 |
| Standing space for eight passengers per square meter | 48 | 13 | 76 + 90 | 48 + 62 | 129 + 150 | not provided |
| Empty mass, tons | 9.25 | 7.64 | ? | ? | 22.2 + 16.2 | 2.3 |
| Power kW | 1 × 80 | 1 × 74 | 2 × 50 | 4 × 40 | 4 × 40 | 1 × 37 |
| Power / weight without passengers, kW / t | 8.6 | 9.7 | ? | ? | 4.2 | 16.1 |
| Characteristic values | MTB-82D | KTM / KTP-1 | MTW-82 | SiS-154 |
| Means of transport | trolleybus | tram | tram | omnibus |
| Years of construction | 1946-1960 | 1947-1961 | 1947-1961 | 1946-1950 |
| Type | Solo bus | Train from Tw and Bw | Solo multiple units | Solo bus |
| Axle or wheel formula | 4 × 2 | Bo + 2 | Bo'Bo ' | 4 × 2 |
| Length in meters | 10.4 | 10 + 10 | 13.6 | 9.5 |
| Seats | 38 | 16 + 15 | 40 | 34 |
| Standing space for eight passengers per square meter | 48 | 100 + 108 | 140 | 26th |
| Empty mass, tons | 9.25 | 12.5 + 8 | 17.5 | 8.1 |
| Power kW | 1 × 80 | 2 × 50 | 4 × 55 | 1 × 83 |
| Power / weight without passengers, kW / t | 8.6 | 4.9 | 12.6 | 10.2 |
In the post-war era, the shortage of trained professionals was a problem for the country's economy. The simple, robust and durable construction of the MTB-82 has proven itself here. If the undemanding repair was carried out correctly, the technology was also reliable. This feature allowed operation even without highly qualified mechanics. At the same time, this was appreciated by many repair workers and some drivers who carried out the maintenance themselves, which made them overlook the undeniably existing shortcomings of the MTB-82.
Overall, these factors, together with the widespread use of the MTB-82 and its long service life, confirm the success of the design from an economic point of view.
Received vehicles
Some of the discarded MTB-82s were not scrapped immediately, but were used as sheds, gazebos or construction trailers. Some transport companies also converted individual vehicles in good condition into work vehicles for service purposes. This is how training vehicles, mobile repair workshops and staff canteens were created.
Due to their importance in the history of Soviet transport, some organizations and traffic enthusiasts began to recondition vehicles of what was once the most numerous Soviet trolleybus type. The Museum of Public Transport in Moscow and the Museum of Electric City Transport in Saint Petersburg each have a roadworthy and a non-operational MTB-82. The two ready-to-drive trolleybuses often take part in vehicle exhibitions. In Nizhny Novgorod and Chișinău there is one MTB-82 each, although it is roadworthy, erected as a technical monument outdoors. The Minsk trolleybus depot no. 1 also has an MTB-82 that is listed as a monument. A total of seven MTB-82s remained.
literature
- A. Sorokin, M. Russell: MTB-82 - the trolleybus "for all times" . In: Trolleybus Magazine , Volume 44, Issue Number 280, National Trolleybus Association, ISSN 0266-7452 , pages 74-77
- А. Шанин: МТВ – 82: шаг вперед, два шага назад . - Альманах "Железнодорожное дело", 2000, №4.
(Russian and in Cyrillic script; German roughly: A. Schanin: Der MTW-82: one step forward, two steps backwards . In: Almanach Schelesnodoroschnoje delo (Eng. "Eisenbahnwesen"), 2000, No. 4) - И. С. Ефремов, В. М. Кобозев: Механическое оборудование троллейбусов . Москва, Транспорт, 1978.
(Russian and in Cyrillic script; German roughly: IS Jefremow, WM Kobosew .: The mechanical equipment of trolley buses . Transport, Moscow 1978) - Д. И. Перкис: Учебное пособие для слесарей по ремонту троллейбусов . Москва, Стройиздат, 1966.
