posted
Awhile back I read an article somewhere on-line comparing rail transit with so-called "Bus Rapid Transit" or BRT. For those unfamiliar, BRT uses dedicated bus lanes with stops similar to train station platforms. Some right-wingers are actively promoting this over rail, believing it to be cheaper than rail but equally effective.
Anyway, I can't remember where I read the article. It cited a number of statistics and studies that showed that buses are less popular with the public and attract fewer riders than trains. Did anyone else read this and remember where they saw it?
------------------ Trust God, love your neighbor, and never mistake opinion for truth. -Mr. Toy
posted
We've had this discussion in Houston. Buses are about 10% of the cost of light rail. Unfortunately, our "Brown Streak" was needed to make Houston a "world-class" city. {Brown Streak = most popular name for our 7 mile long, $50 million per mile light rail that runs between our Billion dollar's worth of new stadiums (baseball, football, basketball)}
New bus routes do nothing for traffic congestion, besides adding to it. Light rail, done right, can aleviate some traffic. Unfortunately, Houston was not "done right", it was "done dirty" and dependant on the amount of money that developers added to Metro's pac.
Metro spent $50,000,000 per mile to lay track on a flat city street with easy access to the work site. Yes.... there was a "little" fat in the contract......
Posts: 1418 | From: Houston, Republic of Texas | Registered: Jan 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Miami has this is the southern part of town. It is called the South Dade Busway and runs parallel to U.S. Highway One. The county says they eventually hope to extend the commuter MetroRail one day, but did the Busway first, since elevated rail extension is too far off in the future.
Posts: 255 | Registered: Nov 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Mr. Toy, I think the article you are referring to can be found at www.gobrt.org.
Under "news", it links to an article titled "Stop the Bus!" by Paul W. Weyrick, followed by a rebuttal by Bill Vincent.
Note that Weyrick, who argues for rail, is a conservative. Vincent, who argues for Bus Rapid Transit, is a former Clinton appointee. He also heads the Bus Rapid Transit Policy Center. This doesn't seem to jive with your statement "some right-wingers are actively promoting this (BRT) over rail..."
posted
Well..I had a really long reply, but my computer crashed and im really mad!
Anyway, I think that this is a huge issue today in America, especially because of Amtrak's financial problems as Mr. Toy said. There are right-wingers that will look for anything to shut down our beloved Amtrak! Buses do cost less to operate because all you need is a driver even though a Coach USA/Greyhound bus only seats about 50 people compared to a whole big Superliner haul train. Now most people that take trains are railfans like us, or cannot afford an airplane but also don’t like to take Coach USA/Greyhound. Next there are the people that take buses because of the small Amtrak coach/bus fare price. But some say on a train you need to buy fancy meals in the dining car which is not 100% true because of the snack car, and some station stops give you time to grab something at McDonalds or so, as they would at a Bus Depot. But hopefully people more politicians would realize that a nation without a passenger rail transportation system would be extremely lame! And trains are much nicer, they have lounges etc. Obviously that is not controversial, but if train riders on Amtrak ever go down rapidly the right wingers such as Senator McCain of Arizona would have a lot to go against us with. So hopefully Amtrak riders will go up in the next couple of years. But the bottom line is that Amtrak must do something to attract more..Like a lot more customers! They had an ad over the summer, but now I never see it anymore, they need something that basically says look what we have and hopefully people will decide to take an Amtrak adventure. But Amtrak’s debts will not disappear and the government is just waiting for it to just sky rocket (debt) and they will move in L ----- www.saveamtrak.org
Tell me what you think, I went a bit off topic at the end. But its sure much better than my homework that I just finished! J Anton L. AIM: pillsburymn pillsbury09@excite.com
Posts: 1082 | From: Los Angeles, CA. USA | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Light Rail - or any form of rail - is great when you are moving people along a linear corridor, or basically from point A to point B.
The problem with such a system is many metro areas have sprawled out in every direction - there is no more "linear". Take, for instance - Portland, OR. We have a light rail line extending from Hillsboro to Beaverton, then downtown and East Portland to Gresham. About 40 miles in length. There are two branches, the Airport Line and the Interstate Line (under construction), each about five or so miles.
