What the US Gets Wrong About Trams

[@danny.j]

Trams in Europe aren’t primarily used for “walkable” distances. That applies only in the historic city centres. They are mostly used for connecting medium sized apartment neighbourhoods to the city centre and to avoid traffic jams. They are perfect middle man between buses and metros. In cities where metros are overkill, a fast collision free tram network is the backbone of transportation. And in the most European cities with metros they are also used as circle line since a metro circle line is also an overkill for most.

[@OnkelJajusBahn]

Perfectly summarized.

[@RMTransit]

There’s a reason I was very specific about “walkable” not distances you’d necessarily walk but distances you *could* walk

[@danny.j]

@@RMTransit I wonder if American/Canadian cities could adopt European tram systems since the neighbourhoods are vastly different. I always seen US cities more suitable for S-Bahn type transit to suburbs. Btw keep up the great work. I really enjoy your videos.

[@eechauch5522]

Yeah, I’m not a fan of this description either. My usual tram ride into city center takes me around 17 minutes by tram. Yes, I could technically walk that distance in about 1h-1,5h, but I feel people get a very wrong impression by calling it walkable. Comparing it to a bike is much more useful. The mentioned route takes around 18 minutes by bike, so pretty exactly the same. So I’d say any distance that can be reached in about 30-45min by bike, can also be sensibly served by a tram. That being said, as a lot of footage in the video was from my hometown Karlsruhe. To give you an idea: Line 2 takes 1h end to end, entirely within the city (2:40h walking), and line S2, which uses the same rolling stock, even takes 1:15h. That’s a 5,5h „walk“.

[@samlerman-hahn2674]

@@danny.j I think smaller North American cities with a lot of 2-4 lane main streets, tramway suburbs, and not too much job sprawl (ie. larger university towns) are pretty good candidates for modern tramways. Places that come to mind include Albany and Schenectady NY, Worcester, Ann Arbor, Berkeley CA, Santa Cruz, Santa Barbara, etc. There's also the legacy systems in San Francisco, Boston, and Philadelphia that I think could stand to be modernised. For SF this would mean making their busier lines high-platform only at all stops for eventual conversion into a metro, and rebuilding the remaining lines as modern tramways with low-floor trams/level boarding, wider stop spacing, signal priority, green track, and tram streets/plazas in commercial districts

[@erejnion]

The biggest positive of trams is that they can easily get into dense pedestrian centers without obstructing anything, all while providing street-level access. That's something impossible for the metro or the bus.

[@sergpie]

For the most part, you're right. What I mean is, cities with unique or unconventional streets or blocks, if they have specific purpose-built vehicles to maneuver in their city, it works beautifully. But then you have cities like San Diego, where its downtown has blocks designed to be small to maximize corner shops (a plan going back to the 1880s), with generic trolleys that are the same size as your average American trolley car line post 2002. This creates near hourly blockages on 11th, 10th, 5th, 4th and 1st avenues. This has caused one serious accident that I know of, and is quite hazardous. This is coupled with stop lights that do not account for a trolley car sitting on the intersection, as they change regardless.

[@RMTransit]

The predictability of rails does wonders!

[@CatnipMasterRace]

Yeah, in my local area in London, theres a shopping street that really should be pedestrianised but it carries 2 major bus routes and 1 minor bus route. I can't really see an easy way of pedestrianising this street without completely cutting off these bus routes as there's no real nearby alternative routes for them. As of right now the council has settled for restricting through car traffic during most hours of the day with a bus filter and expanding pavements where possible. I don't think there's really a nice way to let buses through a pedestrianised area that's both safe and efficient due to their unpredictability. The ideal solution would therefore be to turn these buses into trams as the tracks running through a pedestrian environment provide a better level of predictability than some kind of bus lane which would either not be obvious enough or would be too similar to a road (ie what we already have). However this is very unlikely to happen as it would mean creating an entire tram route all the way into central London (as well as a different one for the more minor local bus) with the sole justification of pedestrianising one half a mile street that the trams would run on. (Not to say that the tram wouldn't be otherwise useful but it would need a lot more justification and consideration of alternatives). Also my phone keeps autocorrecting tram to team so if I've accidentally said team anywhere I meant tram.

[@erejnion]

@@sergpie Yeah, that sucks. Well, either of the solutions would be good: pedestrianizing part of the center there, or running shorter trams more often.

[@_CaptainCookie]

@@CatnipMasterRace you could do it like sutton and have a one way system around the pedestrian area. It's not perfect because 2 or 3 lane one ways are kind of on the heavy side lane wise but it does mean the high street itself is a nice place to visit, with minimal traffic

[@hansklaus6860]

The thing with trams is that they are incredibly versatile. A tram can run fully grade separated like a metro, or run in traffic like a bus, and anything in between. This can allow for highly specialized and very unique transit systems, such stadtbahn systems. But it also makes it really easy for trams to be used in a lazy and suboptimal manner. Trams are an extremely powerful and versatile tool. But if your only tool is a hammer, everything starts to look like a nail.

[@OnkelJajusBahn]

Very well said

[@jasonriddell]

I LIKE TRAMS and think they are the MOST versatile option and for a lot of sub optimal "solutions" IMHO are not "BAD" unlike some "rapid bus" projects that actually suck big time and have near zero ridership one BIG + for trams done "lazy" is the "on grade" guideway acts as a "big billboard" advertising its existence and is itself built in wayfinding

[@KRYMauL]

@@jasonriddell What I don’t get is LCDs are cheap, and so are LEDs. What’s the hold up.

[@vxathos]

And, hell, even as a semi-subway network - looking at SF's muni metro system, for example.

[@Pidalin]

But trams also need much more qualified drivers with rail vehicle driver license, which is a massive problem, you can always find someone who can drive a bus, but with trams, it's much more complicated, some cities have real problem with this. Metro will be operated by autopilot in the future in most of cities, but you can't do that with trams.

[@MrAronymous]

In the transit hierarchy trams are indeed a nicer bus, on paper. But when it comes to rider experience trams are actually 'a slightly less good metro riding on the surface' in a lot of cases. Put them in a tunnel in some sections and the experience can be nearly identical. And a lot of anti-tram pro-bus people don't see that because they have probably have never gotten to experience a proper tram network with the most important features; dedicated lanes, complete signal priority, close integration with pedestrianized areas. That in addition to actually having a useful and sensible route, which a lot of the US streetcar systems don't.

[@incalescent9378]

@@tomassakalauskas2856 I definitely agree. Trams and buses on the surface make you much more connected to the neighbourhood, and in that also facilitate interacting with the surroundings. (And if we're talking wayfinding: being able to see where you're going and where you're passing through definitely helps.) This also means you can get on and off quickly so it makes sense for partial rides: have part of your journey, get off for a store or the library or a park or whatever, continue your journey a bit later. Walk for a bit, and hop on whenever you feel you're done walking. For me, the daylight is also very important.

[@dnocturn84]

@@tomassakalauskas2856 I believe a tram is more commonly used to connect important places within a city district with one another, maybe even across additional diststricts, depending on the location and structure. But a metro should be a system, that transfers larger numbers of passengers, in a much shorter period of time and with less stops, across multiple districts. From one end of the city to the other, if you want to call it that. They should not serve the same purpose and actually complement each other, instead of competing with each other.

[@vjaska]

I wouldn't go as far as describing myself as pro bus anti tram but there are certainly obstacles to merely suggesting a tram on any old corridor, even with the benefits. The Croydon Tram works in London because Croydon had the old rail lines to take over and the room to make it all work where as the proposed North South river tram that was scrapped years ago would of caused more issues than solved - far easier & practical to have bus routes instead when you have serious obstacles to overcome and if you invest in that bus network, it can really be just as good like London's was before they stopped investing and started to cut it instead. I think the US however would benefit massively from trams if done right

[@AmurTiger]

This is working at cross purposes a bit. If 'close integration with pedestrianized areas' is part of what makes a 'proper tram' then you can't transplant a tram into a metro line's right of way and still call it a tram. From a vehicle perspective I don't think there's any bright red line between what's a tram and a metro other then floor height but that's a feature that has fairly limited overall impact on service. Most of what makes a tram a tram and a metro a metro comes down to where the right of way is placed and how ( and if ) it interacts with other traffic. A fully separated and dedicated right of way will tend to be a metro, less separated will be more like a tram alongside which you can place some trends around station distance where shorter distances tend to be the norm for trams. Interestingly​@@tomassakalauskas2856 mentioned a feature of metros that doesn't quite have to be necessary though can be harder to avoid in dense urban areas. Elevated metros are certainly a thing and I can say I've often enjoyed the morning views while on the skytrain to work.

