Why Some People lack the terms "Light Rail" & "BRT"?

[MTR Admiralty]

^I meant the existing tracks can be used to handle heavy rail. Of course signaling will have to change.

They must be converted, which at this time, Translink BC is not thinking about at this time. There is absolutely NO NEED for SkyTrain (and the Canada Line) to switch from its existing technology.

BRT is a glorified limited stop bus.

At the very base yes. Depending on the implementation schemes, it could be "a subway on the streets", but again, it really depends on the implementation.

Yes, but at least you can run any bus on there compared to an LRT where you need a dedicated fleet, tracks and facility for it.

As I said in my post, unless you are setting up a network to lines, it is pointless to have just one line.

It is fine for NJ because they don't have any other options and are not as large as NYC's ridership demands.

Correct. Most light rail systems have multiple-lines because there is a greater degree of inflexibility in LRT systems than in BRT. But don't forget though, BRT systems these days have multiple lines as well. And you do need a dedicated fleet of buses to optimally match the potential capacity and ridership of the line. Existing bus systems that are planning BRT lines have acquired special articulated and even bi-articulated buses whenever possible.

Well, Curitaba's busses is really a BRT on a ROW. While NYCT BRT is rather a pay then board bus.

Well arguably since both the RIT and SBS have "ideally" segregated lanes, they do have common ground, n'est-ce pas? And both systems do have pay-then-board, right? But RIT has clear and dedicated stations, and passengers have to walk in through a system of fare control before accessing the system. In NY, it runs on an honour system.

[Grand Concourse]

Well that is true, but you could probably use the same type of artic bus like the Nova LFSA and run that on other lines. Thus the flexibility of moving buses around to where they are needed.

=

Continuing on my other point of BRT over LRT and directed to anyone in general:

Basically concidering how congested the roads in Manhattan are, you are not likely to ever get the maximum use out of the LRTs because some idiot driver might be blocking the box forcing the train to wait at the light till the track is clear. LRTs works if there's as few obstructions as possible or if it is raised above ground - which NIMBYs will oppose vehemently.

 

Also knowing the MTA, I kinda doubt they would buy special buses if they were to ever have BRTs as it would be best to have a mass order [using existing buses] than 'isolated/specific' ones. Plus I think SBS is probably the closest we'll get to having a 'BRT'.

[MTR Admiralty]

Well that is true, but you could probably use the same type of artic bus like the Nova LFSA and run that on other lines. Thus the flexibility of moving buses around to where they are needed.

Don't forget though, BRT buses for the most part have specific branding that allows regular customers to distinguish them from conventional buses. So if you want to run BRT type buses on regular lines, you might have to remove some kind of branding. Or if they run without branding on non-BRT lines and then they are taken to run on a BRT line, they must have some kind of branding. You don't see +SelectBusService+ branding on regular artics in the Bronx on a normal basis, do you?

[Grand Concourse]

Well that is true, but those are wraps. So the bus, if needed, can be sent to a regular line ... eventually. Thus 'flexibility', compared to a specifically designed bus for only BRT.

But I do agree it won't be like the O5 suburbans that can run on the express route and later put on a local route. I didn't mean 'immediate'.

[MTR Admiralty]

Well that is true, but those are wraps. So the bus, if needed, can be sent to a regular line ... eventually. Thus 'flexibility', compared to a specifically designed bus for only BRT.

But I do agree it won't be like the O5 suburbans that can run on the express route and later put on a local route. I didn't mean 'immediate'.

The thing is, it really depends on the system and form of implementation. The BRT buses must be suitable for the type of capacity the BRT system will try to achieve. So most systems, that are running on NEW corridors, these days will try to get specialised buses for BRT use. Those systems are in cities that do not have an existing heavy rail or light rail infrastructure for BRT to supplement. Even in cities with exsting and extensive rail transit systems, the BRT systems are to service areas that are in dire need of transit (LACMTA Orange Line and MBTA Silver Line) and thus would have to acquire such buses in order to achieve such demands.

 

As for the SBS though, the SBS routes are currently alleviating existing bus corridors. Meaning, there are existing bus routes and the areas are not really so underserved. Like the M15 and Bx12 SBS routes are basically upgraded limited stop routes. So there is a need for flexiblity because the local runs alongside the SBS route. But that's us, not other cities. In Guangzhou, China, there is a similar situation: selective local routes run through the BRT section and have BRT branding. They operate as BRT within the BRT corridor (prepay boarding), but outside the BRT corridor, they function as normal buses. But again, the Zhongshan Avenue BRT project is meant to alleviate existing bus corridors, not to provide NEW service, per se.

[Grand Concourse]

Ok, good points. Thanks for your input.

[KeystoneRegional]

Please, watch the Nazi Banksters Crimes Ripple Effect at http://jforjustice.co.uk/banksters

[MTR Admiralty]

Oui et a convenu, both have 'ideally' segregated lanes and both have pay-the-board fare structure. Well, that is only fare control part of it, so fare control has tons of difference between the RIT and SBS as well as station system.

Compare:

[Kamen Rider]

Please, watch the Nazi Banksters Crimes Ripple Effect at http://jforjustice.co.uk/banksters

[MTR Admiralty]

that would be a waste of infrastructure in the bronx, and insiffecent on the M15

The system used in the RIT will not be used in the SBS system ever, at least for now. But some BRT enthusiasts in the city do want that to happen.

[Grand Concourse]

that would be a waste of infrastructure in the bronx, and insiffecent on the M15

Not only a waste, but a vandal's paradise. That 'station' wouldn't last a week at best probably.

[Forest Glen]

I'm sure all of the high school students would hop that turnstile.

[MTR Admiralty]

I'm sure all of the high school students would hop that turnstile.

Here or there? Because the design kind of doesn't allow that to happen.

[2Easy]

I agree that people don't know transit terminology but it is what it is. In Los Angeles most people call our light rail, subway, and commuter rail the same thing...the train. When people do make a distinction for light rail I usually hear people call it a streetcar, trolley, or tram. I don't recall ever hearing "light rail". Of course I frequently overhear our light rail train operators referred to a "bus drivers" so what can you do...

 

I also have never heard "BRT" outside of transit circles. People call our BRT line the "Orange Line". Never BRT.