BUT - you have various communities that are north and south, west and east of these lines. Do you force passengers to transfer modes of transportation (as it is being done now), or do you opt for passenger convenience?
BRT allows a transit system to offer a corridor, but the individual buses can then travel local routes at the end of the BRT corridor. A perfect theoritical example, again in Portland, is McLoughlin Blvd. Many buses use McLoughlin Blvd. between Portland and Milwaukie, where the various buses then take side streets to the various neighborhoods. Today, these buses all share the road with other vehicles.
BRT could offer the advantages of light rail - a separated guideway, station platforms similar to rail stations - and the benefit of buses to serve neighborhoods. All at a much lower construction AND operating cost, and with the added benefit that many passengers don't have to get off a train and onto a bus mid-way in their journey.
There is not a single cure-all transit solution, a proper network will consist of both buses and trains built and operated appropriately.
Whether people would not use public transportation because it is a bus is subjective - if the buses and bus stations are properly maintained (basically, keep them clean, keep them reliable, and keep the 'bad people' out), people WILL ride buses too. There are days when I'd much rather take a bus over the train, because the bus is not crowded and the train is full of all kinds of people I'd rather not be near - even if the bus takes 20 minutes longer.
Posts: 15 | From: Kalispell, MT - USA | Registered: Mar 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Articles I have read concerning bus vs. rail have claimed that rail is cheaper in the long run. After the initial build and startup costs, labor costs are less due to less operators, fuel costs are considerably less, and the equipment lasts longer and requires less maintenance.
Steel wheels on steel rails are more efficient and have less rolling resistance than tires on pavement. This was once demonstrated by having a young woman pull a passenger train into a station using a rope tied to a mouthpiece she held in her teeth. I have seen the photos.
Posts: 1572 | From: St. Paul, MN | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
CoastStarlight99, I'm having a problem understanding your thoughts. Would you explain:
"Anyway, I think this is a huge issue today in America, especially because of Amtrak's financial problems as Mr. Toy said."
To start, what is a "huge issue today in America?" What is the "huge" issue?
Secondly, regarding the website I referenced, and responses by the other posters, BRT is being proposed (or implemented) as an alternative to municpal/regional light rail systems. How does this relate to Amtrak?
Thirdly, where in this thread did you find "...because of Amtrak's financial problems as Mr. Toy said?" I can't seem to find where he said that in this thread. Can you lead me to where he said that in this thread? But who cares? I don't. Do you? Do you really need Mr. Toy to validate your thoughts and opinions? There's an old saying that goes something like "if two people always agree, that's strong circumstantial evidence that only one person is doing all the thinking." CS99, are you doing your own thinking?
You go on to say "There are right-wingers that will look for anything to shut down our beloved Amtrak."
So my fourth question to you (and Mr. Toy, who hasn't responded to my previous post), is why is this a lefty-righty issue? BRT is simply being proposed as an alternative to light rail. Proponents seem to be lefties (read their bios on their website), and proponents of light rail seem to be righties. And who cares? It's simply a another alternative to mass transit issues. It should be considered, on a case by case basis. Wigwagfan's statement is right on the mark: "There is not a single cure-all transit solution; a proper network will consist of both buses and built and operated appropriately."
To continue, you state "...the government is just waiting for it to just skyrocket (debt) and they will move in L----"
My fifth question is what is "L-----?" And what does any of this diatribe have to do with BRT as an alternative to municipal/regional mass transit problems?
Finally, you say "Light rail is for copmmuter (sic) services, BRT is for long trips..." Really? Would you guide me to this policy position on the website advocating BRC?
[This message has been edited by zephyr (edited 01-07-2004).]
posted
Please calm yourself, Mr. Zephyr. CoastStarlight99 is just a teenager, and is still learning his way around public policy issues. Cut him some slack.
Thanks for the link, but I didn't find the article you mentioned. I don't think this site was the one I was looking for, as the site I read it on was more rail oriented. But I'll look for it again when I have more time.
As for the left-right matter, I have read that the Bush administration (very right wing) is actively promoting BRT and actively discouraging light rail investment. Yes, there are right-wingers who support rail, but they tend to be in the minority.
