Originally Posted by Cirrus
Once again, I don't think anyone is saying that BRT has no place in the world. We're saying that the people who think *rail* has no place in the world and can be totally replaced by BRT are wrong.
The pro rail crowd is NOT the group that thinks BRT and rail can't exist together.
Ha! This is so untrue. I have seen whole pro-rail websites dedicated to promoting rail with every effort put forth to discredit BRT including specific mention about our BRT being a direct cause for lower ridership based on very outdated statistics, and even then it was really caused by other factors including a recession at the time. I have also seen pro-rail lobby groups operating in this city to the detriment of moving transit forward. I would like to know the source of the original quote.
I have read study after study comparing ridership capacities between BRT and LRT indicating that they are very similar. It is only when you get beyond that capacity, that rail is needed and then you have to consider some sort of heavy rail. There is absolutely no dispute that BRT cannot compete with heavy rail for passenger load, but in mid-sized cities, a good implementation of BRT may be all that is needed.
I really see this as a pointless discussion and using a quotation titled Dropping Like Flies
and some of the language that follows implies the opposite to reality. What has happened in both cities mentioned is that BRT has succeeded to the extent that capacity has been reached, and there is a natural progression to a higher capacity rail solution.
What is happening in both cities should not deter other cities from implementing BRT. On contrary, it should deliver great hope that BRT alone can make public transit more attractive in many cities.