"Dave Arquati" wrote in message ...

"Dave Arquati" wrote in message
...

"tim" wrote in message
...

"Dave Arquati" wrote in message
...
Just seen this story online:
http://makeashorterlink.com/?N5BE22DA5



See the Croydon tram. Dedicate the route to *trams* not buses and you
have a
high capacity, less polluting, more attractive route.

90% of this is on segregated, previously under-utilised, railway
alignments.
I don't see how it can be comparable?

True... but isn't the principle of segregation the same whether its on old
railway alignments or not? Segregate an on-road tram and its route still
doesn't have any cars in it. The disadvantage on road is that there are more
crossings and access problems; the advantage is that you can use the
segregated portion for other public transport too, i.e. buses.

We already have bus lanes so by a "dedicated route"

But where in the Central London area (anywhere up to about 7 miles out)
are you going to find space for a dedicated link? A bus lane doesn't have
to be continuous but a tram line does.

I assume you mean
something more than just a lane on the road. If you have a dedicated,
generally traffic-free route for buses,

but we don't in many areas.

and the buses are full up, it's an
obvious next step to introduce trams since they are more attractive and
higher capacity - you cater for the overcrowding as well as allowing for
further growth, and even creating it since people are more likely to make a
journey by tram than bus.

IMHO you just spend a lot of money to replace an inadequate system
with a more desirable but still inadequate system

Tim



Dave Arquati
Imperial College, SW7