[@RMTransit]

Yes, done right trams can be excellent! But there are less examples the many think of a truly great system!

[@RMTransit]

A few people have mentioned that I am talking too much about aesthetics, but I think they are critical! Public transit should be attractive and bring people joy so pleasant visual design is really important in my opinion! Obviously service Is the most important thing, but there’s no reason not to have an attractive system as well! I think it’s a big part of being user centric in your planning!

[@procrastinatingpuma]

What are your thoughts about the aesthetics of the San Diego Trolley?

[@btomimatsucunard]

@@procrastinatingpuma or of the LA Metro cars/ station design

[@KaiHenningsen]

You mentioned color. Traditionally (in my lifetime of now 62 years), at least in Germany, trams and buses were yellow or pale yellow. Then that changed around ... well, from my perspective, in the 1970s. And while they did change in different ways, most systems I saw changed to some version of blue. I never found out why. Currently, here in Münster, the city buses are shades of blue, the regional buses are red, even though they're not DB. (DB, of course, these days are either red-stripe-on-white for long-range, or white on red for regional, unless the local authority (almost all regional public transit is contracted out by a regional authority, like the local state) explicitly demands a different color scheme (which seems the trend nowadays), and traditionally DB buses were red, too. (Post buses, back when we still had them, were postal yellow; maybe that's where other transit got their colors.) Maybe as an aside I should mention Flix - both trains and buses are green. Oh, and whatever the reason Münster ripped out their trams sometime before I moved here in the 1970s (and even ten years ago, there were still streets with old tracks in them), I'd argue that putting new ones in today would be stupid - the streets in the city are just too narrow and windy. Even buses often have trouble coping. And any kind of subway/metro would probably politically impossible - the city center has had serious problems before with building projects that dug deep, with water table going up or down (mostly down, I suspect) leading to trouble with the many, many old buildings. The way the city is built, anything except trains (on the lines built before even WW II, even with slight modernization) and buses is pretty much out, sadly. You could do stuff in the outer parts, but that would be pretty much the reverse of how this is usually done.

[@schwenda3727]

In retrospect in America & parts of Canada, a good share of modern transportation infrastructure in general has historically been uglier than the older school counterparts. Look no further than plentiful streetlight pole designs since the mid-20th century like the “A” shaped or Minnesota/Dakota or plentiful standard armless Canadian designs as well as plentiful mass produced late 20th century NYC streetlight pole designs. They look moderately better in black, dark brown, or dark green paint (or certain other pain colors depending on location) but compared to the turn of the 20th century revival designs that’ve thankfully appeared on plentiful American main streets in recent decades, THEY’RE STILL ABSOLUTELY HIDEOUS!!! Only so very many places that actually built streetcar/light rail infrastructure in the US have attempted to beautify the catenary poles in spite of a handful of setups primarily used to power “heritage” streetcars. Seems like a better piece of infrastructure than any to beautify with either sleek curves or even those retro turn of the 20th century revival patterns if you think about it, much less with dark but solid black/brown/green paint jobs…

[@odess4sd4d]

Is aesthetics just having colors and the nose of the tram look like it is designed for 300 mph, or is it something more than that?

[@jessecruzu]

Can we all appreciate the fact that this guy pushes a great video almost every day. It is now a daily routine to watch RMtransit

[@bluebox2000]

Seriously, he produces some of the best and most detailed videos about transit. I can't get enough of it. Make sure you subscribe to help him out!

[@Hiro_Trevelyan]

As a French myself, I have to add a precision : almost all modern trams in France are the same Citadis model from Alstom. They've been altered for each city (sometimes each line like T3 in Lyon that has its own special Citadis) but most of our trams are derived from the same model over and over again. In France alone, Alstom sold more than 800 Citadis tramways to 23 tramway networks. Worldwide, 55 cities are equipped. They're everywhere. This is obviously done to reduce the costs, since it's mass-produced and it seems to be a very versatile model, so... Good for us I suppose.

[@railotaku]

Yep, Alstom have a few standard front end designs, but is happy to do custom to give each city a unique look, behind the custom panels the underlying tram is pretty much identical cross France.

[@jasonriddell]

Translink in Vancouver Canada has custom noses on there New Flyer LF40 Transit busses ones unique to there system and NOT used anywhere else

[@markdebruyn1212]

My city (Rotterdam) also uses Citadis, but they do look nothing like any other Citadis in the world

[@hypernewlapse]

Yeah but that is the standard tho. Like, each company has its own line, like CAF has the Urbos, stadler the Tramlink, Bombardier (now alstom) the flexity, siemens the avenio.

[@Jakeio-w9j]

Alstom is doing our new set of trams in Melbourne too

[@hollywood1340]

In the US I think the Build America requirement for federal funding plays a huge role in why our trams all look alike from maybe two builders. We don't have the ability to simply pick and choice from competing manufactures. Not to mention our need to ensure it meets our US build requirements. And i believe that's worth mentioning.

[@jasonriddell]

not applicable outside the USA so Canada / Mexico can go "global"

[@KRYMauL]

That was a more recent thing. But yeah, GE should really start making trams. There’s probably a few others like Hyundai that make trams and can be used in the US, too.

[@MrAronymous]

Essentially the Buy America act is about assembling and having sourced a percentage of the components of the vehicle in the US. However most of the big manufacturers (Alstom, Siemens, CAF, KinkiSharyo, Stadler) have set up shop in the US now, so they could easily have a special front fascia made in Europe and assembled in the US.

[@MrMarinus18]

I think we should let the people decide. Have like 5 different designs and have them shown off to the public and hold a popular poll to decide.

[@KRYMauL]

@@MrMarinus18 That would be fun.

[@eriktoth7]

If you want to make a video about the Budapest transit system, I am happy to help you with it. 4 metro lines (one is the oldest in continental europe, another is just beautiful), shiplines, 30+ tramlines, 10+ trolleylines, a funicular and a really widespread an well-connected bus system, so plenty to talk about. And also I really like your vids, keep up the great work!

[@pixoontube2912]

This sounds like a perfect chance for a collab between RMTransit and Adam Something

[@taccus3990]

I recently moved to Budapest and I've never used public transportation so much. And I say this coming from Italy, where we have a pretty much developed public transportation system. In Budapest it's not only functional, but enjoyable too. There will always be a metro, tram, bus coming shortly wherever you are.

[@DanTheCaptain]

He’s made one about the trams, with the help of some other creators. It’s really good, take a look!

[@RMTransit]

I did one previously along with Adam something, but it needs to be refreshed

[@lime56]

Aren't trams and trolleys the same thing?

[@bobbyswanson3498]

it’s a shame what happened to the classic american streetcar. they created some of the most human scale neighborhoods in modern cities with 2-4 story density and would’ve developed wonderfully if we moved in the direction of european trams rather than ripping them out

[@nathanieldaiken1064]

For cars, which are now going electric and may run on rails!🤔

[@leonpaelinck]

Oh but in Europe we also ripped them out. Just the BIG cities kept (part of) them

[@lexburen5932]

@@leonpaelinck yes. And now we are putting them back in 😊

[@peachtpm2528]

I feel that a lot of the poor design choices in NA are made because of the idea that "only the poor use transit", whereas in Europe transit is seen both by the mass and by transit designers as something that is often used even by the middle class. NA designers for this reason just do not put enough care and effort into transit which is seen as some welfare program.

[@IshtarNike]

This reminds me of the scene in crash where they poor black criminal character is saying that the buses have big windows to shame the poor people inside who have to ride it. That was confusing to me because in London a bus is just a bus, it's not a class signifier. You use whichever mode of transport is most efficient.

