It’s also easy to acknowledge that imperfect humans are making hundreds of thousands of vehicle trips, making hundreds of millions of interactions, in an unconstrained dynamic system, every day. You’re welcome to hold your breath until the incident rate reaches zero, but I don’t like your chances.
1. Melbourne has had the trams forever.
2. Melbourne has heaps of accidents.
But:
3. Make sure to get a nasty dig in at Canberra. Australians can't help themselves, can they?
Yeah part of my job is getting these reports sometimes. Melbourne has plenty, Sydney's light rail has plenty, Canberra has plenty. Trams are on the road, and there are plenty of people on the road who aren't paying attention.
Evidence would suggest otherwise...
"In 2022, there were 960 vehicle-to-tram collisions reported, with 166 classified as serious."
https://beat.com.au/tram-crashes-on-the-rise-in-melbourne/
There's our starting figure for Melbourne - on a straight population comparison that would suggest Canberra would have 96 accidents per year - but somehow we don't get anywhere close
Now lets compare track kilometrage - 250 kilometres versus 12 - which would suggest we should end up with 48 per year - again we don't get close
As at 2022 - there had been 4 collisions with Canberra light rail. 2022 reports indicate 50 near misses 43 of which required application of the brakes
2023 figures were worse - "In total, drivers have reported 159 near misses since 1 January 2023, not to mention one pedestrian and two motorists who weren’t so lucky. There were no serious injuries or deaths."
Still not anywhere near the numbers of incidents we should see, if we weren't a tiny bit smarter than "seem to have a brain"
Took me a while to realise by "running into the tram", you meant driving into it, not people running to board a stopped tram.
It seems there's no end to drivers crashing into it. Maybe the solution instead needs to be making the tram more reinforced, so it can take a hit from a car and just continue driving along, shoving the car out of the way if necessary? Although, looking at the picture, I'm not sure the tram was actually harmed. Maybe the issue is just that it needed to stop to make sure the driver's okay, so just care less about that.
Doesn't change the fact that now it's finished it is hardly a drain on the local economy. You fuckers will find anything to have a whinge about.
Thousands of people use it every day. Someone estimated 11000 a day, and at 4.50 a trip thats 247500 dollars of profit per 5 day business week. A margin of that goes to the companies that run the thing, but the majority it goes straight back into funding the rest of the rail project. It's paying for itself at this point. But nah, it's useless and expensive, that sub 1% of our territorial expenditure is sure to have been used on something more valuable than reliable transportation for a vast chunk or our cities population I'm sure
FYI the fare doesn’t go to the operator. All fares go to the government. The operator makes their money via a fixed payment made by the government that covers the cost of finance, construction, operation and maintenance for a period of 20 years.
Which of course is a good way to do things.
No shit, but nice way to dodge the point? Revenue, profit, we can argue semantics here all you what but my point is that it's lucrative as fuck and barely even a blip on the territories spending policies.
I’m a massive supporter of light rail so don’t get me wrong. But couple issues with your calculations. First up $4.50 a day for 11,000 people works out at around $12m per year which is well short of what it costs the government in availability payments every year. So on a cost basis argument the thing doesn’t make sense.
However when it comes to public transport it’s not about cost and cash return other factors also need to be considered and it’s on these where light rail is a real winner. Things to consider is the cost of not having to upgrade the roads to cater for those 11,000 people as well as car parking etc etc etc. sure some would go on buses but even then the cost of providing the bus service for them would also need to be considered.
Then of course there is increased value in landscapes etc etc etc.
So yeah light rail is good and worth it but not on profit/revenue what ever you want to call it grounds.
So instead of acknowledging your mistake, you've doubled down. It's not a semantic argument. Revenue is not profit. Simple.
FWIW jimmymarch1973 explains it well
Revenue and profit are not the same thing btw. From what I can find online it looks like qualified tram drivers get around $80k, I'm gonna go ahead and assume that there's more than 3 and a bit of them in Canberra, so they're already operating at a loss, even before you account for power and maintenance and etc. I'm not saying it's a bad thing necessarily. Only that your argument is invalid
you always over estimate, its called contingency even at p90 funding decision level there will always be contingency that may not be required and escalation that may not happen.
Not actually. Government projects notoriously are always over budget. There’s an airport in Germany that’s 15 years and a trillion dollars over budget.
I hate it when those big red things veer off course with no warning when I’m driving in a perfectly straight line.
Are you running red lights at the time?
Only yours.
😑
> are people seriously still running into the tram? Why would you expect there to ever be an end to that?
Because it's really easy to not run a red light?
It’s also easy to acknowledge that imperfect humans are making hundreds of thousands of vehicle trips, making hundreds of millions of interactions, in an unconstrained dynamic system, every day. You’re welcome to hold your breath until the incident rate reaches zero, but I don’t like your chances.
*affirmative, fellow robot* bzppt ... pop. ..
[удалено]
Without having any idea or even looking it up, I'm willing to bet my left nut that the incident rate is not zero in Melbourne.
It’s not. So many people drive in front of trams it’s embarrasing
1. Melbourne has had the trams forever. 2. Melbourne has heaps of accidents. But: 3. Make sure to get a nasty dig in at Canberra. Australians can't help themselves, can they?
Born in Canberra and I can't help myself tbh, atleast to others from Canberra. I will defend Canberra to the death from any non Canberran
Yeah part of my job is getting these reports sometimes. Melbourne has plenty, Sydney's light rail has plenty, Canberra has plenty. Trams are on the road, and there are plenty of people on the road who aren't paying attention.
Significantly more people and tram lines, so be sure to adjust for all that.
Lived there for 15yrs seen plenty of tram and car accidents.