(Russian and in Cyrillic script; German roughly: DI Perkis. The mechanics' textbook for the repair of trolley buses . Strojizdat, Moscow 1966) - Ю. М. Коссой: 50 лет нижегородскому троллейбусу . Нижний Новгород, Литера, 1997, ISBN 5-900915-13-1
(Russian and in Cyrillic script; German roughly: Ju. M. Kossoj. 50 years of Nizhny Novgorod Trolleybus , Litera, Nizhny Novgorod 1997) - Л. М. Шугуров: Автомобили России и СССР. Часть II . Москва, ИЛБИ, 2000, ISBN 5-87483-006-5
(Russian and in Cyrillic script; German roughly: LM Schugurow. The automobiles of Russia and the USSR. Part II . ILBI, Moscow 2000) - Веклич В.П. Поїзд із тролейбусів МТБ-82 з керуванням за системою "багатьох одиниць" // Міське господарство Україн - 1967. - № 2. - С. 37-38. - ISSN 0130-1284
Web links
-
"Tram and trolleybus Nizhny Novgorod" to the MTB-82 ( Memento from August 5, 2011 in the Internet Archive ) (Russian)
- History of the MTB-82 ( Memento from August 16, 2010 in the Internet Archive )
- Photos ( Memento from March 10, 2010 in the Internet Archive )
- Technical data ( Memento from March 7, 2010 in the Internet Archive )
- Parts and devices, sketches from operating instructions ( Memento from March 9, 2010 in the Internet Archive )
- «Villamosok.Hu» for the MTB-82 (English, history of Budapest vehicles, technical description, photos and sketches from operating instructions)
- "Traffic Kharkov" to the MTB-82 (Russian, history, photos and sketches from operating instructions)
- Page "Tram and trolleybus Nizhny Novgorod" on the history of the MTW-82 tram vehicle (Russian, A. Schanin's article The MTW-82: one step forward, two steps backwards )
Individual evidence
- ↑ Ju. M. Kossoj: 50 years of the Nizhny Novgorod trolleybus , pages 8 and 9
- ↑ a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q A. Sorokin, M. Russell: MTB-82 - the trolleybus "for all times". In: Trolleybus Magazine , Volume 44, Issue Number 280, National Trolleybus Association, ISSN 0266-7452, pp. 74-77
- ↑ a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o page “ Traffic Kharkov” on the MTB-82
- ↑ a b c A. Schanin: The MTW-82: one step forward, two steps back .
- ↑ a b c Page of the manufacturer on the MTB-82 (Russian), accessed on September 21, 2011
- ↑ a b c Vehicle list of the MTB-82 trolleybuses
- ↑ Ju. M. Kossoj: 50 years of the Nizhny Novgorod trolleybus , pages 42 and 54
- ^ Page “Nizhny Novgorod's tram and trolleybus” on the history of the MTB-82 trolleybuses in Gorky ( memento of March 9, 2010 in the Internet Archive ) (Russian), viewed on February 1, 2013
- ↑ a b c History of double trolleybuses in the USSR on the page “Public Transport in the Kuban Region and the Adygea Republic” (Russian), accessed on October 15, 2011
- ^ Kost Koslow, Stefan Maschkewytsch: Kyjiwski Trolejbus . Kyjiw " KYJ ", Kyjiw, 2009. pp. 208-216
- ↑ Sergij Tarchow, Kost Koslow, Aare Olander: Elektrotransport Ukrajini . Warto, Kyjiw 2010, ISBN 978-966-2321-11-1
- ↑ Trolleybus transport on www.elektrotransportsf.com
- ^ Az MTB 82-es trolibusz
- ↑ Drapelul roşu newspaper , March 29, 1953 edition
- ↑ Drapelul roşu newspaper , September 13, 1953 edition
- ^ Dorin Sarca, Gh. Radulovici: Centenarul tramvaielor din Timișoara, monograph 1869–1969 . Timișoara 1969
- ↑ a b c D. I. Perkis: The mechanics textbook for the repair of trolleybuses .
- ↑ page «Villamosok.Hu» on the MTB-82
- ^ Christian Suhr: GDR omnibuses . Motorbuch-Verlag, Stuttgart, ISBN 978-3-613-02709-1 , p. 119
- ↑ Ju. M. Kossoj: 50 years of the Nizhny Novgorod trolleybus , page 32
- ↑ Ju. M. Kossoj: 50 years of the Nizhny Novgorod trolleybus , page 9
Remarks
- ↑ After the war, the staff of some military factories were even given paid leave without orders, which put a great strain on the economy. - Свирин М. Н .: Танковая мощь СССР . Эксмо и др., Москва 2008, ISBN 978-5-699-31700-4 (Russian and in Cyrillic script; German roughly: Michail N. Swirin: Die Panzermacht der USSR . Eksmo et al., Moscow 2008), p. 572
- ↑ No deliveries ex works, only used vehicles from Tbilisi
- ↑ Different sources indicate different nominal outputs for the DK-202B version.
- ↑ The designation МТБ-82ВСХВ is derived from the abbreviation ВСХВ Russian Всесоюзная сельскохозяйственная выставка for the all-union agricultural exhibition
- ↑ For comparison, the cost price of the medium tank of the type T-34, which was manufactured in Gorky in 1942 by the neighboring plant No. 112 "Krasnoye Sormovo", was 209,700 rubles - Свирин М. Н .: Танковая мощь СССР . Эксмо и др., Москва 2008, ISBN 978-5-699-31700-4 . (Russian and in Cyrillic script; German roughly: Michail N. Swirin: Die Panzermacht der USSR . Eksmo et al., Moscow 2008), page 614