[@Novusod]

Transit is a welfare program. There are homeless who sleep on trains and buses all the time America's cities. Trams and such aren't just for transportation. They also serve as temporary housing for the poor. This happens because transit authorities sell unlimited all day passes when really they should charge riders by the minute and kick everyone off at the end of the line. Bums and criminals ruin everything though.

[@marcomontella6006]

You're right about the perception in NA, but I've the impression that in places like say New York City, which already has a huge and convenient public transport network, people do not see transit that way and everybody use it.

[@4473021]

That idea was very carefully crafted by the car lobby and its shills, just like all the anti-pedestrian propaganda they had.

[@piotrrywczak]

The main benefit of tram system is how seamless it is. You exit the building, walk along the road to the near tram stop, you board the vehicle and sit down/hold the handrail, and after a few/dozen minutes you exit and walk to your destination. The rails provide smooth ride, you don't need to get out of your way to go downstairs to an underground station and back up. There isn't even a station to speak of. It's all in one place already, there is a shelter and a place to sit down but most of the time you won't use it and the tram is directly next to the things you want to visit.

[@transitspace4366]

In Europe, TBMs are used precisely because the streets are too narrow to build cut and cover tunnels, I really don’t understand why line 5 in Toronto wasn’t built entirely like this given the impressive width of the Eglinton avenue, in Europe we dream of having so much space! It seems like the Quebec City tramway will be the first modern European tramway in North America (they will even have Alstom Citadis 405 trains, like T9 in Paris)

[@transitspace4366]

I'm a big fan of the Montpellier trams, there are 4 lines, each one has an associated element. Line 1 (air), line 2 (earth) crosses natural spaces, line 3 (water) goes towards the sea, line 4 (fire) is a ring line. A fifth line is under construction, its themed around "science and biology" because it serves many parks and universities. Tours, France also have a very futuristic tram.

[@transitspace4366]

If trams in France, and in Europe in general, are more aesthetic than in North America, it’s mostly because they are designed by specialized agencies, the Montpellier trams were even designed by Christian Lacroix, one of the most famous designer who usually works for luxury brands.

[@ethandanielburg6356]

North American cities probably could do more cut-and-cover construction, but I feel like they prefer tunnel boring nowadays since it doesn’t involve moving as many underground utilities and it’s also less disruptive at the surface. The Canada Line in Vancouver used cut-and-cover for the underground sections and many local residents and business owners were upset about the disruption and filed lawsuits.

[@zackgro8440]

Europe is not a monolith babe. It's a continent.

[@KyrilPG]

@@transitspace4366 Well, he (Lacroix) was his very own luxury and haute-couture brand for decades... He's now mostly retired from haute-couture and operations of the brand. But he continues designing things and opera / theater costumes IIRC. He also designed one generation of TGV interior refurbishments. And if you get the reference: This is Lacroix sweetie darling ! (From Absolutely Fabulous, one of the greatest UK comedy series).

[@Londoncycleroutes]

Great video - it would be interest to hear your analysis of where would be most suitable for trams. In London we tend to take the ex-rail-alignment approach you talk about but one big issue is these don't necessarily exist everywhere!

[@RMTransit]

Yeah, perhaps that’s a video for 2023!

[@KyrilPG]

One good alignment for cities is what Paris does : take one or two lanes of car traffic for the 2 tracks of the line and decrease the car's share of the public space in dense urban environments while also offering new ways and lanes for soft mobility (bikes, personal e-mobility devices) and green bands that decrease urban heat accumulation spots. It helps shape urbanism and new appeased car traffic patterns. That's what they did with several lines, specifically T3a, T3b and others... They also do a mix of that and ex-rail-alignments on other lines, specifically the "Txx Express" lines (like T11 Express) where Citadis Dualis (tram-train) rolling stock is used so that they can run in both SNCF corridors and streets. There are also lines that took almost half the width of previous long straight wide streets that used to be Paris center's access / way out before freeways ; the French / European softer version of stroads. Like T6 line's Eastern part (this line's Eastern terminus called Châtillon-Montrouge is located above ground but through a building, like Reece mentioned. Located next to line M13 South terminus of the same name). Really, France has such a variety of modern tram installations that you can pick from, even underground metro-like ones in city centers (Rouen). For urban spacing that would be more comparable to US cities, look for tram lines in suburbs or outlying parts of cities. The likes of Lyon's East far reaching trams for example, Paris' T6 that I mentioned and many others. You can use the cartometro site in conjunction with Google Maps satellite view and street view to follow the different lines and types of integration and alignment in urban environments. In case you don't know already, cartometro is a treasure trove of exact maps of track layouts for a number of cities throughout the world, France being the most covered country, Canada the second. The site is available in English, and is extremely useful to have a better perception of transit installations. That should give you some enjoyable homework while we wait for Reece's video on the matter ! 🤣

[@jasonlescalleet5611]

Around here, disused rail lines are often snapped up and turned into bike trails. This is great if you like to bike places (and lots of people here ride bicycles, for exercise and sometimes even for transportation) but it precludes using them for trams. Offhand I can’t think of any rail rights-of-way in my area that aren’t either still used for (freight) trains, or converted to bike use. And I know I’m not the only cyclist here who would raise a stink if someone tried to take away one of my bike routes.

[@denali637]

Houstonian checking in: Our "metro" system is drastically insufficient, because we desperately need true intracity and regional rapid transit. But our "light rail" network - the red line in particular - really is a high quality example of a tram, in my opinion, and it exemplifies the specific advantages of trams over underground metros or regional rail, in that you can get from the tram door to the cafe counter in a couple of steps. Also, the six-minute headways, while not quite world-class, are pretty excellent for the US. The green and purple lines are not frequent enough (12min peak, 18min off-peak) to be useful "walking accelerators" downtown, but they become handy outside of downtown, and are accelerating development along their corridors. It will be interesting to see how they are impacted by the Inner Katy BRT line, whose proposed route runs along the same downtown streets as the green and purple lines - hopefully this will mean fully dedicated transit ROW and signal priority along those corridors (maybe even partial pedestrianization, like the red line corridor? I'm afraid to dream of it...). If you ever get far enough down your list to consider a video on Houston, definitely look at the Inner Katy (/silver line extension) and University BRT lines. If executed right, they could be quite transformative, and the former could be one of the country's best examples of BRT (though I'm not convinced the University line is best served by BRT). The MetroHouston youtube channel has good flyover animations of both projects.

[@jtsholtod.79]

When I used to travel for work to Houston, I was always so disappointed by METRORail. It was cheap, but had such low ridership and didn't seem to go places that people wanted to actually travel. It seems to have improved greatly, but still has a long, long way to go. Given the terrible traffic in Houston, there is just so much potential.

[@a-dot-s-dot]

I used to plan light rail for Houston METRO. When the Red Line first opened, it had the highest ridership per mile in North America and was getting up to 40-45k a day. I was Planning PM for the Red Line extension to Northline and Green Line down Harrisburg. Oh, and University was initially planned as LRT (tram) as well but politics literally intervened.

[@PresentGenGamer]

The green and purple lines will be extended down to Hobby. Once that happens we will then see the same 6 minute headways as the red line, as airports are generally ridership generators in their own right. Despite the light rail's problems (mostly due to motorists) it's actually really well implemented at connecting major nodes around the city. All while keeping costs down that comes with building light rail when used in the right way i.e. only building elevated tracks when it's absolutely necessary.

[@denali637]

@@jtsholtod.79 All three lines go through Downtown, and the red line goes to the Museum District, Rice, the Medical Center, and NRG, while the green line goes to the East end and the Purple line goes to TSU amd UofH. Nimbyism in Upper Kirby and Afton Oaks killed the hopes of bringing Montrose (and, I guess, UK/Greenway/Galleria, but, like, ew) into the fold, and I'm not sure if anything has really been seriously proposed for Washington or the Heights (both would greatly benefit from lines, IMO). So I stand by my original assessment: there are lines and service levels that are **missing** (a tram is not true rapid transit or mass transit), but the three existing lines are all solid examples, and the red line remains, in my eye, one of the country's best tram lines.

