U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Urban Planning
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 03-05-2013, 01:31 PM
 
Location: North Baltimore ----> Seattle
6,473 posts, read 11,099,778 times
Reputation: 3117

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Malloric View Post
I'm not sure what's hard to understand about 30,000 being higher than 26,900. .
You have presented statistics for BRT vs. LRT. We are comparing streetcars vs. local bus. Something about apples and some type of citrus fruit that grows in your state....

I think when trying to determine the maximum capacity of something, a range is inconvenient. This was my only point.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Malloric View Post
I'm not sure what's hard to understand about capacity for various transit systems being given in a range. Seattle Streetcar was designed to be easily upgradeable to carry around 12,000 per DAY. The APM in SeaTac was designed to be able to move 14,000+ people per HOUR. They're both light rail. But you don't understand how they can have a different capacity? That's as obvious as 30,000 being larger than 26,900 to me. /Shrug..
Sometimes LRT is categorized as seperate from streetcar. You are using them interchangeably, just as you are subsituting BRT for local bus. Foolhardy.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Malloric View Post
I never said a hypothetical local streetcar had a lower capacity than a lower (? not sure what that means, a lower used bus?) bus. Or do you just literally mean a bus with lower usage than a given streetcar? I mean, it's rather obvious that Seattle's streetcar has a higher capacity than the (lower used) hopper bus that runs down Highway 99 six times a day.
Obviously I meant local bus. See my first comment. Your statistics represent different modes of transit than you are presenting them for.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-05-2013, 01:33 PM
nei nei won $500 in our forum's Most Engaging Poster Contest - Thirteenth Edition (Jan-Feb 2015). 

Over $104,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum and additional contests are planned
 
Location: Long Island / NYC
45,987 posts, read 41,947,535 times
Reputation: 14805
Quote:
Originally Posted by Malloric View Post
I never said a hypothetical local streetcar had a lower capacity than a lower (? not sure what that means, a lower used bus?) bus.
I thought that's what you were saying...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-05-2013, 01:34 PM
 
Location: North Baltimore ----> Seattle
6,473 posts, read 11,099,778 times
Reputation: 3117
Quote:
Originally Posted by nei View Post
I thought that's what you were saying...
Me too.

Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-05-2013, 02:03 PM
 
Location: Vallejo
14,061 posts, read 16,074,613 times
Reputation: 12636
Quote:
Originally Posted by nei View Post
I thought that's what you were saying...
I guess if you communicate at the picture book level?

To me, that's kind too stupid to even consider. I mean, if you take a inter-county Hopper bus that runs back and fourth twice a day, there's obviously not very many seats. That has dickwad to do with the capacity of that route, however. You can add more bus. Central LINK is currently limited to two-car trains until they finish U-Link since the turn around track is too small. Unless they can run the trains more frequently than every 7.5 minutes, the system has a current capacity of 3200 per hour in each direction.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-05-2013, 02:39 PM
nei nei won $500 in our forum's Most Engaging Poster Contest - Thirteenth Edition (Jan-Feb 2015). 

Over $104,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum and additional contests are planned
 
Location: Long Island / NYC
45,987 posts, read 41,947,535 times
Reputation: 14805
Quote:
Originally Posted by Malloric View Post
I guess if you communicate at the picture book level?

To me, that's kind too stupid to even consider. I mean, if you take a inter-county Hopper bus that runs back and fourth twice a day, there's obviously not very many seats. That has dickwad to do with the capacity of that route, however. You can add more bus. Central LINK is currently limited to two-car trains until they finish U-Link since the turn around track is too small. Unless they can run the trains more frequently than every 7.5 minutes, the system has a current capacity of 3200 per hour in each direction.
Well no I didn't think you meant a bus that runs four times a day but a bus run to however high frequency there is demand for. If a streetcar and bus have roughly about the same seats, capacity would be the same. Streetcar max frequency is probably higher but that has more to do whether there's lane separation rather something intrinsic to streetcars.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-05-2013, 02:47 PM
 
4,023 posts, read 3,265,560 times
Reputation: 2924
Quote:
Originally Posted by apm193 View Post
[3] But streetcar infrastructure is not just rail, its rail and pavement.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Malloric View Post

You also completely missed the point of #3. The point is streetcar tracks are in a road that needs to be resurfaced just as often as any other road. They usually use cement since that holds up a bit better than asphalt under the weight of a 30-40 ton streetcar, but yeah. You can't just slap down some slurry seal for rather obvious reasons that streetcars don't run on asphalt very well.

