What are the advantages of these things as opposed to, idk, a bus?
>>2057440Great photo op for local leaders and politiciansYou can brag about it on social media (although you seldom if ever use it)
>>2057440It's on rails which I assume aren't shared with vehicles, and doesn't need a battery charge.
>>2057440It doesn't get stuck in traffic and most very rarely stops at red lights. Trains are the future.
>>2057440Less pollution, quieter, smoother ride, more passengers, disabled people friendly, faster than bus, cheaper than metro.
>>2057449why are you here? it takes you 4 hours to get to anywhere that an airplane will land deliberately, you're scared of the coast so no boats obviously, bicycles are for homos, trains are for commies, so... you're here because /o/ is too fast and no one pays attention when you act out like a special needs child?
>>2057456lots of spite and projection going on in this post
>>2057457to my shock, I see that you couldn't even come up with an /n/ related reply
>>2057460why would there be an /n/ related reply to an /n/-unrealted seethe?
>>2057440Simple: HIGHER CAPACITY.Higher capacity per vehicle and consequently per corridor or per occupied area. Also cheaper in proportion to the capacity offered than the same capacity with buses.Modern trams of largest size can carry over 400 pax, biarticulated buses only get to 180. And those are very cumbersome.Not everywhere will use such large trams, but usually in all scenarios trams will be larger than the largest buses you can realistically use. A tight european downtown with 1st gen tram will have smaller trams, but still smaller buses. In practice, trams have *at least* 2:1 capacity advantage over buses, usually more.Means: You run a tram every 5 minutes gets you same capacity as 2 or 3 buses every 5 minutes. If you run 2 or 3 buses every 5 minutes you can't give them good signal priority (because it wouldn't give enough time to other traffic signal phases, for dumb people: the crossing street doesn't get enough green light). Also difficult to have a bus arrive every 1-2 minutes at the stop, because it may take up to a minute for boarding. Buses won't be perfectly spaced so they bunch up which means they lose time. Plus you have more vehicles, more drivers, etc.Getting similar capacity on one corridor with buses as with a tram is very impractical. You get slower and less regular service, probably double stops (where two buses stop at the same time and people have to run to their bus).On a secondary level trams tend to be more comfortable and attractive for people, they generally are always built with private ROW or other priority (bus could have that but often doesn't because due to low capacity it's not seen as economical), and they give an impression of commitment to higher quality service which attracts riders.>tl;dr tram gets higher capacity on any single corridor than bus line(s) ever could.>>2057444>>2057445Retards who don't get it, a bus can do all of that too.
>>2057462>a bus can do all of that too.Only if you have a dedicated lane for them. Yes in theory a bus with a dedicated lane that gets in no traffic and doesn't stop in traffic lights would be the same. Wait, I found a difference: the train is like 6 buses combined and it only needs a driver so less costs for the city.
>>2057440Less noise.>inb4 electric bus
>>2057468>Wait, I found a difference: the train is like 6 buses combinedYes but that wasn't mentioned in the quoted posts.>>2057470Wrong, electric buses, trolley or battery, are noticeably quieter than trams.
>Yes but that wasn't mentioned in the quoted posts.I don't care about that but if you think about it, it's more costly having 12 buses with 12 drivers than having 2 trains with 6 train cars each one and only 2 drivers.
>>2057491Only if you only consider paying the driver for "costs". It's expensive to rip up a road and put in a rail for a trolley, as opposed to *maybe* slapping down a coat of paint on the preexisting road.