[@VLA1234-t2t]

Sucks that txdot doesnt care about mass transit and only cares about one more line. Seen they’re destroying 5by1s all over hosuton for “future” highway expansion. Some near the red line lol. Pretty hilarious

[@DChatburn1]

The #4/#6 trams in Budapest, where I live, runs 24 hours a day. I think that it is the only tram line in our city that runs 24/7. The Budapest tram system is clean, efficient, and frequent.

[@Nam3y123]

Glad to hear someone else say some good things about the G:Link! Sometimes I feel like the only person not in Australia to care about it at all. Usually when I hear people talk about it, it's just "that weird light rail that's connected to Brisbane" lol

[@chrismckellar9350]

I have been on G Link and its is great system considering that the Gold Coast is very car centric. G Link when completed will compliment Brisbane's metro passenger trains services to/from the Gold Coast.

[@RamonInNZ]

I had used Brisbane Metro service to shuttle between near east of Brisbane to Varsity Lakes when visiting my daughter and sister - we would then jump in a car to go to GC (10mins away). Having rail link sorted will be fantastic once I get back in the next year or so. Great system & service by the way.

[@Santiago-in1xf]

Munich is another good example of the "could walk" trip city. From the Old Town to one of the adjacent neighborhoods is usually walkable but a well timed tram can speed up the trip or make a longer not walkable trip that much more walkable. I'd find myself hoping on a tram for part of the trip and walking the rest or for longer trips, chaining two tram rides.

[@davebirch1976]

Here in south Yorkshire the Sheffield supertram network is still using the same trams they had when they started in 1994,they run on former train lines into Sheffield, and then on-street tracks once in the city centre. A couple of years ago we got some new Tram/Trains which run on the national rail network between Parkgate and Tinsley-Meadowhall south where the tram joins the existing tram network into Sheffield city centre

[@visg8303]

if only we could get extensions!!

[@ashleyjiscool]

Surprised that they managed to get a big(ish) network (insert joke about Sheffield here)

[@MrBirdnose]

My theory is trams in North America are ugly because people are really cost-sensitive about public transit, so anything that "looks expensive" is likely to draw criticism as an example of government waste.

[@johnruskin4290]

Yet they will spend all kinds of money on the stations, or insist on tunneling under the river in Pittsburgh when they could have used any number of existing bridges.

[@sciamachy9838]

Proud of living in one of the cities with the most iconic trams of all times: Milan. The class 1935 has been exported a lot, even in San Francisco.

[@LrdZanny]

Theres a chicken and egg problem in North American urbanization that feedback loops into these light rail projects. I'm in Baltimore and the Red Line that will probably get built now is going to be a tunneled light rail, and its largely because it won't get the ridership to support denser metro because so much of the urban core is unlivable due to 50 years of car dependency. Its hard to convince government, especially when talking about billiions in transit investment, that if they just built a comprehensive metro grid and deprioritized cars and gave bikes good access everywhere people would mode switch and the city would revive. Because thats what it would really take to really make it work, you can't just do one piece of the puzzle, you need to reallocate public space, you need to rezone and invest in transit oriented and car free mixed use development, and you need to build a dedicated right of way rail network to get people in out and around the broader city. If anything is missing you just don't see adoption at the scale you would hope for.

[@jasonriddell]

yup car is king and few politicians WANT the "wrath" of voters stuck in commuter he!! I think part of the "issue" is also the belief that TRANSIT will transform / revitalize cities / make new "greenfield" developments instant attractive without the rest of the public "infrastructure"

[@traveller23e]

What's the difference between tunneled light rail and metro?

[@melaniers]

@@traveller23e Train sizes and speeds. Light rail trains are shorter, lighter, and have lower top speeds and slower acceleration. Full metro trains are bigger, heavier, carry more people, accelerate faster and can hit higher top speeds.

[@traveller23e]

@@melaniers Ah, got it. Where I am there's not really a concept of "light rail", so for example the metro in my city generally runs two quite short vehicles of lightweight construction on track which probably has a low maximum axle weight and maybe a smaller loading gauge but is otherwise completely compatible with the regular rail system. There _are_ regional trains on certain routes with a single railcar of heavier construction that has a lower nominal capacity than the metro, though.

[@raghunandan9290]

​@@traveller23e Yes Light Rail refers to Train body size, features etc . Metro refers to service name . For ex, Light Rail can be used for as a Team or as a Metro .. But for each application, they modify Trainsets..

[@idot3331]

3:19 I don't know much about American trams, but I much prefer the aesthetic design of the first tram to the second one. It looks quite retro, but if it's nice and well maintained I think I prefer it over a lot of modern European tram designs which often look a bit cheap and tacky in my opinion. Obviously practicality is the most important factor, which I can't comment on based one one photograph, but I really love that boxy retro design for trams and trains.

[@davidreichert9392]

In Canada there is always a push and pull between doing things the European way and doing it the US way, and it becomes highly poltiicised to the point where little gets done. We have to stop thinking "North America" and start thinking with common sense. We have to stop waiting for the US to do something sensible before we get on with it. Sometimes we manage it, and it ends up being the US following our lead soon after.

[@zackgro8440]

LOL ls S T F U you have idea what you're talking about. There is no "european way" more than a "north american" way. If you're going to be ignorant at least compare apples to apples.

[@red_skies80]

The Vancouver skytrain has a lot of limitations for its price tag, but man, it’s so useful having frequent, reliable rapid

[@jasonriddell]

@@red_skies80 the "OG" skytrain was pretty revolutionary in 1986 and I would say has done well in SHAPING the lower mainland and TransLink has grown it relatively "smartly"

[@shatterquartz]

1:45 "The tram is a great way to cross your neighborhood" just as the T9 is shown crossing my neighborhood :)

[@_CaptainCookie]

Are you planning on doing a video on London's non underground railways? Aka the tramlink system, the London overground and the various non TFL railways. There's so much to talk about and I think they're all really interesting

[@RMTransit]

Yes, I will!

[@prendo147]

The Manchester MetroLink needs a video too, it’s the biggest light rail system in the UK!

[@fatherfountain1906]

@@RMTransitI thought you did a video about this already? Called something like londons urban railways.

[@_CaptainCookie]

@@fatherfountain1906 I can't seem to find it. It might have been deleted or privated if he did make it

[@filipthorne7260]

Could you do a video on Prague? We have great trams!

[@RMTransit]

2023!

[@biscuit715]

God I loved Prague trams. Never used the metro because I liked the trams too much! Shame about some roads being so anti pedestrian though, crossing the bridges is horrible! (Charles bridge is horrible for a different reason lol)

[@DanielFildan]

@@RMTransit Would be happy to help out with Prague. The various modernisations and renovations of the tram vehicle fleet can be a tough not to crack.

[@DavidFraser007]

Brno has better! nejlepší šalina

[@filipthorne7260]

@@DavidFraser007 BRUH Brno has no metro lol JK it’s ok.

[@PatrickLechevallier]

Excellent...as always!I very often watch transit videos in different languages but honeslty you are the best and you know your stuff very well.Because of you RM Transit is the best.What I also like is that you don't only focus on North american transit systems.With you,we can travel in many cities around the world....your comments are well done ....Go on with your good work! Merry Xmas and happy new year to you !Joyeux Noel et bonne année!(Bonjour de Québec au Canada)...

[@wojtusrealname]

I think that best tram systems still exists in central and eastern eErope in countries like Czechia, Slovakia, Hungary and Poland. These systems are integrated into cities and have different types of usage depending on the likne, within one system, for example Poznan with regional tram, city tram, and high speed tram(premetro) or Kosice with tram line going straight to Tatry Mountains tourist towns. U should look at tram systems in the eastern part of EU. btw great video

[@petrfedor1851]

Trams in Unites States and Canada: We can eighter go full on streetcar or light rail. Trams in Czech ans Slovak cities: We can switch between these mode twice on one line. And between two towns occasionaly.

[@RRAAZZAA]

You should check out, imo (a bit biased as well) the best tram network in the world Melbourne’s tram network

[@felixkeller5144]

it would be awesome if you would talk about the different modes of transportation in zurich. Its awesome that you have trams, trolleybuses, regular buses and the s bahn all in the same city with very good interchanges.