I think that's a misconception. rail transport (of any kind) doesn't require pavement. grass track is common in european cities. a few places here also use them. besides an aesthetic improvement grass is helpful in reducing the urban heat island effect produced by asphalt and concrete and controlling storm runoff and pollution. grass is obviously a lot cheaper as well. the size and weight of buses creates a lot of wear and tear on paved roads which translates to more cost and expenses over time for more frequent road resurfacing since buses make direct contact with the pavement. rail doesn't require any pavement but buses do.




fort collins co


kenosha wi


grenoble fr
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-05-2013, 03:12 PM
 
Location: Vallejo
14,061 posts, read 16,074,613 times
Reputation: 12636
Kenosha, WI one:


It's not that they are always in the street, but I think street running is quintessentially what makes a streetcar a streetcar. And you're right, it's not that they need the pavement, it's that the cars do. Which means where they intersect (or commonly run in mixed traffic as well, at least for stretches) it has to be repaved just as frequently as a road does except now it's a heck of a lot more expensive than just a cheap slurry seal. If it doesn't do any, it's not a streetcar. There's definitely not a clear line. Sacramento's LRT does a fair amount of street running, and I wouldn't call it a streetcar. It's hard to point out exactly what is and what isn't. Size comes into play, but take the street cars (trams) in Hungary or Budapest:


Embarcadero Station:


Streetcar in a subway.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-05-2013, 07:54 PM
 
195 posts, read 235,391 times
Reputation: 247
Quote:
Originally Posted by cisco kid View Post
I think that's a misconception. rail transport (of any kind) doesn't require pavement. grass track is common in european cities. a few places here also use them. besides an aesthetic improvement grass is helpful in reducing the urban heat island effect produced by asphalt and concrete and controlling storm runoff and pollution. grass is obviously a lot cheaper as well. the size and weight of buses creates a lot of wear and tear on paved roads which translates to more cost and expenses over time for more frequent road resurfacing since buses make direct contact with the pavement. rail doesn't require any pavement but buses do.




fort collins co


kenosha wi


grenoble fr
But then is it really a street car? A street car runs on a street with other vehicles. The pictures you posted seem more like light rail, especially the last one.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-05-2013, 08:03 PM
 
Location: Coos Bay, Oregon
7,142 posts, read 8,877,400 times
Reputation: 7732
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2Easy View Post
Haven't read most of the thread, but feel like chiming in here. The smog was actually worse when the streetcars were here than it is now. And it's more congested because there are millions more people here. And the rail system was only highly efficient in romantic retrospective. The reality is that ridership was plummeting for years until the streetcars were replaced with buses. Buses were an improvement from a transit perspective, but people (me included) love trains, so back they come. The new streetcars will be much more comfortable than the old ones though, so they can be considered better than buses.
I believe the LA smog problem developed in the 1940s. The construction of freeways and abandonment of streetcars lines was well underway at that point. I have not seen any evidence that conversion of streetcars lines to busses ever improved ridership anywhere. The lowest point for transit ridership in the US was in the 1960s. Which was shortly after the last streetcar systems were abandoned.

The fact that LA is now spending billions of dollars to rebuild the rail system, I think is proof that that the abandonment of streetcars was a FAIL.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-05-2013, 08:38 PM
 
4,023 posts, read 3,265,560 times
Reputation: 2924
Quote:
Originally Posted by apm193 View Post
But then is it really a street car? A street car runs on a street with other vehicles. The pictures you posted seem more like light rail, especially the last one.

sure it is. usually there is some combination of grass and pavement along the line. on some streets it runs in traffic sharing the road with other vehicles. on others it might be grade separated on its own grass track in the middle of the road or alongside the road. in some areas there might be no road at all and you have the tracks all by themselves. that's the flexibility you get with rail. ideally you want to install grade separation wherever you can to take advantage of grass tracks and signal priority and minimizing time the streetcar spends in traffic improving service and reliability. on narrower streets along the route that don't have enough room for grade separation it can share the street with other traffic.


fort collins heritage trolley on street


fort collins trolley - grade separated
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Urban Planning
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top