Perhaps I should have placed this under the commuter forum, but there isn't much activity over there, and I didn't know if it would get seen.
------------------ Trust God, love your neighbor, and never mistake opinion for truth. -Mr. Toy
As for the lefty-righty matter, your broad brush political labeling of BRT proponents seemed uncalled for. I'm getting the impression that you label anyone who disagrees with your views as a "right-winger." I'm not sure what your definition of that term is, but it seems your intent is to belittle that person and/or to curry favor from those who agree with your partisan politics. The result is you alienate (or flame) the very people you are trying to persuade over to your point of view (if that is actually your objective).
Finally, I don't need a lecture from you on my questions to CS99. I didn't (still don't) understand what his post has to do with what essentially is a community/regional transportation issue. I asked him specific questions to help gain some understanding on the point(s) he's trying to make. Mr. Toy, what got you so agitated over this post? Was it that I questioned this being a big righty-lefty issue? It ain't in my book. Or my comment suggesting independent thinking? It's OK with me. Or did I come across disagreeing, heaven forbid, with your position? Actually, I don't have a strong opinion on this matter. To me, BRT is simply an alternative a community might consider to solve their local transportation problems.
Mr. Toy, please calm down and cut me some slack. As this forum's token "right-winger"(I thought I would beat you to the punch with your label), I reserve the right to disagree with you from time to time.
[This message has been edited by zephyr (edited 01-08-2004).]
But look you little no good peace of shit...If you want to talk to me about train related politics..I know alot! Dont be screwing around and telling me I dont know nothing ....
If youve got guts email me @ pillsbury09@excite.com
But you probally dont..
Anton
[This message has been edited by CoastStarlight99 (edited 01-08-2004).]
Posts: 1082 | From: Los Angeles, CA. USA | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
As a militant centrist I would like to point out that many of Amtrak's strongest supporters include powerful Republicans (Kay Bailey Hutchison, Tommy Thompson, Trent Lott). Even John McCain claims he is not against passenger trains, only the current structure of financing them. Although, Mr. Toy IS correct in that a majority of Amtrak's opponents are of the Republican persuasion.
I do not see this as a left-right issue. It is my opinion that the cause of supporting Amtrak can be best served by welcoming people from the entire political spectrum. To me it is a common-sense issue and it broadens transportation choices. That should appeal to the right.
Posts: 1572 | From: St. Paul, MN | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
It is unfortunate to see how this message board has deteriorated over the past six months or so. We used to have intelligent discussions on this board.
Personally, I rarely look at this website anymore. Today, I saw Mr. Toy's intelligently written post and had hope that this board may be heading back on the right track. As I continued reading the replys, the quality headed straight down.
Whether I agree or disagree with Mr Toy is irrelevant. Everyone should be able to post their opinions without intimidation, obscene language from others, and generally, very immature comments.
I hope some day this message board can return to quality conversation, and not just stupid remarks.
quote:Originally posted by TwinStarRocket: As a militant centrist I would like to point out that many of Amtrak's strongest supporters include powerful Republicans (Kay Bailey Hutchison, Tommy Thompson, Trent Lott).....Although, Mr. Toy IS correct in that a majority of Amtrak's opponents are of the Republican persuasion.
That's all I was trying to say, no more, no less. Most of us are well aware that SOME Republicans are very pro rail. I have always acknowledged that fact. But the fact remains MOST of Amtrak's critics are far right-wing Republicans. Very FEW rail critics are left-wingers. Moderates also tend to be pro-rail.
Zephyr wrote:
quote: Mr. Toy, what got you so agitated over this post? Was it that I questioned this being a big righty-lefty issue?
First of all, I am not agitated. Your post, however, came across as unnecessarily heated. Hence my concern. I mention the left-right issue for reasons stated above, not because I have anything personal against right-wing views in general. (I support some right-wing causes, such as school vouchers.)
Thanks for the Weyrich PDF link. It is similar to what I read before, but it is not the same article.
CoastStarlight99, I shouldn't have to say this, but directing profanity towards Mr. Zephyr isn't helping the situation, so I will no longer come to your defense in this matter.
