I checked a few stop pairings in Prague (and I focused on the straight ones). Again it seems to hover around 17-19km/h. Better than Finch West, but its far from amazing. I haven't seen anything that reaches the promised 22km/h speeds on Finch West.
I'm not sure which stop combos you looked at, so I'm not saying you're wrong, but my frame of comparison is the high speed services that run in the outer parts of town, comparable to the Finch line, so those are the representative examples I'm going with. All travel times and distances are sourced from the official website at dpp.cz, and the location given is the exact stop name you can find on their site yourself.
All searches are for 9:00 am on Dec 8, so that they represent a workday schedule and not a Sunday evening one.
Dědina - Dejvická: 7 km, 16 minute travel time = 26.25 km/h average speed
Výtoň - Libuš: 12 km, 28 minute travel time = 25.71 km/h average speed
Sídliště Barrandov - Slivenec: 2 km, 4 minute travel time = 30 km/h average speed
Sídliště Řepy - Anděl: 8 km, 18 minute travel time = 26.67 km/h average speed
Bílá Hora - Malostranská: 8 km, 20 minute travel time = 24 km/h average speed
As an aside tidbit of note, their longest route, the 26, is 23 km long, but takes only 1 hour and 10 minutes to travel its complete route. Contrast that with the 501.
We have all the tools we need, we're just not taking advantage of them.
As I responded to you earlier today, just because something can be done in a hypothetical sense doesn't mean it ever will be done. Has anything been done about 510 and 512? No. We've had shitty speeds for years and years. And you expect something different this time? You think that all of a sudden that this time something might be better? That's like a woman dating a guy thinking "I can change him, with me, it will change". Just because it is possible in theory doesn't mean it will ever happen.
A compelling argument to never do anything about anything that has historically been terrible.
A more apt dating analogy would be "I've been ****ed over by so many people in my life, that must mean I will never be able to find a healthy relationship".
I obviously can't guarantee anything, but right after opening day is the perfect time for lots of people to complain and maybe hit a critical mass. Remember all those trial balloons of policies politicians like Ford put out that are walked back after sufficient outrage? It may not be enough to change the operating procedures for the legacy streetcar fleet, but bad PR for a brand new transit project may be enough to push them to make changes, in the same way that those trial balloons are walked back even while society more generally remains a neoliberal hell with no concern from any major political party for the average person.
Not to mention, you could have similar outcomes with a bus on it's own right of way without the $3.5 Billion pricetag, and you could build a lot more bus rapid transit for the cost of this white elephant.
Until you run out of capacity on that BRT. What then? There is a wide spectrum of ridership between what a bus can carry and when it starts to make sense to have a subway, and an LRT can be scaled up in a way that BRT cannot.
But it looks like you don't want to acknowledge reality, and just be bitter when you see an argument you don't like by trying to discredit me like you did some posts ago or just be sarcastic while ignoring my previous points.
Yes, when people discredit a legitimate form of transportation just because our own application of it is poor, I have a problem with it.
I didn't ignore your previous points, by the way. I'm subscribed to a lot of threads and sometimes I miss notifications. But hey, if it makes you feel better to have a grievance with me, bully for you. But hey, let's go over your previous points:
Congratulations on being vague and ambiguous on what your point was.
I spelled out my point for you quite clearly.
"if you have a bunch of circus clowns at the helm, being a subway instead of an LRT is no guarantee of speed or reliability."
That is my point. Read it, then read it again, then read it a third time before you start accusing me of stuff again.
Whether the slow zones are an issue of policy, as on the streetcars, or just bad maintenance, as on the subway, doesn't matter one bit. Deferring maintenance is
as much of a policy choice as running slow LRTs is, and when you have people who make that decision, you will get slow zones,
even though they don't run the subway like a streetcar!
It doesn't matter what the cause is for the slow zone, all that matters is that the journey is made slower because of human decisions that need not have occurred!
Have I made my point crystal clear for you?
But the GTA is no better at subway operations than buses and LRTs? What planet are you living on. TTC might not be the best at subway operations, but there's hardly one that comes 15 minutes later followed by 5 coming right behind each other. Subway service is pretty regular and still relatively good and reliable despite the slow zones.
Subway service may be more regular than surface transport by virtue of being in its own enclosed environment, and dealing with less external factors than a mixed traffic bus or streetcar. But make no mistake, it happens, and not at all unfrequently, that the subway runs extremely unreliably too. I've lived it, I've seen it. I've seen trains that tail each other through line 1 stations and leave an enormous gap between them. I've seen trains that are so crowded I can't get on - usually after a big gap. I've waited 10-15 minutes for trains with no explanation as for the service gap.
It may be that it was an act of chance and that nothing could have been done to prevent it - but if I argued like you argue, I could say that this means that subways are trash and we shouldn't build them.
I have not once said that it would be a good idea to put a subway there. Nice try with your assumptions.
OK, and if we had built your proposed BRT, what would you propose as a solution once we had maxxed out capacity there? Which is not hard to do, buses, even artics, offer far lower capacity than a single LRT car, never mind multiples of them coupled back to back to back. If BRT has been maxxed out, and LRT is bad... then either we build a subway, or we evacuate the whole area. So your argument will lead to advocating for a subway eventually, just not as fast.
Prior to LRT opening, buses on the 36 were running every 3:25 minutes in the morning rush hour, the majority of them artics. There isn't a lot of additional capacity you can squeeze out of the mode before the line becomes absolutely chaotic to run. That's why the Yonge and Bloor subways were built, you were having streetcars running every minute or two at peak, in MU configurations, and they still couldn't keep up with the demand.
I meant to say most buses/streetcars/LRTs in Toronto. European LRTs have signal priority, stops further apart usually, and are often grade separated.
You are just saying whatever shit comes to your mind to discredit my posts which, which is just plain disingenuous.
Then you should have clarified that, no? How can you get mad at me for taking your argument at face value?
See what we said about realistic expectations of the line?
No.
People have been predicting this outcome for years, without evidence.
Now that we have the evidence, it makes sense to criticize. But all the Nostradamus posts going years back predicting this based on zero available information were not remotely helpful and contributed nothing to the discourse.
-infantile meme redacted- Just give it up son. LRTs are garbage
Go away, the adults are talking.
