Using actual numbers: Melbourne's light rail E-class trams have a carrying capacity of 64 seated: 146 standing. They can regularly mix with pedestrians. The E

Using actual numbers: Melbourne's light rail E-class trams have a carrying capacity of 64 seated: 146 standing. They can regularly mix with pedestrians. The E class is the "big" one at about 40 seconds: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kmBlZ4xpS5Q https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kmBlZ4xpS5Q Melbournes older, 6 car trains have a crush capacity of ~1526. Seatwise they have ~500-600, with a standard target capacity of about 800 (above that the extra variance/numbers people start to complain about overcrowding). Seen here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4AfbBVXGJzY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4AfbBVXGJzY Now, those old trains aren't the newest, and they're single-decker and not the biggest or double-decker like sydney's, and they're not the bestest like some of the asian fully-auto metros. But, my point being is that by the numbers before we start getting too crowded, our quite average older 6 car trains have point in time comfortable capacity about 2-3 times more than your 8 car subway estimate. Hell, three of our light rail vehicles regularly move the numbers of your 8-car subway. But wait... We've not actually accounted for the trips accurately, because if a train runs the full length of its track only carrying its estimated point in time comfortable capacity, the carriages would be quite empty: the total passengers using a train aren't its point-in-time-carrying capacity, but how many get on and off between all the stops along its path. That goes for light rail too. So to find the actual number of people moved by train or light rail, you generally have to multiply the carrying capacity by some additional multiple. On the other hand, private vehicles generally, in practice have a person per vehicle estimate UNDER 2 (barring geography, time, purpose variances), meaning your estimate is overly optimistic for the cars, and out by about an order of magnitude for the rail vehicles. I was not being facetious when I made another comment in this thread when I said I was shocked by how inefficient private vehicles were when I actual went down to the intersection and started counting how long it took them to move say 100 people (equivalent of 1 of our trams), nor am I being facetious when I say not only that this is likely a problem with an already known solution, but a problem where The Boring Companies apparent solution is starting with a rough order-of-magnitude efficiency penalty. I'm honestly a bit...feel like I'm taking crazy pills...that people are talking about the proposal of putting private individual vehicles on rails...in tunnels.