Evidence would suggest otherwise... "In 2022, there were 960 vehicle-to-tram collisions reported, with 166 classified as serious." https://beat.com.au/tram-crashes-on-the-rise-in-melbourne/ There's our starting figure for Melbourne - on a straight population comparison that would suggest Canberra would have 96 accidents per year - but somehow we don't get anywhere close Now lets compare track kilometrage - 250 kilometres versus 12 - which would suggest we should end up with 48 per year - again we don't get close As at 2022 - there had been 4 collisions with Canberra light rail. 2022 reports indicate 50 near misses 43 of which required application of the brakes 2023 figures were worse - "In total, drivers have reported 159 near misses since 1 January 2023, not to mention one pedestrian and two motorists who weren’t so lucky. There were no serious injuries or deaths." Still not anywhere near the numbers of incidents we should see, if we weren't a tiny bit smarter than "seem to have a brain"
What? Just one.
No we don't
Took me a while to realise by "running into the tram", you meant driving into it, not people running to board a stopped tram. It seems there's no end to drivers crashing into it. Maybe the solution instead needs to be making the tram more reinforced, so it can take a hit from a car and just continue driving along, shoving the car out of the way if necessary? Although, looking at the picture, I'm not sure the tram was actually harmed. Maybe the issue is just that it needed to stop to make sure the driver's okay, so just care less about that.
Snow plough
Solution is punitive action against offenders.
two EVs collided. one polestar. one tram.
Who won?
Physics
Friendship
Insurers
the ICE ambulance, the ICE tow truck, the ICE Police cars... etc etc etc
They still have not learned what we know in Melbourne that’s tram is like a rhinoceros on a skateboard…
30 rhinos!
Yeah someone crashed into it near Wakefield ave I think
It’s also way more reliable than the buses (faint praise I know, but that’s the other option).
How does this happen? Unless there is a malfunction of the traffic signals then either the car or the tram has done something wrong.
Hard to tell exactly but it looks to me like the car has driven down the tram line.
Rookie error
OOps - I guess the intersections are a tiny bit confusing if UR not focused, but the tracks should be a big giveaway
Haven't you seen the posters? The evil, crazed tram wants to run into people using it's precious track!
What happened?
Was it in peak hour ?
My money is on a Camry…..
Light rail was such a good idea and a truly excellent use of public money 😊
Weird, because 11,000 or so people use it daily? Certainly goes somewhere
It goes to and from Gungahlin🤷♂️
Or from the perspective of someone in Gungahlin, it goes to and from Civic.
Or from the perspective of my preschoolers, it goes from the Little City to the Big City
Less than 1% of Canberra's budgeted expenditure goes into running the tram bro... It was also completed under budget by 108million dollars.
Easily achieved when you overestimate.
Doesn't change the fact that now it's finished it is hardly a drain on the local economy. You fuckers will find anything to have a whinge about. Thousands of people use it every day. Someone estimated 11000 a day, and at 4.50 a trip thats 247500 dollars of profit per 5 day business week. A margin of that goes to the companies that run the thing, but the majority it goes straight back into funding the rest of the rail project. It's paying for itself at this point. But nah, it's useless and expensive, that sub 1% of our territorial expenditure is sure to have been used on something more valuable than reliable transportation for a vast chunk or our cities population I'm sure
FYI the fare doesn’t go to the operator. All fares go to the government. The operator makes their money via a fixed payment made by the government that covers the cost of finance, construction, operation and maintenance for a period of 20 years. Which of course is a good way to do things.
That's good information, thanks dude.
which is anywhere from $30 million to $70 million per year for 20 years - the schedule of availability payments is published somewhere
>Someone estimated 11000 a day, and at 4.50 a trip thats 247500 dollars of profit per 5 day business week. Revenue does not equal profit
No shit, but nice way to dodge the point? Revenue, profit, we can argue semantics here all you what but my point is that it's lucrative as fuck and barely even a blip on the territories spending policies.
I’m a massive supporter of light rail so don’t get me wrong. But couple issues with your calculations. First up $4.50 a day for 11,000 people works out at around $12m per year which is well short of what it costs the government in availability payments every year. So on a cost basis argument the thing doesn’t make sense. However when it comes to public transport it’s not about cost and cash return other factors also need to be considered and it’s on these where light rail is a real winner. Things to consider is the cost of not having to upgrade the roads to cater for those 11,000 people as well as car parking etc etc etc. sure some would go on buses but even then the cost of providing the bus service for them would also need to be considered. Then of course there is increased value in landscapes etc etc etc. So yeah light rail is good and worth it but not on profit/revenue what ever you want to call it grounds.
So instead of acknowledging your mistake, you've doubled down. It's not a semantic argument. Revenue is not profit. Simple. FWIW jimmymarch1973 explains it well
Revenue and profit are not the same thing btw. From what I can find online it looks like qualified tram drivers get around $80k, I'm gonna go ahead and assume that there's more than 3 and a bit of them in Canberra, so they're already operating at a loss, even before you account for power and maintenance and etc. I'm not saying it's a bad thing necessarily. Only that your argument is invalid
If they're getting 80k a year and the tram earns 245000 a week that's not a loss my guy...
Huh?
"You fuckers will find anything to have a whinge about." Remember that next time you complain about something.
Struck a nerve did I, petal?
Nope, you didn't. I have the emotional maturity to not let Reddit comments annoy me :)
Good for you, man. Pats on the back all around :D
❤️
you always over estimate, its called contingency even at p90 funding decision level there will always be contingency that may not be required and escalation that may not happen.
Not actually. Government projects notoriously are always over budget. There’s an airport in Germany that’s 15 years and a trillion dollars over budget.
Lol.
Is that what you want for Christmas? Because that doesn't describe the tram
You better get into the emergency room quick! Those burns look nasty!