View Single Post
  #127  
Old Posted Jan 15, 2022, 7:33 PM
Quixote's Avatar
Quixote Quixote is online now
Inveterate Angeleno
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 6,546
Quote:
Originally Posted by ue View Post
Do you have the stats for this? I'm not disputing you I just want to see at what thresholds HRT is necessary and where in LA that is. It seems like most cities are shifting to LRT, as it's much cheaper to build and, if you have long enough trains and frequent service, it can be not unlike HRT. The Paris Metro is known for being narrow, while the Calgary C-Train has higher ridership than a lot of American heavy rail.
There are no stats, although I did mention ridership density for Crenshaw North being in the 10,000+ range. At-grade LRT works for geographically smaller cities with significantly smaller populations, Calgary being a great example.

For core LA, at-grade LRT is not a viable alternative for the simple fact that most arterials aren’t wide enough. And even if you were yo have street-running rail, think about how slow and unreliable it would be. It only takes one idiot driver to ruin the commutes of hundreds of thousands of people.

The difference between HRT and LRT is grade-separation, frequency, and capacity, not the rolling stock itself.

Manila:

Video Link
__________________
“To tell a story is inescapably to take a moral stance.”

— Jerome Bruner
Reply With Quote