[@hintmations]

Personally, I don't like the U.S light rail system because they forget that you're supposed to remove cars from the streets before building it, otherwise, it gets stuck, the best case (I've seen) that an LRV stops at a road crossing, the tram with more people should have priority. Also, I feel that Trams should be used as local transit, North American cities build Light Rail even though they run it as a rapid transit-like service while being slower and having less capacity.

[@benqurayza7872]

I agree about signal priority for LRTs on city streets. New Jersey Transit management seems afraid to assert this for the Hudson-Bergen Light Rail because their political masters have no transit vision.

[@RMTransit]

Yes, local transit service is probably where most trams make sense

[@johnruskin4290]

It's weird because when trying to get a traffic light at an intersection on a Pittsburgh street with light rail tracks, the powers that be said they couldn't because it would impead the "rail line" as if it were akin to a freight train. We didn't mention the one existing traffic light for fear it would be removed. I think there are too many conflicting well-intentioned rules and priorities/perspectives that we need to sort out.

[@Jaymac720]

In New Orleans, we have street cars. They’ve been a thing here for close to 200 years. The first went into service in 1835. The two most well known lines used are St. Charles and Canal. I’ve actually taken the Canal street car from Mid City to downtown, and it’s pretty convenient in addition to being an experience. But yeah, it’s not gonna get you to every part of the city

[@LaT00pe]

Merry Christmas Reese ^^ Thank you for all the great content !

[@elizabethdavis1696]

Please consider doing a video on rail trails and abandoned tracks

[@RMTransit]

That’s a good topic idea!

[@jamesmilham9491]

OMG!!! He mentioned the Gold Coast. I've been waiting for so long for Reece to talk about our G:LINK, and he loves it!! 😍😂

[@stephankoenig6116]

I get that optical factors play a role in the attractiveness of public transport, but for me, what plays a much more important roles are the technical, planning aspects as opposed to e.g. livery. Can you give me your thoughts on that?

[@RMTransit]

I don’t think you can have great transit without getting most of these things, right, and I think usually systems that don’t have great service. Also, don’t get the aesthetics, right

[@jasonriddell]

in North America when transit systems upgrade to a NEW series of transit bus ridership goes up and always has happened and in all cities that track that have shown that "new" does draw in MORE usage

[@joestrahl6980]

@@RMTransit trams can be part of the cityscape and soul of a city in a way that is difficult for a bus. That is a reason why the design and beauty of tram vehicles is important. Also among others a tramway is a long term committment that then effects the further development of the corridor and city blocks at a short distance away.

[@thismetrotunnellife]

Fancy that - footage of Acland St, St Kilda Melbourne, Australia featured on Canadian YT...good one

[@user-pv6qk6rm2u]

In Berlin some Tram stops share their platform with buses. This makes the transfer easy and saves space for road vehicles. Cars dont have to stop behind buses

[@gustavolanata1019]

Thank you for mentioning Budapest. I use the tram for many walkable distances as most of my mates. It can take me out to other areas but for that I use the Metro. Overall the tram is very convenient and makes my trips to work easy on a daily basis. Great work.

[@unspeakablek5750]

I think a perfect example would be a city like Dublin, Ireland. This is because of the various ways the tram is utilised. There, the trams run on streets, they're grade separated, run the middle of main roads, they run along old rail corridors and also run on viaducts. This gives the Dublin tramway network very high versatility, as they run like buses in the city and like suburban rail in the suburbs. Another interesting factor is the speed of the trams, because in Dublin city's dense core the tramway runs quite slowly at an average speed of 35 km/h, where as in the suburbs they operate up to 70 km/h on old rail corridors and right of ways. And all of that is achieved with the most simple and basic European tram, made by Alstom. So, in my opinion this is the perfect case study for the possible uses of modern European trams in north America and all over the world.

[@jasonriddell]

IMHO North America as a whole views TRANSIT / Mobility differently then Europe and in North America the personal car is the "highest form of mobility with the BUS at the bottom add it a MAJOR distrust / "hatred" for anything involving "tax dollars" and you get a transit system that LOOKS and FUNCTIONS way differently then ones in areas that believe that PUBLIC TRANSIT and GREATER PUBLIC infrastructure is required to BUILD better communities / cities

[@darynvoss7883]

Melbourne's tram system is a crucial part of the transit system, with 200 million trips annually. Not at all uncommon for people to travel 15 or 20 km by tram.

[@meikahidenori]

It's also not uncommon here to see older ones in service for tourists either. We can have quite an eclectic mix on weekends and holidays

[@fenleyjones]

In north America, light rail means the vehicle has steel wheels.

[@krcprc]

I wonder what you think about trams in the Eastern block. Cities usually have large prefab house complexes on the outskirts with tens of thousands of inhabitants. These "suburbs" usually need more transit service than a bus and those cities usually already have a streetcar network (more like Toronto's than Paris'). So the same trams that wingle in those tiny old streets with low speed also go there, usually on a railway corridor with high speed and less frequent stops, basically light rail. I suppose that this need for medium capacity service way out of the centre is the reason this type of mixed tram system is not seen in America, although there's probably no technical reason why Toronto's trams couldn't also work as light rail.

[@NotReallySan]

Our DWA (now owned by Bombardier) ‘HermeLijn’ trams were originally supposed to be 100% low-floor but De Lijn (our operator) switched it to 70% low-floor at the last moment. Thankfully we have 100% low-floor Bombardier Flexity 2’s now and they’re amazing.

[@torenthe_expert8977]

I love how all the public transit KZbinrs watch eachother

[@MrMarinus18]

9:00 In many parts of Europe trams also have signal priority. They always get a green light except for some highly specific circumstances.

[@rudivandoornegat2371]

Great video. I enjoyed it. Merry Christmas.

[@diedampfbrasse98]

what North America also seems to have missed in many cities is that Trams can and should be extremely well combined with bus lines. Over in the US I often was forced to walk around a lot when I needed to switch from one public transport to another ... Modern european tram networks design stops for a seemless transition between busses and trams, or other public transport options. You step out of your bus and just need to turn around on the spot to wait for your tram. That goes for stops on a regular street and for the dedicated tram pathways which allow busses to get on and off for the stops. Hence low capacity bus lines feeding directly into the higher capacity tram lines (which then feed into S-Bahns/rail/etc), extremely minimizing the need to walk when using public transport overall.

[@DanTheCaptain]

The best “tram” in North America is line 512 in Toronto or the iON LRT in Kitchener Waterloo. A lot of the trams North American cities build are not that great because they often lack the right-of-way and aw just some tracks running in the street. Or they go the opposite direction and try and be something else, like a light metro.

[@PSNDonutDude]

You've criticized the Hamilton LRT before, but it actually has a lot of the design features that you enjoy. It will be side running for a portion of time, it will significantly reduce vehicle lanes, and when they do run in the centre, there is only 1 lane and sometimes 2 retained with no widening. There are many spots where vehicle lanes are being reduced from 4 to 1, for deliveries and such. It will be grade separated except at intersections and will have transit priority at intersections. I hope we get green track as well and will be advocating for this. Much of the LRT route is also a walkable or cyclable distance, and ultimately will be for capacity rather than speed.

[@AaronSmith-sx4ez]

Good video! In my view trams are overused and misunderstood in NA. Typically they are sold as a cheaper alternative to a metro, but most city managers are naive to how much slower they are. They do have their niche though... The station walkshed can be incredibly quick for a tram...maybe 30 seconds compared to 5 minutes+ for bigger metro stations. Also many trams have mixed standing room/seats and it's easier to get a seat on a tram vs a bus...the latter of which can be claustrophobically packed. They unload faster than a bus, pollute less nitric oxide than a diesel bus, depreciate slower than a bus, and are a great option for cities in cold climates where yes you could walk...but it wouldn't be fun. I think as you put it they are best used in dense downtowns corridors and walk extenders...and not for long distances, low density areas, suburban commutes or where capacity is needed.

[@AaronSmith-sx4ez]

@@grahamturner2640 I agree!

[@longiusaescius2537]

Exactly bru

[@kidrissa]

I feel like what we have in Houston is a PERFECT example of "Minimum Viable Tram". It seems like folks tried to make EVERY compromise, and what we ended up was a system that is, at best, "meh".

