daily menu » rate the banner | guess the city | one on oneforums map | privacy policy | DMCA | news magazine | posting guidelines

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > Infrastructure and Mobility Forums > Subways and Urban Transport

Subways and Urban Transport Metros, subways, light rail, trams, buses and other local transport systems



Global Announcement

As a general reminder, please respect others and respect copyrights. Go here to familiarize yourself with our posting policy.


Reply

 
Thread Tools
Old April 4th, 2012, 09:03 PM   #441
ssiguy2
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: White Rock BC
Posts: 5,404
Likes (Received): 857

I'm not very adept at such things but I don't think the new map is out. I'm sure opening day will result in Youtube vids so I'll keep an eye out.
ssiguy2 no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old April 6th, 2012, 03:09 PM   #442
HARTride 2012
Registered User
 
HARTride 2012's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 13,853
Likes (Received): 1976

Here in Tampa, FL, US, we will be opening up our first BRT line next year (hopefully spring 2013). It will be mixed traffic though, not dedicated lanes. And a portion of one of the roadways the BRT line will travel on is only 2 lanes.

Far from a real transitway, but nonetheless something more than just local bus, with a handful of express and circulatory routes.
HARTride 2012 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 6th, 2012, 05:12 PM   #443
xrtn2
Registered User
 
xrtn2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Valadares, Brazil
Posts: 19,667
Likes (Received): 17485

BRT IN CURITIBA



image hosted on flickr

CCD Transporte Coletivo DE700 por Franz Hecher, no Flickr

BRT IN BELO HORIZONTE

image hosted on flickr

Cronograma das obras de mobilidade urbana está em dia em BH por Portal PBH, no Flickr
__________________
BRAZIL !

Last edited by xrtn2; April 6th, 2012 at 05:21 PM.
xrtn2 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 6th, 2012, 09:28 PM   #444
State of the Union
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 154
Likes (Received): 12

Quote:
Originally Posted by HARTride 2012 View Post
Here in Tampa, FL, US, we will be opening up our first BRT line next year (hopefully spring 2013). It will be mixed traffic though, not dedicated lanes. And a portion of one of the roadways the BRT line will travel on is only 2 lanes.

Far from a real transitway, but nonetheless something more than just local bus, with a handful of express and circulatory routes.
The quote from nearly a year ago in this very thread that I have placed in my sig comes to mind when I read this post.

Not to start a debate, but just sayin'
__________________
"BRT is a crock of shit, because it can mean any sort of improvement beyond a bus line in mixed traffic. BRT is joke, and until it's defined properly, should not even be considered." -JustinB
State of the Union no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 24th, 2012, 11:42 PM   #445
IanCleverly
A New Kind of Medicine
 
IanCleverly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Caerphilly, South Wales
Posts: 446
Likes (Received): 230

Quote:
Originally Posted by The News, Portsmouth
Praise for new rapid route as users get to grips with the BRT



GOOD START Passengers getting an Eclipse bus on the BRT route.


THE bus rapid transit route between Fareham and Gosport is a smash hit with users. As well as buses, the route – which was launched on Sunday – can be used by cyclists, so avoiding the busy A32.

David Wright, 52, of Park Road in Gosport, said: "I cycled along the route to work and I thought it was fantastic. It was faster and safer than the A32. I hope they are able to continue the route further into Gosport, towards Holbrook. If the intention is to get people off the A32, perhaps they could do that by encouraging non-cyclists to get on a bike".

The BRT connects the two towns along the disused railway line. Gosport councillor Peter Edgar, who was one of the first people on board the Eclipse buses, spent many years campaigning for Light Rapid Transit. This would have seen a tram system linking Fareham and Gosport to Portsmouth through a route under the harbour.

Cllr Edgar said: "This is the largest investment in public transport since the train came in Victorian times. I travelled on the BRT and I was pleased with what I found. We would all have liked the LRT. However, it would have been a brave politician who said no to the government’s offer of £20m for a bus route only, with no other spending option".

