Whilst this is very cool, I’m a little concerned about how the pros for “very light rail” basically amount to having better vibes than busses. Not that I even disagree with that premise, but I’d want something more concrete…
It’s all about the cost savings (in the short term. I don’t know how long such trackwork would last)
That’s kind of my concern. I’m worried they’re cutting so many corners that the competitive edge over busses all but vanishes and, best case scenario, this ends up being a bizarre PR campaign for public transit.
There are a lot of advantages of tram that you can’t eliminate no matter how much cost you cut. It’s quiet, it’s smooth, it’s electric and doesn’t need big batteries, it’s on separate tracks so it’s predictable, it’s ways easier to operate so thr drivers are easier to find.
I think the article said CVLR would be battery powered to eliminate the need for overhead cables. I’m not saying I believe it is worse than e.g. and electric bus. But even the company producing it seems to struggle to articulate its advantages.
The reason I care is because I really want more trams in English towns/cities. But not if it’s a pared down version that gives the entire concept a bad image
Smaller batteries that can recharge a bit while the tram is at station is actually pretty cool concept that was tried several times and as far as I remember was deemed working.
But I get your point.
Trams are common sense. So are trains.
*Sensible
You overestimate “common”