[@MrMarinus18]

Americans are super stingy with tax dollars and they tend to be super critical of their government. If you have a government that's more trusted they can actually put quality first and build a good system even if it ends up being expensive. In countries with strong socialist politicians there is a requirement for a good system regardless of what it costs. Of course money is not infinite but in America they often try to get the minimum they can get away with. While in Europe they try to get the maximum they can get away with.

[@theultimatereductionist7592]

@@MrMarinus18 The French are even more critical of their government. That is why they are more courageous about protesting and forcing their government to be afraid of THEM, rather than the way Americans are terrified of THEIR government and terrified to protest.

[@MrMarinus18]

@@theultimatereductionist7592 Yet in France it seems to work a little better. Mostly because people are a little more sane and a little less likely to believe dumb conspiracy theories. Note my use of the word "little".

[@_me-ta-_3780]

@@MrMarinus18 Trust needs to be earned. The amount of corruption and funds being diverted to other things in the US is insane. Just raise taxes and give the government more money is obviously not a sane answer when they have proven that they will mismanage the hell out of it and pocket it every step of the way. The other thing that should be mentioned is that public transit doesn't have to be publicly-owned. In Japan many of the better train lines are actually private railways. This model may work better for the US than the European model, but only if transit stops being seen as for poor people. (the amount of crime on US transit doesn't help with this perception)

[@MrMarinus18]

@@_me-ta-_3780 The US already has very low taxes compared to other nations. One funny thing about that is actually that the Japanese model is the original American model. Japanese trains themselves are operated at a loss almost universally but profit is made through the stores and through underused membership cards. They also very often make money by making a station and selling the land to developers at considerable price. This profit model was invented in the US where railways were sold at a loss and profit was made from real estate.

[@hsantana]

An interesting tram system to check is in Santos - Brazil, even if trams are ugly, system is getting a lot of popularity and under major expansion in downtown area. Just search for "VLT Santos"...that's how LRTs are called around here.

[@peterdeady3625]

Thanks!

[@RMTransit]

Thank you!

[@bryanCJC2105]

It doesn't help that most US transit agencies and political leaders view public transit as an extension of welfare and therefore, only worthy of the minimum design and options, minimum operable segments, and minimum integration. In fact, US trams are rarely built along the busiest transit corridors and instead serve a wealthier part of cities. They are frequently built, not as a bona fide transit solution but, as a development solution aimed at choice riders to revitalize dead downtowns and for new sports stadiums, aka "vanity trains". This is why most new tram/light rail lines in US cities often barely exceed the ridership of a moderate bus line.

[@johndemcko8585]

I'm glad you've covered Phoenix. The light rail here is almost always street running, but with some signal priority (Phoenix City, at least).

[@shirschi98]

Can you have a look at the tram networks from Bern, Basel and Zürich (all Switzerland) also a look into the Intercity Network from Switzerland would be really cool.

[@unknownPLfan]

This doesn't mention tho some of the newer tram systems in the US that do act more like streetcars in city centers with some mixed results. E.g. KC, Portland, Atlanta, and Milwaukee, etc. It's wild what we do here. Either we have tram systems trying to cover interurban type distances in places where it should really be a metro, or we have dinky city center loops that are only marginally better than old school pre war trolleys because they at least have articulated vehicles and somewhat better separation from traffic, but ultimately often fail because they don't connect to much outside of the immediate city center.

[@XZenon]

Here in Germany, trams (U-Bahn, Stadtbahn etc.) often do allow for travel from one edge of the city to another on just one line going through the center but the are faster alternatives.

[@givolettorulez]

There's a big difference with some tram lines in Europe compared to the one are shown in the video. In some cities, in Italy Turin, Rome, Milan and Naples, some lines and some rails are survivors from 1800s. This means that tramways are present in narrow streets and get interfered by private traffic.

[@OnkelJajusBahn]

One thing is, in North America a lot of light rail systems are implemented in cities with metro area populations of over a million people. In Europe, cities that big normally have a metro as their highest system of transport. (Though not all) Most european light rails can be found in cities between 300.000 and 1.000.000. Like Karlsruhe or Valencia. But Europe also has its Ottawa like low floor Metros, like Granada, Sevilla, Porto, Kryvy Rih, Wolgograd,

[@MarioFanGamer659]

Just FYI, only Sevilla and Kryvy Rih are proper examples since they're fully grade separated while the ones only underground in the city centre but act like a normal tram (i.e. with grade crossings) otherwise.

[@OnkelJajusBahn]

@@MarioFanGamer659 Yeah, your right.

[@jasonriddell]

a lot of global cities STARTED Metro / Trams a LOT earlier then North America that will usually NOT build a train based transit solution till 800K OR MORE people

[@starborneolympus3907]

Here I am like - wait - there are cities without trams ? I am from a city of 250k and never thought, there could exist cities above 100k without trams in Europe.

[@OnkelJajusBahn]

@@starborneolympus3907 Unfortunately, there are still a lot of cities with over 100.000, that don't have trams. Maybee even more than half.

[@yarwar]

It's worth mentioning that a substantial part of what you praise as modern European tram designs were actually provided by Bombardier :)

[@gregderise9969]

This is an outstanding video that I firmly believe would be highly instructive to all planners to view. I wish somebody in the US administration that’s involved with transit funding would see this and require any city applying for federal funds to watch this and apply some of the lessons in it. This is an incredibly valuable video that makes me envious of European cities which have tram systems planned, I am more human centric planners, in other words planners no that the days of individual car ownership for moving around in dense urban areas is sub optimal

[@aleksstosich]

I share your love of French trams - I really liked Caen's system when I was there years ago. I hope Metrolinx does it right with the Hamilton LRT.

[@bcshelby4926]

...the transit mall which carries both bus and LRT traffic in Portland has always had an auto lane. When they brought LRT into the mix they took one of the bus lanes away and increased the distance between bus stops from every pother block for a given eoute ot 4 - evne 6 blocks apart. To accommodate stops for the LRT trains (which take up a full city block hence the reduced number of bus stops) . What they should have done (and I suggested) was to take over the left side auto lane completely on both 5th & 6th ave, and designate that lane for the LRT tracks.. LRT trains have doors on both sides so there is no reason to have them operate on the right had side like buses do. Thy way spacing of bus stops would not have needed to be changed and there would be no competition for lane space between buses and LRT. Again that "old style" thinking from the past. Even on the two LRT lines that pass east to west through the city centre there is still an auto laneon both streets instead of dedicating it those streets totally to the LRT.and pedestrian-/bikeways. Save for the segments that run alongside freeways Portland's Max operates more like a glorified streetcar, particularly while in the city centre, as it has to to deal with traffic signals and other vehicles. I timed how long it took to get through downtown on one of the east west lines and it took almost twice as long (because of all the congestion and traffic signals the trains deal with) than from the stop before the West Hills tunnel to the suburb of Beaverton (which is about three times the distance). So like with teh FX-2 BRT I commented about on the BRT video, TriMet seems to have purposely hamstrung the system through poor conceptualising and planning.

[@eno3085]

There is also a thing to consider about european tramways. Most citys use them as a Metro-Light. Citys like Cologne (1 Mil), Leipzig (700k) or Dresden (600k) can work perfectly fine without any Metro at all. You just need to provide a strong backbone which goes from where people live to the center/POIs. Hell normally citys in the span from 100k to 500k get to live without a tunnelsystem for transit at all. So just build trams on dedicated ways. They dont need to be in every street in the city. People will walk the last 500 meters at ease.

[@kiroolioneaver8532]

The problem with Toronto is that trams are used as a cheaper (key word) "alternative" to metro systems which is a problem. If they are needed they should be on their own merits based on need.

[@MrAronymous]

There is limited vision though. Zoning is lagging. The current tram routes under construction are all surrounded by low rise sometimes even low density buildings. For a proper metro to pay of density would have to be increased along the whole line, more than just 1 block surrounding a station like is the case right now.