But questions remain over whether it will be enough to cut congestion on the crowded A32. Driver Bill Aylward, 74, of Peak Lane in Fareham, said the roads were as bad as normal. He said: "I saw a bus at 8.30am and it didn’t have that many people on it. The traffic was bad and it won’t be helped by the bus lane in Fareham either. I don’t think it will get people out of their cars".

Hampshire County Council’s councillor in charge of transport issues, Cllr Mel Kendal, said: "The first 24 hours of service have gone very well and I am delighted those who have used Eclipse have been able to see for themselves the difference having a dedicated busway has made. Clearly congestion is not going to disappear overnight but it will be reduced significantly if more people travel by bus".

Source:- The News, Portsmouth


Eclipse Bus Group on Flickr
IanCleverly no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 25th, 2012, 02:20 AM   #446
HARTride 2012
Registered User
 
HARTride 2012's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 13,853
Likes (Received): 1976

Quote:
Originally Posted by State of the Union View Post
The quote from nearly a year ago in this very thread that I have placed in my sig comes to mind when I read this post.

Not to start a debate, but just sayin'
Yeah, I definitely see your point. It is not the best plan for BRT.
HARTride 2012 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 14th, 2012, 04:07 PM   #447
IanCleverly
A New Kind of Medicine
 
IanCleverly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Caerphilly, South Wales
Posts: 446
Likes (Received): 230

Quote:
Originally Posted by Streetsblog.org
MTA Chooses Busway For Possible Staten Island North Shore Transit Line



Under a plan selected by the MTA, bus rapid transit would run along Staten Island's North Shore, with local bus routes feeding into the dedicated infrastructure.

The MTA announced yesterday that if it builds a new rapid transit line along Staten Island’s North Shore, it will opt for bus rapid transit over light rail, an MTA spokesperson told Streetsblog. The obstacle now, as always, is money.

The proposed BRT line would run along Staten Island’s North Shore, which is twice as densely populated as the rest of the island. Even though no rapid transit exists in the area, over a third of residents take transit to work, relying entirely on buses.

Along much of the route, the busway will use the existing right-of-way of now-shuttered rail service. In some places the tracks are still there; in others, they are overgrown with vegetation or even underwater. At the western terminus of the right-of-way, the system would turn inland and run to the West Shore Plaza in mixed traffic.

In a presentation delivered yesterday at the Snug Harbor Cultural Center, the MTA outlined its decision to pursue bus improvements over light rail. Though light rail would be marginally faster than buses — and likely higher-capacity — the busway option has two decided advantages, according to the presentation.


In Port Richmond, bus rapid transit would run on an existing elevated structure, refurbished for buses.


First, by using an “open” busway design, in which multiple bus routes can shared the dedicated transit infrastructure before branching off, the busway can speed trips for people across more of the island. As such, the MTA predicts higher ridership on the BRT option than on light rail. Second, the MTA estimates the capital costs of the busway to be far lower than light rail: $371 million versus $645 million. North Shore bus riders would see their travel times to the St. George ferry terminal cut by around half.

At the same time as the MTA is pursuing the restoration of rapid transit to the North Shore, the city Department of City Planning and Economic Development Corporation are at work on a wide-ranging plan to revitalize the area, including pedestrian and bicycle improvements and efforts to promote mixed-use development. If both the planning and transit improvements move forward, the area could be truly transformed.

At least on the transit side, however, this project isn’t going anywhere without money (it also needs to go through design and engineering work and environmental review before it could be “shovel-ready”). MTA chief Joe Lhota has repeatedly said that the debt-strapped authority’s next capital plan will focus on improving the existing system, not expanding it. While a Staten Island busway is an order of magnitude cheaper than current MTA megaprojects like the Second Avenue Subway, right now there’s no indication at all of how the MTA will fund its capital needs.
Full story, including more links for those interested, on the Streetsblog website
IanCleverly no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 15th, 2012, 03:38 AM   #448
ParadiseLost
Registered User
 
ParadiseLost's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Delft, The Hague, Rotterdam
Posts: 219
Likes (Received): 14

Quote:
Originally Posted by Suburbanist View Post
The idea that BRTs are flexible because they can "divert" to many routes at the end of a busway is as (un)reasonable as suggest helicopters are better than planes because they can land on top of buildings instead of necessitating an airport.