[This message has been edited by Mr. Toy (edited 01-09-2004).]
First, im sorry to Mr. Toy ------The profanity was not nessecary. I just don't like it when people directly make fun of my comments . ---------- Im going to leave it a that I dont want to make any ememies on the board..but one thing --[QUOTE]Originally posted by Konstantin: [B]It is unfortunate to see how this message board has deteriorated
^^Dont bad mouth this board,it is alot better than trainorders, or amtraktrains, etc. This board is the most professional!
Lets keep it running nice guys, we got ride of the irishchief and hopefully we wont have any more of that kind of people and well be fine!
Anton AIM: pillsburymn pillsbury09@excite.com im waiting on that email zephyr
Posts: 1082 | From: Los Angeles, CA. USA | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Konstantin: It is unfortunate to see how this message board has deteriorated over the past six months or so. We used to have intelligent discussions on this board.
Personally, I rarely look at this website anymore. Today, I saw Mr. Toy's intelligently written post and had hope that this board may be heading back on the right track. As I continued reading the replys, the quality headed straight down.
Whether I agree or disagree with Mr Toy is irrelevant. Everyone should be able to post their opinions without intimidation, obscene language from others, and generally, very immature comments.
I hope some day this message board can return to quality conversation, and not just stupid remarks.
Like Konstantin, I too have been dismayed by the recent conduct on this board. Many of the long-time members here have shown enough sense to stay away from the rampant flaming and other such nonsense, while still giving us the benefit of their experience, insight, and considered commentary. While, not naming names, a small handfull of newer members have dragged some others down to their level.
I don't know what the story was behind the short lived tenure of Irish Chieftain, the latest active moderator, but this place is in definite need of a sheriff. Not someone to crack down on anything and everything that is the slightest bit off topic or out of place, but a sort-of Andy Taylor type (of Mayberry NC) who would mostly just sit back and keep a watch out.
(so much for my planned comments on the subject of BRT...for what it's worth this could have been a good non-Amtrak discussion)
[This message has been edited by Ken V (edited 01-09-2004).]
posted
I think the basic problem with this board is its recent infestation by teen-aged illiterates. Like Konstantin and others I now only occasionally look at this board, and feel that it's not worth participating if the responses are so silly and unintelligent. This is regrettable, as I think there are all sorts of people out there who have much to say, but don't want to be associated with 13 year-olds who seemed to have failed basic English in their local high school.
Posts: 524 | From: Toronto Ont. Canada | Registered: Mar 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Mr. Toy, when you quoted me about powerful Republicans, I hope you did not think it was reacting to your comments about left-right issues. I agree with you 100%, including the part about the Bush administration being very right-wing.
I was really reacting to the previous post that had used the term "Republican Facist" by trying to point out that Republican and anti-rail should not be necessarily tied to each other. And I really am only defending Republicans because we need pro-rail Republicans to help Amtrak.
Anyway, I never want to be mistaken for a critic of Mr. Toy, only one of his fans.
Back on topic: a campus BRT runs by my house. Non-stop 40mph between U of MN campuses, built on an old rail right-of-way. They call it a dedicated transitway. It's noisy and the busses smell. But they built a bike path along it so I am happy. I'd much prefer rail.
And as for the deterioration of this forum, let's spam it with intelligent polite discourse!
Posts: 1572 | From: St. Paul, MN | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
You are a little jerk royaltrain! People like you are what make message boards hectic so that good posters leave. Now your saying that to be a railfan you have to be a 60 year old conductor. This message board was %100 fine, until Zephyr insulted me, and now were all back to the issues that Irishchieftrain started.
Anton
Posts: 1082 | From: Los Angeles, CA. USA | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Since I cannot figure out how to add pictures, change text, insert smiley faces, or many of the other neat little things some of you do, I agree with Jonathan and CS99 that we do not need any more criticism of any poster's English skills.
The more people, especially young people, that we bring into a discussion of rail issues the better. If this forum were 100% serious people discussing serious issues it would not be as fun. Sorry for being off topic, but I wanted to throw in a vote for a little tolerance and a lot less insults.
Posts: 1572 | From: St. Paul, MN | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
