3 ms·

maybe the trolleys where substituted by the coaches because there were more cheap to use, you don't have to create a network of cables overhead, and with cheap

by joking 7y ago

maybe the trolleys where substituted by the coaches because there were more cheap to use, you don't have to create a network of cables overhead, and with cheap gas there where no need to electrify the public transport. The coaches have the benefit to be able to go anywhere and modify your routes as suits you, while the trolleys need a fixed infrastructure. Both have their own pros and cons, so i don't see the need for a conspiracy.

majewsky 7y ago
As a rough estimate, a streetcar line is more efficient than a bus line above 40,000 passengers per day. My city (Dresden, Germany) has a bus line with 70,000 passengers per day, and you can really see it cracking at the seams. During rush hour, busses run every 3 minutes, and that interval cannot be increased any further because the busses would start blocking each other, thus backing up from the bus stop into the road and creating additional congestion. The only thing the city can do (and that's what they're working on) is to upgrade from bus to streetcar. Dresden has some of the longest trams in the world, at 45 meters (50 yards), and these carry 3-4 bus loads at once.
- sokoloff 7y ago
  The German bus systems I’ve used have been night and day better than US ones. Buses that mostly run to a schedule are incomprehensible to most in the US. Probably related, I doubt we have a bus line with anywhere near that ridership.
  - kasey_junk 7y ago
    I was curious about this as I’ve never looked into ridership by route and at least for Chicago it is absolutely true. A 70k route would be more than 3x the biggest in Chicago. https://www.transitchicago.com/assets/1/6/Monthly_Ridership_2018-12.pdf https://www.transitchicago.com/assets/1/6/Monthly_Ridership_...
    - majewsky 7y ago
      To be fair, that 70k route is one of the top 5 routes in Europe by passenger numbers IIRC.
    - bryanlarsen 7y ago
      At least the red, blue & pink lines exceed 70k/weekday. Which is the point: anything approaching that level should be converted from bus to rail.
  - 205guy 7y ago
    SF has the notorious 38 Geary that had 55+K daily ridership (boardings) in 2017 [1]. It has many of the problems of an overloaded bus line (traffic causing buses to run together, etc). Oddly, the SF Muni metro lines (what they call the light rail, runs underground downtown but on the street elsewhere) don't seem as congested, but I can't find the ridership numbers. People have been complaining about the 38 for years, but I don't want to criticize the SFMTA (local agency that runs buses/trolley buses and light rail) because it does seem to get the job done without much expensive investment (cost of most recent underground metro in SF was $1.6B for 1.7 miles [2]). [1] https://sf.curbed.com/2017/9/19/16302396/sf-worst-bus-transit-line https://sf.curbed.com/2017/9/19/16302396/sf-worst-bus-transi... [2] https://www.sfmta.com/projects/central-subway-project https://www.sfmta.com/projects/central-subway-project

by joking 7y ago

majewsky 7y ago

As a rough estimate, a streetcar line is more efficient than a bus line above 40,000 passengers per day. My city (Dresden, Germany) has a bus line with 70,000 passengers per day, and you can really see it cracking at the seams. During rush hour, busses run every 3 minutes, and that interval cannot be increased any further because the busses would start blocking each other, thus backing up from the bus stop into the road and creating additional congestion. The only thing the city can do (and that's what they're working on) is to upgrade from bus to streetcar. Dresden has some of the longest trams in the world, at 45 meters (50 yards), and these carry 3-4 bus loads at once.

sokoloff 7y ago
The German bus systems I’ve used have been night and day better than US ones. Buses that mostly run to a schedule are incomprehensible to most in the US. Probably related, I doubt we have a bus line with anywhere near that ridership.
- kasey_junk 7y ago
  I was curious about this as I’ve never looked into ridership by route and at least for Chicago it is absolutely true. A 70k route would be more than 3x the biggest in Chicago. https://www.transitchicago.com/assets/1/6/Monthly_Ridership_2018-12.pdf https://www.transitchicago.com/assets/1/6/Monthly_Ridership_...
  - majewsky 7y ago
    To be fair, that 70k route is one of the top 5 routes in Europe by passenger numbers IIRC.
  - bryanlarsen 7y ago
    At least the red, blue & pink lines exceed 70k/weekday. Which is the point: anything approaching that level should be converted from bus to rail.
- 205guy 7y ago
  SF has the notorious 38 Geary that had 55+K daily ridership (boardings) in 2017 [1]. It has many of the problems of an overloaded bus line (traffic causing buses to run together, etc). Oddly, the SF Muni metro lines (what they call the light rail, runs underground downtown but on the street elsewhere) don't seem as congested, but I can't find the ridership numbers. People have been complaining about the 38 for years, but I don't want to criticize the SFMTA (local agency that runs buses/trolley buses and light rail) because it does seem to get the job done without much expensive investment (cost of most recent underground metro in SF was $1.6B for 1.7 miles [2]). [1] https://sf.curbed.com/2017/9/19/16302396/sf-worst-bus-transit-line https://sf.curbed.com/2017/9/19/16302396/sf-worst-bus-transi... [2] https://www.sfmta.com/projects/central-subway-project https://www.sfmta.com/projects/central-subway-project