There is this thing called connection, transfer or change.

As for the safety: it's all about physics. Buses where people are not wearing seat belts are inherently danger. INHERENTLY. It's not a matter of perception, of felling, it's a matter of engineering and physiology.
Safety isn't about physics, it's about statistics. And yours are clearly bullshit.
ParadiseLost no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 15th, 2012, 08:48 AM   #449
Sopomon
Hideous and malformed
 
Sopomon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 870
Likes (Received): 153

Quote:
Originally Posted by ParadiseLost View Post
Safety isn't about physics, it's about statistics. And yours are clearly bullshit.


Either way, it's pretty safe to say that even BRT is massively more unsafe than a Tram or Light rail
__________________
And he kicked so many rosebushes at her that eventually, Sasuke turned into a log.
Sopomon no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 16th, 2012, 12:19 AM   #450
ParadiseLost
Registered User
 
ParadiseLost's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Delft, The Hague, Rotterdam
Posts: 219
Likes (Received): 14

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sopomon View Post
Either way, it's pretty safe to say that even BRT is massively more unsafe than a Tram or Light rail
Not at all, that's a very irresponsible conclusion to make without any sort of evidence to back it up. In fact I wouldn't be surprised that per passenger mile BRT would be one of the safest modes of transport per passenger mile. Perhaps even more safe than trains and subways (but less so than the two modes you mentioned). At work now so I will try to find some stats later.
ParadiseLost no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 16th, 2012, 01:16 AM   #451
Silly_Walks
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,974
Likes (Received): 836

Quote:
Originally Posted by ParadiseLost View Post
[...] that's a very irresponsible conclusion to make without any sort of evidence to back it up.[..] Perhaps even more safe than trains and subways
Now THAT's an irresponsible conclusion. I can't really think of anything safer than travelling on fully grade separated subways. Staying at home might even be less safe when it comes to accidents hehe
Silly_Walks no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 16th, 2012, 08:04 AM   #452
Suburbanist
on the road
 
Suburbanist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: the rain capital of Europe
Posts: 27,529
Likes (Received): 21236

Geez, people misunderstood my statement regarding the mass of vehicles: due to their design, buses take much longer to stop than cars as the don't have equivalent braking capabilities proportional to their sheer mass as cars, yet they carry unrestrained passengers! And, contrary to ANY tramway (let alone LRT or regular rail/monorail), buses don't have the ability to be guided and stopped, on tracks, in case of emergencies. They rely solely on a human driver hitting the brake pedal. And they rely solely on human perception to judge things like safety distance.

Bus (as any other road vehicle) have virtually no way of knowing things like ROW intrusion or what else. They have the equivalent safety systems trains did... in 1890.

That is why buses are inherently dangerous BY DESIGN:
(1) they rely in grossly imprecise human input for all their movements
(2) at the same time, they don't have safety features other road vehicles (cars and trucks) have for passengers (airbags, seatbelts, survival cell concept, seats designed to minimize injuries in case of crash etc).

It is really a cut-and-clear case: since the late 1960's it's well understood how devastating crashes can be and how physical devices and restraint helps reduce injuries on car crashes. Yet, passengers travelling on city buses are as unrestrained and unprotected as a car passenger would be in, say, 1930. Buses, BY DESIGN, offer even more danger to passengers than motorbikes as passengers don't wear helmets and they can EASILY, by a consequence of physics, just crash onto each other should a sudden stop occur (like in a collision).
__________________
YIMBY - Yes, in my backyard!
Suburbanist no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 16th, 2012, 11:45 PM   #453
Silly_Walks
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,974
Likes (Received): 836

Quote:
Originally Posted by Suburbanist View Post
Yet, passengers travelling on city buses are as unrestrained and unprotected as a car passenger would be in, say, 1930. Buses, BY DESIGN, offer even more danger to passengers than motorbikes as passengers don't wear helmets and they can EASILY, by a consequence of physics, just crash onto each other should a sudden stop occur (like in a collision).
Well, this should not be a case of opinion, but something easily backed up by facts/numbers. Do you have proof buses are less safe than passenger cars and motorcycles?
Silly_Walks no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 17th, 2012, 01:52 AM   #454
ssiguy2
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: White Rock BC
Posts: 5,404
Likes (Received): 857