[@kiroolioneaver8532]

@@MrAronymous For a metro to pay off all you need is to ensure that it will attract ridership. And one of the ways to do this is to make sure the stations act as hubs (i.e. buses service/terminate at those stations). You see this on Line 2 (particularly the Scarborough and Etobicoke stations) where most of the ridership does not live in close proximity to the subway line but is connected to it by buses. This was part of the problem with the discourse surrounding the Scarborough LRT vs. subway extension. Sure, the LRT would be (by virtue of its seven stations as opposed to three) closer to more people but (as current usage rates for the SRT prove) the busiest stations (in this case Scarborough Centre, and Lawrence East) are those where the buses go. Put another way, metros can be justified when you build existing infrastructure (i.e. buses and other routes) to service them more so than the immediate density of the surrounding area.

[@davidyoung5114]

New drinking game...everyone takes a drink every time Reece makes reference to another one of the clips he has recorded!

[@1978dkelly]

Regarding the trams themselves, some of this comes down to US Department of Transportation regulations, which mandate that light rail vehicles basically be Sherman tanks...on the idea that they might collide with a freight train or that a motorist might hit them (as often happens in Houston). I think the rest comes down to money (or lack thereof) and general car-centricity in all aspects of government and transportation planning (inconveniencing motorists is a cardinal sin in the US.). Public transportation projects are extremely expensive in the US, which is why they often end up looking utilitarian. I think the aesthetics of these systems are secondary, really. The NYC subway has (IMHO) bad aesthetics (from the badly maintained stations to the drab stainless steel box-like train cars) but has very high use because it's very useful and usually the fastest way to get around the city.

[@Paul_inDC]

Excellent point. And DOT’s “Sherman Tank” regulations make some sense given the number of accidents that do happen. Running a light rail line in the middle of a freeway (case in point the former Green and Yellow lines in LA) is a risky venture from that standpoint, in addition to the lunacy of expecting people to patronize a system that forces you to walk to and stand in on a platform in the middle of a 12 lane freeway breathing vehicle exhaust. But then that view gets back to the vision held by too many in the US that non-commuter urban transit is really just welfare intended for people “too poor to have a car” so stick it wherever is cheapest. Frustrating.

[@davidty2006]

i mean when you see that most modern pickups are bigger than the sherman tank..... Kinda reasonable?

[@Sam-pv7bd]

I loved the Berlin Tram. It was so fun to ride. There was a Tram station and an S-Bahn station right outside the hotel where my parents and I stayed.

[@Bleifuss88]

8:39 How many pantographs can I fit onto my train? Switzerland: Yes

[@drdewott9154]

The biggest issues in North America are by far that they dont find that sweet spot in which trams work. Trams usually work best perfectly in between the needs of a bus or BRT, and between that of a Metro. So larger capacity needed than a bus, and yet where a full metro line isn't viable, and with a higher degree of priority in traffic than a bus, with dedicated lanes wherever possible and high degree of signal priority Yet in North America most systems either overbuild their infrastructure with hugely long trams and large amounts of grade separated infrastructure except a few sections, that make you question why its not a metro. And in the other end you have systems with barely any kind of priority in traffic or dedicated lanes, combined with slow operations and small vehicles where it makes you wonder why they didn't go for a bus.

[@SlavicBias]

Me, as an active user of Eastern European "Light rail" (Prague and Bratislava mostly) can say, that tram line as long connected ride is extremely comfortable to use. There are multiple hubs and trams usually intersect on some parts of their paths so you can have a ride not by 4 buses, which are affected by traffic, but by 2 trams, which are literally light rail. Transferring from one part of the town to another is on another level. What adds to it, is that they are frequent and usually more frequent, than buses. Only subway can compete with such levels of effectiveness

[@hubertseidl1074]

your definition that it is somewhat like an elevator... I can understand it. I am in vienna and here it really works. in vienna, they even span a bit too long distances for that comparison. because there are lines that go straight for 5km or more. that's for me outside the realm of travelling comfortably by foot (but yes, I can do it). by the way, I am one of those who purchased the klimaticket Ö, and so far it is great. no more buying tickets for railways, busses etc.

[@ethandanielburg6356]

I agree that modern French tram networks tend to be an excellent example of using trams where they make the most sense. I do wonder though why some tram lines in greater Paris are largely grade-separated but also have some street-running sections, like T2 and T13; I imagine it wouldn’t have cost that much more to grade-separate the entire thing and run a (light) metro-like service. The plans for a mostly underground tram line in the west of Lyon to replace what was going to be metro line E also seem a bit confusing. If you’re going to do all this tunnelling, would it really cost that much more money to build a fully grade-separated light metro rather than a heavily tunnelled tram line?

[@marcomontella6006]

Afaik Paris tram lines which are almost fully grade separated run on former rail corridors, such as T2 and T4. Then the cost of grade separation of the lines wasn't in the budget as the grade separated infrastructure was already there. Unused

[@DougGrinbergs]

3:16 Denver RTD light rail: “Oh, that’s ugly“ 😉

[@Sven_Okas1967]

I like my Tram in Berlin. In the next May a new line is open from berlin Mainstation to the underground station Turmstraße. The nex new tramline in Berlin is the Line to the station Ostkreuz. Greetings from Berlin/ Germany. Sven

[@orthrus4490]

Id argue that the term "tram train" specifically applies to america more than just trams, as most of them dont really function as trams but instead as a lower capacity train that can, if necissary, operate on the street. A good example is ironically Dallas, which uses souped up tram trains for a commuter rail system which is grade separated and/or treated like a train at intersections when north of downtown (where like 80% of the track is). It also has a streetcar (the modern one, not the mckinney one) that actually is a traditional tram, albeit on the small side

[@Gfynbcyiokbg8710]

most of them aren't tram trains, they're just light rail

[@orthrus4490]

@@Gfynbcyiokbg8710 light rail is technically a form of tram system. It's an arbitrary term in the american context, as our term "light rail" can be broken down into 3 European categories: trams, tram trains, and light metro. The most common American variant is a system with 90% light metro grade separation, 10% tram track, and using tram train vehicles, which simply means multiple tram vehicles in a single train. But make no mistake, the vehicles themselves are almost always some form of tram or a train made of linked trams. It's just that in America we make our trams go significantly faster than the ones in Europe since we grade separate them a lot more. If you look at the example I gave (dallas), the light rail network spends part of its time in a traditional tram environment, but doesn't operate in mixed traffic. The Europeans have a term for the exact environment that these vehicles are operating in: a tramway. Even in US terminology light rail includes several different things, namely completely grade separated (light metro) and street running (which is essentially a souped up street car). Ironically enough, the dallas street car is literally a tram. By definition, function, and even just basic looks it is literally a tram yet falls under the US definition of light rail

[@Gfynbcyiokbg8710]

@@orthrus4490 You've clearly confused 'tram' with 'tram-train'. All light rail can be considered a 'tram' but almost none of it is a 'tram-train' as almost no light rail can operate on regular train lines (which is the definition of a 'tram-train'). A 'tram-train' isn't just a fast or more grade speperated tram

[@orthrus4490]

@@Gfynbcyiokbg8710 my brother in christ don't act so confident when you don't know what you're talking about. Many of them can and do run on traditional rail track if they have the same gage, and many of the light rail lines in the US are partially or mainly made of repurposed freight track precicely because light rail vehicles can operate on them and thus its essentially free infrastructure. I said that trams as a whole in the US tend to be a bit bigger and "souped up" compared to their European counterparts in order to have higher top speeds(to take advantage of the better grade separation), not that it made them into tram trains. Are all trams in the US tram trains? No. The dallas streetcar isn't. But the "light rail" network? Absolutely. The limitation on most of them is actually on the freight side. Since most light rail track is electrified repurposed(previously abandoned or unused) freight lines, a lot of freight trains can't fit under the overhead wires since the wires weren't designed with them in mind (since they hadn't been using the track anyways). Make it where the wires are tall enough to accommodate freight traffic and it's very easy for them to use the lines since the tracks were originally for them anyways.

