16-km Kamalapur-N’ganj underground train by 2030

[Mage]

Bus and rickshaw should be phased out.

You cannot phase out buses. You can ease pressure on buses by metro though. Rickshaws should be be banned.

Rails should be intercity only imo.

Not possible. You need rail network from Dhaka to other cities like Chittagong.

 

[VikingRaider]

You cannot phase out buses. You can ease pressure on buses by metro though. Rickshaws should be be banned.

Not possible. You need rail network from Dhaka to other cities like Chittagong.

Oh yes actually I meant it by intercity, sorry for my wrong word.

I exactly wanted to say from one city to another , like from Dhaka or from another district to another district. But not from various places inside dhaka city !

I simply wanted to say about express trains aka long distance trains by intercity/ আন্তঃনগর!

@Mage

 

[Mage]

Oh yes actually I meant it by intercity, sorry for my wrong words.

I exactly wanted to say from one city to another , like from Dhaka or from another district to another district. But not from various places inside dhaka city !

Rail link within city is important too i.e. metro rail.

This can ease traffic congestion in Cities, a bit.

 

[VikingRaider]

Rail link within city is important too i.e. metro rail.

This can ease traffic congestion in Cities, a bit.

Maybe but I prefer non stop bus service ( লক্কর ঝক্কড় বাস না) in this cases, with controlled traffic, as we saw during safe Street movement .

 

[Mage]

Maybe but I prefer bus service in this cases, with controlled traffic, as we saw during safe Street movement .

You need too many buses. During office hours it is very hard to get into buses.

Metro rail can take some pressure off buses.

 

[HariPrasad]

Well done BD. As I always say, BD is a very progressive country inspite being a majority Muslim country. BD is always in headlines for Good reason unlike most of the Muslim countries from where you will hear the news of Violence and fundamentalism.

 

[Bengal71]

Metro should be the main mode of mass transportation. But, Buses will always be there. How do you go to a place, say, 2 km away from a railway station without getting into a bus? Taxi is affordable to people like you, @Homo Sapiens and @Bilal9.

@Nilgiri

Maybe a combination of metro rail and tram network could work.

 

[bluesky]

Maybe a combination of metro rail and tram network could work.

For tram, a dedicated line is required which is no more possible in most areas of Dhaka because of congestion. In the cities like Tokyo or Shanghai, the tram lines were set when the density of population was low and there were large spaces available.

In the case of Tokyo it was around 1902 when the first tram system was introduced, Shanghai in 1881. In the days before the WWll, the main modes of transportation were tram, train, and bus combined. Gradually, the modes changed to train, bus, and tram.

Trams usually have one or two carriages that can transport at best 100 passengers at a time. A train can carry a few thousand. So, it would be uneconomic to build tram lines. A hundred years ago it would have been different. So, train and also bus is needed for the proper functioning of today's city transportation, the bulk being handled by the trains.

 

[Nilgiri]

Maybe a combination of metro rail and tram network could work.

Trams take up a lot of roadspace, it should be restricted only to major thorough fares.

The better model to start out with is have wheels+spoke model of metro rail for inner city, radial commuter/suburban rail (to connect inner city to suburbia/satellites) and then a good bus system to interlink/refine this system where appropriate.

Paris is good case study for all (i.e RER vs Metro rail design + buses/trams on top only where appropriate). Trams are best once you reach certain equilibrium of the bus requirement AFTER heavy metro+commuter rail put into place...i.e you can start out with segregated BRT infra and convert them to street trams with time if appropriate. This helps in saving money and cost long term in creating less redundant tramways and the effects those would have on crowded streets in the interim.

@Mage

 

[bluesky]

Maybe but I prefer non stop bus service ( লক্কর ঝক্কড় বাস না) in this cases, with controlled traffic, as we saw during safe Street movement .

@Atlas, how many people can ride a bus, at best it is 60. In the case of a train, 1500 people can ride. So, the bus is not a substitute for the metro trains. However, there will be long distance buses as well as for routes within the city. It is not feasible to take the trains to every nook and corner of a city. Every train station must be linked with bus services. Otherwise how do you go to a place, say, 3 km away from a train station if Rickshaw is not in service?

 

[Nilgiri]

@Atlas, how many people can ride a bus, at best it is 60. In the case of a train, 1500 people can ride. So, the bus is not a substitute for the metro trains. However, there will be long distance buses as well as for routes within the city. It is not feasible to take the trains to every nook and corner of a city. Every train station must be linked with bus services. Otherwise how do you go to a place, say, 3 km away from a train station if Rickshaw is not in service?

