Buses
are boring and trains are sexy?
J.H.
Crawford contra Lloyd Wright
"People
like trains, and use them"
Are
there many differences between buses and light rail? Yes! Do they
provide similar performences? No! Or as a mayor of Los Angeles once
replied: "Buses are boring. Trains are sexy."
Not boring buses (Malta)
Boring
or sexy, cheap or expensive, poor or comfortable? A bus is not simply
a train or a light rail vehicle! Both represent modes of transportation
in their own right. Nevertheless light rail and similar rail-based
modes have proved to be very successfull in many cases.
In the words of J.H. Crawford (editor of Carfree Times): "In
the end, they're still buses. The fiction was maintained that bus
rapid transit can often provide similar performance to light rail.
The reality is that people will switch to rail vehicles in much
larger numbers than anticipated. People will avoid buses, no matter
how you dress them up. It's just not a comfortable way to travel."
Two
visions
Lloyd
Wright (of the Institute for Transportation & Development Policy)
however does have some concern regarding the vision of Crawford:
"Given
the success of Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) throughout Latin America
(Curitiba, Bogotá, Quito, etc.), the 17-city US programme,
the 5-city Australian programme, and the Canadian efforts, I think
it is a bit unfair to give such a negative impression to this option.
In many respects, BRT does emulate rail-like performance (e.g.,
São Paulo's Nove de Junho corridor is recording volumes over
50,000 passengers per hour per direction). Of course, one aspect
of BRT that is different from rail is its price tag. BRT systems
are constructed for US$1 million to US$10 million per kilometer,
a fraction of heavy-rail systems.
Yes,
the image issue of bus travel does need to be addressed, especially
in developed nations. Thus, the BRT programme in the USA emphasizes
rail-like vehicles from such manufacturers as Neoplan and Civis.
However,
in the developing nations, BRT does not necessarily have such an
image problem. The citizens and municipal leaders in Curitiba and
Bogotá would not agree with the assessment that they have
an inferior product. In fact, Bogotá's new TransMilenio system
is far superior to most rail systems that I have experienced.
In
the end, it may not even be a strict choice between BRT or rail,
as São Paulo has shown that the two options are mutually
complementary, with a subway serving the urban core and busways
connecting to other areas. At the very least, we should give this
promising option a fair chance to prove itself."
CIVIS
complementary where money is tight?
Carfree
Times editor Crawford replies in his newsletter (Issue 23, January
2002): "As
readers of this newsletter will be aware, the editor strongly favors
rail-based urban transport systems because of their very high energy
efficiency, good speed, and high levels of passenger comfort. This
is not to say that buses do not have their place, especially in
cities where money is very tight. It is interesting to note, however,
that Curitiba, which pioneered the advanced bus systems supported
by Mr. Wright, is now considering the conversion of some routes
to light rail, presumably because of the lower operating costs,
reduced pollution, and increased capacity.
It is worth noting that street-running light rail systems can often
be installed for a price that falls within the range quoted by Mr.
Wright. There is, of course, no question that the ability of conventional
buses to run both on and off the BRT network does add a great deal
of flexibility to this system, which may be very useful in some
circumstances.
Recent
US experience with bus and rail systems seems to suggest that ridership
projections for bus-based systems are consistently too high, whereas
ridership projections for new urban rail systems are often exceeded
by large margins. People like trains, and use them."
And
yes, one have to agree with Crawford that rail-based public transport
is very promising. But buses will play their role for sure. Light
rail is almost never usefull as a stand-alone system. The benefits
of a light rail application only bears fruit if it is part of a
larger network of buses, or buses and other modes of transportation.
Guided bus in Essen (D): hopeless
Experiments
In
the past there were some hopeless experiments to add light rail-properties
to buses. These experiments weren't very succesfull, as the Essen-case
in Germany still shows today. A high quality tramway to the housing
area of Kray was sacrified for a guided bus showcase. Today only
the medium strip alignment survived. The trolley isn't used anymore
since dual running in the tram tunnel is finished due to practical
and safety reasons.
So far the Nancy fake-tram didn't perform properly
Today
again experiments are taken place. And again one tries to add light
rail-properties to buses, such as is the case in Nancy (France).
Here a bus is disguised as 'rubbertired tram', which is in fact
a mechanical guided trolley bus. Many accidents have occured due
to the yet immature technology. Other projects in France - such
as Translohr and CIVIS - still have to prove their usefullness.
This
Rouen bus is 'reading' the dots on the road
The
optical guided bus in east-west corridor in Rouen deserves the benefits
of the doubt. The line is numbered T2, while T1 is already in use
for the tramway network of the north-south corridor. Unfortunately
to much money was spent to the tram tunnel in the centre. Only money
for cheaper CIVIS-based public transport remained.
Buses
AND Trains