4 ms·

Couldn't disagree more. Buses are much slower, often have long and winding routes (because they're not stuck on rails), get stuck in traffic and can't hold as m

by flukus 7y ago

Couldn't disagree more. Buses are much slower, often have long and winding routes (because they're not stuck on rails), get stuck in traffic and can't hold as many people, my tram lines with dedicated lanes don't have those problems. I doubt you'd see many people taking buses for trips where trams are an option. The permanence is also a feature. One of my favorite things about Melbourne is never having to visit a shopping mall because retail spaces spring up naturally along tram lines, these are easy to get to, open and walkable. It was also a big factor in where to buy an apartment, I'm pretty confident the tram lines will be there long after I die but bus lines can be changed on a whim. It's a crime that Sydney and Brisbane got rid of them.

wahern 7y ago
> my tram lines with dedicated lanes don't have those problems Dedicated lanes is the biggest factor. Plenty of trams don't have dedicated lanes, in which case the significant cost premium is a complete waste. Buses can also have dedicated lanes with right-of-way. The ones I've been on in Mexico and Ecuador were quite nice. While I personally find rail more comfortable and also appreciate how route permanence effects property values, as a taxpayer even dedicated lanes and right-of-way don't justify the costs. Historic lines are a different matter as the initial capital costs are already spent, and even if they cost more to operate it can still make sense. So it does suck that old lines were destroyed. But if you're gonna build new, I just can't abide paying the ridiculous premium for rail unless they're going underground or otherwise grade separated for a significant portion of the line. But if they're grade separated then by definition they're not really trams.
- flukus 7y ago
  > Buses can also have dedicated lanes with right-of-way. IME they're an improvement but no where near as good as separated rail. It's like building a 32 lane highway, it speeds up most of your trip but then 90% of it is spent at the exit ramp. Underground would probably be an improvement for travel times but I'm not sure how much, part of the benefit of trams is their frequent stops so being completely unimpeded is less critical. I doubt you'd see the same level of retail build up along the lines too. One option I'd like to see return through the CBD would be elevated lines, I'm not sure why they fell out of fashion.
- devnulloverflow 7y ago
  > Buses can also have dedicated lanes with right-of-way. Yes, the busways in parts of Brisbane are really excellent, better than any tram line I have seen. But they are also huge pieces of infrastructure that take up even more space (and I suspect money) than the a tram line would have. Which is probably why they only extend in one direction from the city.
samplatt 7y ago
>One of my favorite things about Melbourne is never having to visit a shopping mall because retail spaces spring up naturally along tram lines Been in Melbourne for 18 months now and have only just realised that this is one of my favourite things as well, I only appreciated it subconsciously until now.

by flukus 7y ago

wahern 7y ago

> my tram lines with dedicated lanes don't have those problems Dedicated lanes is the biggest factor. Plenty of trams don't have dedicated lanes, in which case the significant cost premium is a complete waste. Buses can also have dedicated lanes with right-of-way. The ones I've been on in Mexico and Ecuador were quite nice. While I personally find rail more comfortable and also appreciate how route permanence effects property values, as a taxpayer even dedicated lanes and right-of-way don't justify the costs. Historic lines are a different matter as the initial capital costs are already spent, and even if they cost more to operate it can still make sense. So it does suck that old lines were destroyed. But if you're gonna build new, I just can't abide paying the ridiculous premium for rail unless they're going underground or otherwise grade separated for a significant portion of the line. But if they're grade separated then by definition they're not really trams.

flukus 7y ago
> Buses can also have dedicated lanes with right-of-way. IME they're an improvement but no where near as good as separated rail. It's like building a 32 lane highway, it speeds up most of your trip but then 90% of it is spent at the exit ramp. Underground would probably be an improvement for travel times but I'm not sure how much, part of the benefit of trams is their frequent stops so being completely unimpeded is less critical. I doubt you'd see the same level of retail build up along the lines too. One option I'd like to see return through the CBD would be elevated lines, I'm not sure why they fell out of fashion.
devnulloverflow 7y ago
> Buses can also have dedicated lanes with right-of-way. Yes, the busways in parts of Brisbane are really excellent, better than any tram line I have seen. But they are also huge pieces of infrastructure that take up even more space (and I suspect money) than the a tram line would have. Which is probably why they only extend in one direction from the city.

samplatt 7y ago

>One of my favorite things about Melbourne is never having to visit a shopping mall because retail spaces spring up naturally along tram lines Been in Melbourne for 18 months now and have only just realised that this is one of my favourite things as well, I only appreciated it subconsciously until now.