[@Gfynbcyiokbg8710]

@@orthrus4490 😂 I could say the exact same thing to you. A 'tram-train' has nothing to do with it being "multiple tram vehicles". "The concept of tram-train is a light rail vehicle that operates as a tram on a tramway or non-mainline railway, and as a train on heavy rail mainline railway infrastructure" - Mott Macdonald (engineering, management and development consultancy firm) "A design of tram which can operate over standard railway track as well as tram track." - Wiktionary "Tram trains are vehicles that can operate in two transport modes, the first as a tram on an urban tramway network on a street and the second as a train on a mainline railway alongside heavy rolling stock." - Deutsche Bahn ESG "As a tram makes the journey, it slides onto the special section of track that connects it to the main rail network. There, it switches from driver controls to rail signalling, acting not like a tram but a train." - WIRED Basically Every single website, consultancy firm, newspaper, etc. out there agrees with my definition NOT yours.

[@jnrfalcon]

Like some political commentators said. Mass transit system in the US often doesn't cost that much money, it cost votes. Especially when they got delayed by both sides, either for property right, or environmental feuds.

[@CameronKang91]

I like trams. When I was at Istanbul last month, the tram was so busy to point it get tram traffic jam near Eminonu and the drivers allow us to alight out of the station when we are stuck in tram traffic 🤣🤣

[@Master_Blackthorne]

Cool model in the background!

[@qolspony]

I agree with you 100 percent. We should have gotten elevated metro lines that is supplemented by streetcar systems. But the streetcar system should be more intensive than the elevated metro, because it easier to apply. So a elevated metro should be built far enough from each other outside the central business district that they become convenient for longer distance commute. They also would provide a meaningful connection to an intensive streetcar system. The big advantage of a streetcar system is that a single car is required. This is good for two reasons. 1. It will have less impact on the street. 2. Big and complex stations wouldn't have to be built. 3. Single cars that get full would induce more frequency. And more frequency will induce more demand, because people like convenience. Elevated metro advantage is 1. It avoids vehicular traffic. 2. Cost is cheaper than building a subway.

[@mariocelej3613]

@RMTransit, you should plan a visit to Warsaw and then with a train you may go to Berlin(it would be 2 in 1 trip...) There is a direct line to Warsaw(from TO) and you can also see the new Hyundai trams that are driving around the city.

[@davidmarkwort9711]

You should take a look at the history of the trams in Hannover, Germany from the year 1972 onwards, you will see how a city changed its face, the infrastructure and its trams to those of today.

[@tygrallure6895]

I'm not sure why any of the planners in North America does not take notes from Europe and improve upon what they already successfully do. It's crazy living in Europe as an American, and seeing how easy it is to get around places, while these places are heavily populated. It is very possible to do it and for people to still keep their vehicles. And this would create jobs, and be better for the environment. I'm not sure why we don't want to get behind this, but it's immature and very saddening because we could be doing so much more with this land. It could really be a beautiful county.

[@zedspoint4614]

When I went to Augsburg, Germany, the trams there were quite great, different types (newer and older) mixed together. It worked great and all the trams I boarded where always on time within 30seconds of what the timetable says. The trams were always different from the one before it with the sheer amount of advertisements/posters on the trams. One tram would be decorated with Lidl/Aldi bakery, another one with Volkswagen or Audi, others with Pharmacies/Apotheka, and electric/water distributor. I think that really helped with sustaining the frequent running of the trams with some operating every 5-10mins near the university while other areas with 15-30min frequencies aside from weekends

[@mr_obscure_universe]

Instead of government funding (and meddling), eliminate all taxes on American rail companies and employees. We'll have a rail renaissance in a New York Minute. Investment will pour into building GOOD urban and interurban rail networks. And since the only way the investors will profit is to move passengers from A to B, it will be done in the most efficient and frugal manner - without partisan politics, waste, and administrative bloat. (Just look at the HSR mess in California - delays - budget overruns - and waste)

[@mysterium368]

8:06 My commuter station! The difference here is a technical one, due to Karlsruhe being a classical tram network with new tram-trains that in term have to fit classical railway.

[@kskssxoxskskss2189]

Learned a lot from this one. As usual.

[@luhso7552]

I'd love to see a take on Lisbon's tram network. Visited recently and found it pretty intimidating to try to figure out.

[@brianalexeu]

I think vehicle designs in North America are generally pretty frustrating. Especially because the manufacturers that build them sell better designs elsewhere in the world that don't already look 50 years old when they are first deployed. Examples are the Silverliners built by Hyundai Rotem or some of the hideous LRVs by Kinki Sharyo who both make super sleek highspeed and metro trains for other networks. Or Siemens for that matter who's Avenio Trams are much nicer that what they sell in the US. Thankfully this does seem to change a bit recently.

[@johnruskin4290]

This begs the question of do the nicer designs cost more? Or as another pointed out, do concerns for the vehicle's crash resistance affect what can be sold in at least the US, and thus appearance suffers? That said no matter how ugly the rolling stock is if the system doesn't get people conveniently from where they are to where they want to go it fails. It's an interesting point to think of having multiple layers of systems that separate long haul commute lines from those intended for going between adjoining neighborhoods. Might be possible just by reconfiguring existing bus lines to complement the rail service. I feel we need to have an in-depth discussion with those that plan our transit.

[@jasonriddell]

@@johnruskin4290 I agree an "ugly" effective system is ALWAYS "better" then a "PRETTY" showpiece that does NOT offer service to a LOT of PAX

[@jackx4311]

About 45 years back, I met a Dutch tram driver who told me that their trams ran in lanes separated from other traffic by substantial fences, but along main roads. On approaching an intersection, a transponder on the tram triggers the traffic lights so that cars crossing in front of the tram were stopped and the tram got a green light to keep rolling. Also, the trams ran in coupled pairs; if you had a ticket (which you could buy at most tram stops from a ticket booth), you got on the front section, and fed your ticket through a turnstile. If you didn't have a ticket, you got on the rear section, where there was an open space which could hold a fair number of passengers, and you could by a ticket from a conductress. Result was that the trams could move through the city in the rush hour as fast as they did at off-peak times.

[@IamTheHolypumpkin]

My (European) transit system is painting all its vehicles in a color somewhere between turquoise and teal. While only a single color, it's very recognizable.

[@LunaDragofelis]

Frankfurt am Main?

[@PascalDragon]

I hope you don't solely blame the look of the trams in Northern America on Siemens, cause it's the operator that also decides large parts of the look and placement of the doors. E.g. in Munich the Siemens Avenio has been ordered with 2 doors for each compartment with 2 to 4 compartments for each tram (Munich has a single direction system, so doors are only on one side). So for the 4 parter that makes 8 doors or even 10 doors for a coupled 2+3 (which are allowed to operate in that configuration for a few months).

[@mobilinsan]

İstanbul has experienced and going to experience nearly every type of trams imaginable: A low floor, mix-used LRV, couple of nostalgic/thematic streetcars, an "unnamed Stadtbahn", a niche coastline tramway and eventually a tram-train-esque LRV. And trust me, İstanbul needs more trams. I personally wish more tram lines in Anatolian side of İstanbul like other cities in Turkey.

[@PRH123]

I rode on the streetcar in the "English" area of Istanbul, it was great. And also the world's oldest metro in the same area.

[@mobilinsan]

@@PRH123 you mean the "Tünel" I guess, either way it's indeed great.

[@Justin-fi9kj]

I would love to hear your thoughts on the MBTA green line. To me it seems like a version of light rail that actually works in the US

[@elefante8572]

Which line? The D line is kind of like a tram train and is pretty good, whereas the B and C lines are slowed a ton by lack of signal priority, the E line runs in mixed traffic, and the GLX is pretty similar to most modern US light rail. It’s certainly a well used system but it has a ton to improve upon!

[@elefante8572]

I’m very excited about the new modern vehicles they’re purchasing, though! Those have the potential to double capacity with some station improvements.

[@johnlang4198]

The illustration of the CAF trams for Calgary looks almost identical to the trams being used on Sydney's L1 Dulwich Hill light rail line, albeit with more sections.

[@acfbrown1]

If you go to Britain again in 2023, you should come to Edinburgh and do a video on Edinburgh's Trams as the Edinburgh Tram extension from York Place to Newhaven is supposed to be opening in the next few months.

[@alainmellaerts8926]

For the enthousiasts, check out Tram 44 Brussels - Tervuren. One of the most beautiful in the world with classic trams from the Tram Museum running occasionally in Summer.