|
|
| Re: Blog Post: IBX cannot be a tram (1608453) | |||
 |
|||
| Home > SubChat | |||
|
[ Read Responses | Post a New Response | Return to the Index ] |
|
||
|
Re: Blog Post: IBX cannot be a tram |
|
|
Posted by New Flyer #857 on Sun Sep 25 07:20:59 2022, in response to Blog Post: IBX cannot be a tram, posted by geoffc on Sat Sep 24 21:53:33 2022. This is the first time I'm hearing about street-running relevant to the IBX. I thought the whole idea was that you have an existing corridor, but of course that corridor may not cover the whole intended routing.The SIlence indicates that street-running may be necessary for a short while in Middle Village. That could be a reason to go with trams instead of heavy-rail. The historic advantages of trams is their high flexibility. They can go fast like a subway when on their own private ROW, and then can function like buses, making smooth 90-degree terms at intersections, while they are on the street. Platforms to access them also can be much simpler. Trams should be the go-to especially if you aren't fully sure how the line will develop long-term, because they can basically go anywhere rail is installed. I disagree that NYC being a "subway city" should have bearing on what type of vehicle is used for this project. The author indicates that probably IBX vehicles would be segregated from the rest of the system anyway, and we're more than used to certain rail vehicles not being able to access certain tracks. |
|
|
|