True Religion shirts for women

true religion brand
cheap true religion jeans
true religion brand jeans
true religion uk
moncler vest
moncler uk
moncler women jackets
moncler men jackets
moncler down jackets
moncler down coat
moncler jacket
cheap moncler

Basically, it's what always happens once you start blowing money on fancier buses:  they get more expensive to operate and maintain than trains. Leave them for the low-rider local/feeder services they're built for, where there is no point in spending money on infrastructure beyond curb signs and the odd shelter.  There is a reason "long" buses are toys used at Disneyland, not mission-critical transit scenarios. (BTW, that bus-train is not very long.  It might be a little longer than an articulated bus, with a fraction of the capacity.)

I dont know where you live, but if it's on the east coast, then you've never seen one of these on the interstate highway
http://www.laborunionreport.com/portal/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/Triple-Trailer.jpg
Thats right, a single truck pulling 3 trailers. And thats in mixed traffic.

Heres what Utah allows, 95 feet in mixed traffic.
http://www.utahmc.com/trucking_guide/img/low/chapter_14/triple-combination.jpg

An articulated bus is 60 feet.

And yes, the Montreal metro is a good example. Being a "train" isnt what magically allows it to pull 10 cars. Nor is it the fact that it's on a track. It's the electric power that lets it pull so much weight and the fact that it has an exclusive ROW. And yes, the montreal metro hits many curves.

The turning radius has nothing to do with overall length, but with segment length. As long as there is an articulation or gap every 30 or so feet.....your bus can be as long as you want if it's in an exclusive lane.

You may have even ridden on such an example. Disney runs a 7 car + engine bus.
http://www.originald.com/pics/updates/2009-04-21/ATR/Large/IMG_8647.JPG

Even does a tight loop at both ends.

And here's the fun part: One disney tram can and does pass the other disney tram that is busy unloading to dock at the next available slot. (Families are slow)

So instead of waiting behind the station, as a train would, this disney bus can pull around the loop and unload on the other side of the platform.

Regardless, a huge part of the point of transit is to prevent vehicles from arbitrarily doing anything. The best thing for them is to stay on schedule so they don't interfere with vehicles behind them, and so passengers don't miss connections. How do you make a ten-car bus arbitrarily pass another ten car bus? If it's not possible with trains, as you keep saying, it would be even harder with buses.

And where the hell are you that building track is more expensive than building a busway? Even in mixed traffic urban streets, it sounds iffy and it gets positively ridiculous on unimproved land or when grade separation is called for. It sounds like more of the same ol' buses are cheaper myth.

Youre going around in circles here. I explained that capacity has nothing to do with train vs bus operation. You can have a 10 car train. You can have a 10 "car" bus. As long as the right of way is separate (and it is in this case) then the fact that the bus runs on tires is no limit to the amount of cars a single driver can pull.

And how does being on steel wheels help punctuality...? I assume you're referring to trains ability to accelerate faster. But thats only the case for electric, not diesel trains. Electric buses accelerate just as well.

As for the green line, trains cant get longer without extremely expensive escavations  to make stations longer. Add more trains...? Theyre already backed up in the tunnels! Better signals? Well, the trains can run almost bumper to bumper (but not as much as buses due to stupid rules that limit how close trains can operate to each other). 

Actually, letting green line trains "arbitrarily" pass each other would do wonders for service levels. Say the B line is docked at a station. The B is very popular, so it takes longer to load. If there was a way to pass, the less popular C could close its doors, and move on while the B finishes the loading process. Or, if passing was allowed, trains could "arbitrarily" express and skip various stops.

Impossible with most rail systems because its too expensive to build more track.

I don't know how bad the Green Line is.  I haven't ridden it since 2002. But if what you say about it is true, that it spends much of its time waiting for trains ahead to clear, there is something wrong with it. I'm just taking your word for it, but if that's the case solutions include: longer trains, more frequent trains, maybe supplementary local bus service, better operational practice (signals?), or maybe it really is at its capacity limit. If the latter is really true, any solution chosen to add capacity has a high upfront cost, and a new busway is hardly the cheapest or lowest-impact option. Either way, vehicles should not be arbitrarily passing each other.

Capacity? Well, no. Theres nothing limiting the length of a bus. Well, actually, the power of the motor is a limiting factor, but if they were to electrify the line and distribute the power, then you could have a 500 foot long bus, with the appropriate articulations. Of course, a 500 foot bus cannot leave the buway and travel on surface streets when necessary, so thats a huge drawback.

How is the green line a bad implementation? it's the logical conclusion of ANY transit system that has greater demand than the travel way can accommodate. Trains can have congestion too. If the green line ran on tires instead of rail, it would be easier to create passing lanes and create local and express trains. That would be cheaper than the cost of adding a complete 3rd or 4th track to the system. Note I say easier, yes, trains can change tracks, but it's slow and less flexible.

But I think my point still holds: the ability you laud, to pass/leave in arbitrary order, is only relevant when the system timing is so sloppy as to require it—and such sloppy timing inherently restricts the speed and capacity of the system. Morever, using this ability on a regular basis will make the problem worse.

So rather than a positive, really this is a workaround for a very large negative.  If Bogotá wants to increase capacities, this is a sign that they've got some pretty fundamental changes to make.

[Of course, as Alon says, passing can be (and very often is) done on any rail as well, and is very useful for handling expresses etc.]

p.s. Don't begin your answer with "No.", it's obnoxious.

Anyway, almost any conceivable benefit to surface buses can be realized in a surface rail system that leaves room for bustitution during maintenance times.