4 ms·
There is another alternative: frequent enough that it doesn't matter if you miss a train, because the next is in 5 minutes or so.
by AnimalMuppet 2y ago
There is another alternative: frequent enough that it doesn't matter if you miss a train, because the next is in 5 minutes or so.
- toss1 2y agoYES, that would absolutely work As long as the infrastructure is good enough that it doesn't delay all the trains/busses (which happens a lot in Boston metro area, unfixed for decades). At that point, it's just a capital equation - is it more costly to ensure they run 99.995% reliably +/-30sec or just invest enough capital to field and maintain a new train every 5min on average? One advantage of the latter is a lot more redundant equipment available. But also a lot more total wear and maintenance. But either works