Yes buses (even BRT) are no substitute for where the main throughfare routes/needed capacity lies esp in super dense+ large population cities. Rail is champ there (and you can select the type of rail that best makes sense and layer those types).

Buses are lot better for disseminating at more refined level from those thoroughfares and also linking them (given they tend to look like spoke system after you spread out from inner city a bit) etc. Buses do have their time and place....also they are flexible assets that are not tied down to the hard infra (rail).

It becomes cost benefit analysis in the end as to the capacity demand in different parts of a city for mass transport compared to more general, location sensitive transport etc.

 

[Bengal71]

Trams take up a lot of roadspace, it should be restricted only to major thorough fares.

The better model to start out with is have wheels+spoke model of metro rail for inner city, radial commuter/suburban rail (to connect inner city to suburbia/satellites) and then a good bus system to interlink/refine this system where appropriate.

Paris is good case study for all (i.e RER vs Metro rail design + buses/trams on top only where appropriate). Trams are best once you reach certain equilibrium of the bus requirement AFTER heavy metro+commuter rail put into place...i.e you can start out with segregated BRT infra and convert them to street trams with time if appropriate. This helps in saving money and cost long term in creating less redundant tramways and the effects those would have on crowded streets in the interim.

@Mage

For a city as congested as Dhaka, trams need to run on overhead tracks, there is no other way. It will be expensive but cost will be manageable in the long run given the petrol cost of thousands of buses and the work hours lost due to congestion caused by them. It's also environmentally friendly, I wish BD goes electric as much as possible. With the meager funds we have to implement this, it will take a while but it should be in the long term plans.

 

[Nilgiri]

For a city as congested as Dhaka, trams need to run on overhead tracks, there is no other way. It will be expensive but cost will be manageable in the long run given the petrol cost of thousands of buses and the work hours lost due to congestion caused by them. It's also environmentally friendly, I wish BD goes electric as much as possible. With the meager funds we have to implement this, it will take a while but it should be in the long term plans.

Well overhead trams....why not just go for overhead rail as part of metro? It would be just a little more capital investment, and you get lot more capacity for it.

In fact years ago I designed a concept where you have a overhead flyover (road) and you have a tram suspended from its underside, to make use of all the volume afforded in dense cities (where say BRT is not enough capacity but you want something less than a full metro route). But again it would need just that bit more one time capital expenditure and planning (given you need to take into account extra height needed and the routing of flyover exits etc).

 

[Bengal71]

Well overhead trams....why not just go for overhead rail as part of metro? It would be just a little more capital investment, and you get lot more capacity for it.

In fact years ago I designed a concept where you have a overhead flyover (road) and you have a tram suspended from its underside, to make use of all the volume afforded in dense cities (where say BRT is not enough capacity but you want something less than a full metro route). But again it would need just that bit more one time capital expenditure and planning (given you need to take into account extra height needed and the routing of flyover exits etc).

Overhead trains should be for the relatively long haul services, whereas overhead trams will span the suburban major streets.

The idea is people use the metro for long distance like 10-15km, them after they get off the train a small stroll away is the tram which will drop them within 10min walking distance to their homes.

I thought about your concept too, although I am not a civil engineer. My concept was in the flyovers cars ply on the two sides and metro rail tracks in the middle, it overcomes the height issue, although it will make the flyovers wider and will take up more space. But yeah your concept could work too. But it won't work for suburban tram network which will be a slower service and needs to wiggle through the suburban streets.

 

[Nilgiri]

Overhead trains should be for the relatively long haul services, whereas overhead trams will span the suburban major streets.

The idea is people use the metro for long distance like 10-15km, them after they get off the train a small stroll away is the tram which will drop them within 10min walking distance to their homes.

I thought about your concept too, although I am not a civil engineer. My concept was in the flyovers cars ply on the two sides and metro rail tracks in the middle, it overcomes the height issue, although it will make the flyovers wider and will take up more space. But yeah your concept could work too. But it won't work for suburban tram network which will be a slower service and needs to wiggle through the suburban streets.

Yeah I'm not up to date on how things look like w.r.t Dhaka in a layout kind of way....it may be just too wide.

If you need lot of wiggle, then maybe overhead tram or even just a good network of e-vehicles could be optimal (depending on what you can legislate for inner city restriction on surface travel). In either case its best to put in the heavy capacity "core" stuff first...and see where the intermediate requirements form for the next stage....so every Taka is spent as wisely as possible given transport infra needs to be gotten right the first time around as much as possible.