• agrammatic
    link
    fedilink
    3
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    There’s no requirement for metros to be above ground, or for that matter not use overhead lines.

    If we are talking an above-ground metro with overhead lines, that’s what I know as tram/light-rail. So, we are talking about the same thing with different words. My objection is to anything either underground or highspeed as frivolous requirements that serve to stop the project altogether (anything over 120 km/h, let’s say).

    Inside the cities it’s probably a good idea to bury them

    This will be how the project dies. The societal majority that you will have to build to approve of such an investment in public transport is also the societal majority that would be against choosing to bore through antiquities (if you respect the antiquities protection law as it stands, you will be stalled for multiple decades). The cost is also unbearable to begin with - the EU is not willing to fund any ambitious projects in Cyprus until bus usage cements itself.

    It’s far more realistic to convert existing bus lanes into dedicated tramways intra-city, take over some car lanes for exclusive use in other roads, and share the road where needed. Should you wish to connect cities by rail rather than bus, you can expropriate land along highways for inter-city service and go for the tram-train model.

    Making perfect the enemy of good in public transportation planning in Cyprus made one thing certain: the number of car trips as a percentage of all trips has not decreased in any noticeable amount.

    • @Smoke@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      1
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      If we are talking an above-ground metro with overhead lines, that’s what I know as tram/light-rail.

      My understanding is that if it runs on rails embedded in the road, or at least at grade, that’s a tram. If it’s grade separated from the road for higher speeds, that’s light rail.

    • @barsoap@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      11 year ago

      My objection is to anything either underground

      Well I wouldn’t object against not doing it underground, I just think that grade separation would be useful there’s more than one way to skin that particular cat.

      or highspeed as frivolous requirements that serve to stop the project altogether (anything over 120 km/h, let’s say).

      There’s plenty of Bombardier Talent 2 on S-Bahn duty in Germany, doing 140km/h, Talent 3 can do up to 200 which is technically HSR, same goes for the Stadler Flirt.

      That is: You can get those things off the shelf. Building track capable of supporting those kinds of speeds doesn’t really cost much on top of what you’re paying for new track in the first place. At the very least you should make sure that, where it wouldn’t explode costs, curve radii etc. are suitable for HSR.