Buses don't have safety belts but neither does any other form of transit so I don't see the difference. I can also never recall anyone jumping infront of a bus unlike subway jumpers. That is why so many subway/metro systems are building enclosures to stop people from jumping.
Also, unless the weather is very severe, accidents with buses are extremely rare while quite common on LRT suchas in Calgary and Houston.
I still think the primary reason cities go with LRT has more to do with ribbon cutting ceremonies than it does sound transportation policy.
ssiguy2 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 17th, 2012, 02:50 AM   #455
ParadiseLost
Registered User
 
ParadiseLost's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Delft, The Hague, Rotterdam
Posts: 219
Likes (Received): 14

The only thing that's consistent with your theory Sub is that buses would be more unsafe for other road users than cars. Buses don't have restraints precisely because they don't really need them, the mass of the vehicle is the exact thing that protects the passengers in a collision. And besides the separate ROW in a BRT vastly decreases the chance of collisions.
ParadiseLost no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 17th, 2012, 02:59 AM   #456
Silly_Walks
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,974
Likes (Received): 836

Quote:
Originally Posted by ssiguy2 View Post
I still think the primary reason cities go with LRT has more to do with ribbon cutting ceremonies than it does sound transportation policy.
I think it has to do with greater capacity.
Silly_Walks no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 17th, 2012, 08:02 PM   #457
JustinB
Registered User
 
JustinB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Toronto
Posts: 1,633
Likes (Received): 30

In many ways, Suburbanist is correct. Buses are more dangerous than a motorcycle or car because buses do not have certain safety features that are available for cars. Same goes with rail lines. Most LRT, and subway lines are protected with signals, or ATO/ATC. Buses are at the mercy of the traffic around it, and the bus drivers. So yeah, buses are more dangerous than rail, or automobiles, if one thinks about it.

Of course, no one thinks about it, or cares. I am not going to think about how much more dangerous a bus is, than LRT.
__________________
The more valuable you perceive your time as worth, the less valuable it actually is.
JustinB no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 17th, 2012, 10:22 PM   #458
ParadiseLost
Registered User
 
ParadiseLost's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Delft, The Hague, Rotterdam
Posts: 219
Likes (Received): 14

Quote:
Originally Posted by JustinB View Post
In many ways, Suburbanist is correct. Buses are more dangerous than a motorcycle or car because buses do not have certain safety features that are available for cars. Same goes with rail lines. Most LRT, and subway lines are protected with signals, or ATO/ATC. Buses are at the mercy of the traffic around it, and the bus drivers. So yeah, buses are more dangerous than rail, or automobiles, if one thinks about it.

Of course, no one thinks about it, or cares. I am not going to think about how much more dangerous a bus is, than LRT.
No this is simply wrong and stupid.
Buses are more dangerous than motorcycles in the same way that sitting in your couch without a helmet is more dangerous than going skydiving with a parachute.
ParadiseLost no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 17th, 2012, 10:41 PM   #459
Silly_Walks
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,974
Likes (Received): 836

Quote:
Originally Posted by JustinB View Post
Buses are more dangerous than a motorcycle or car because buses do not have certain safety features that are available for cars.
Show me the per-trip and per-kilometer figures showing more casualties for buses than motorcycles or cars, and I might believe you.
Silly_Walks no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 18th, 2012, 07:02 AM   #460
joezierer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 237
Likes (Received): 9

Quote:
Originally Posted by ssiguy2 View Post
accidents with buses are extremely rare while quite common on LRT such as in ... Houston.
Unless I'm mistaken, 100% of the accidents on Houston's light rail are because of cars running red lights or turning left when not allowed.
joezierer no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Tags
brt, bus rapid transit, public transport, urban transport

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Related topics on SkyscraperCity


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 06:23 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us | privacy policy | DMCA policy

tech management by Sysprosium