Quote:
Originally Posted by aberdeen5698
Even if this were true, it would be expensive (due to all the operators required) and it would trash the throughput on all the north/south streets that cross Broadway and carry a substantial volume of their own transit. It's extremely challenging to give signal priority to high frequency trams running in both directions with uneven block spacing and still maintain adequate windows for cross traffic. And given the propensity of cars and pedestrians to gum up the works, I'm extremely skeptical that those kinds of headways could be maintained with much reliability.
Bunching of trams is worse than bunching of buses because buses have more stops that they're able to skip (a higher number of stops with nobody alighting) in order to recover spacing. Trams have fewer stops and a lot less likelihood of being able to skip one of them, so once a tram is off-schedule it stays that way, affecting everything behind it.
|
We need real world data and everything you are saying. We haven't been giving anything but fluff.
If we can't do it with BRT and TSP, then for sure we should not entertain
Real world data I keep providing and it seems to be ignored. It's simple mathematics and I've given real world examples, but it's not like I'm experienced in this matter.
TSP does have delays, but well managed, it should not impact cross traffic and does not impact cross traffic in the real world as much as you are making people believe. There is not one textbook that indicates this is happening at the level you are making it appear to happen.
Also you and migrant_coconut have never given any data, but simply keep saying what I'm saying is untrue. I've given another real world example of San Antonio Texas with 100 buses an hour. That's much less than 2 minute headway.
The difference with the train is the boarding time can effect the dwell time of buses signifiantly. The right turning lanes appear that they would effect many timings, but it is an old industry and these can be calculated.
Bus Bunching occurs in practice (from the hundreds of documents online) because of dwell time and not traffic. You and migrant keep going on about traffic. The dwell time is significantly reduced with Light Rail. It is explained well in "Light Rail Explained" which basically is talking about reliability of light rail which makes all the difference.
So even with the same traffic and stops, you will get less bunching form a tram. If you don't get this...than it is no point in you and migrant keep saying the same thing.
All of this can be easily understood by translink itself if it measures right turns, measures dwell times, measures headway variance and pedestrian traffic and sees what is happening with it's own buses and even can then simulate traffic with VISSIM simulation (which Stears and Davies have done for Hamilton LRT and realized they were wrong when they did the report for UBC in giving 0 time at red lights for the tram for UBC which is never the case).
The problem is that people are not measuring reliability and not doing Cost Benefit Analysis with the time involved.
There is a benefit to people's time using the Light Rail with at-grade crossings, but people really have to take (very little) time and figure out the model and determine what will happen. To do this for the very first LRT in the city and have it go across a busy area..and never having done this before..is not a good idea. That is why the fear will push us to skytrain and we will never know if the LRT could have done what it most likely can do..which is move this volume of people with limited TSP during busy times that does not impact cross flow traffic and by limiting some right turns (possibly)..and that will save thousands of peoples entire life wages.
But we can't have that conversation. All we have is you guys saying I'm wrong with absolutely no data at all. I can do that.
Threaded Mode