Even if you think what you would say is obvious, please add. This is genuinely something I think makes sense regarding local bus routes given the longevity of light rail and how infrequently routes change, but I also suffer from confirmation bias, so I’m hoping for reasons this would be a terrible idea but obviously would prefer reasons it would be an even more amazing idea than I thought.

  • pgetsos@kbin.social
    2·
    1 year ago

    Light rail/trams are better especially for avenues etc. But busses are more flexible, and you usually need a combination of both for best results

  • Kempeth@feddit.de
    1·
    1 year ago

    Busses have their uses. Lots of commentor have mentioned the flexibility in setting up / changing routes. But there’s also the flexibility in sizes. You can start a line with a large van or small mini bus and your only overhead is the driver. From there you can scale that up according to demand up to frequently run articulated busses. Meanwhile your minimum investment for tram includes at the very least a not inexpensive track installation.

    Don’t get me wrong. If you have the passenger volume that investment definitely pays off. But I don’t like this unnecessary competition between two modes of transport that can be very complimentary to each other and are both better than individual cars.

  • farsinuce@feddit.dk
    0·
    1 year ago

    We tried in Denmark (Aarhus). Quite expensive, and too many issues. Electrical busses (with dedicated lanes) seems like the better solution, bus but this is also not cheap.

    Edit: Spelling

  • lps@lemmy.ml
    0·
    1 year ago

    Light rail is infinitely more expensive to construct and it only takes one delay/accident and all subsequent trains after cause a log jam…vs a bus which can route around it.

    A better solution uses corridors dedicated to buses that are electric powered.

    Something like this was done in Colombia with these routes being connected by ground hubs, similar to subway stations.