Reply on: Viko #256415:
Popravde, neviem si celkom predstaviť, na akej relácii naprieč mesto by bolo vhodné mať linku s polhodinovým (mimo špičky; a to sa navyše bavíme i celom zväzku) intervalom obsluhovanú dvojdverovými vozidlami s prímestským interiérom, na ktorej jazdnú dobu 120 minútovú medzi komerčnými vplývajú všetky možné dopravné nástrahy. Ani taký príklad nikde z iných systémov nepoznám.Ešte keby sme sa bavili o nejakej lokálnej obsluhe, napr. 540 by z Rače smerovala na Rendez a nahradila 52 alebo 56, tam by tie rozdiely až taky vplyv nemali.
(Cífer, žel.st., Chorvátsky Grob, nám. ... )
AxLu
I’d like to come back to the topic of luggage racks. A few months ago, it was mentioned that some vehicles had them removed, which increased standing space. Would it be possible to do something similar in the trolleybuses on line 61, given that these racks are rarely used? Most passengers prefer to keep their luggage with their seat rather than place it somewhere they can hardly see when the vehicle is crowded.
Removing these racks would at least partially increase capacity. If the vehicle structure allows it, it might also be worth considering adding extra doors that open outwards, so passengers have enough space while standing and don’t have to move aside when doors open. I believe this would be much cheaper than buying new vehicles.
In addition, implementing these changes could actually encourage more people to return to their cars. Even passengers traveling to the airport from other towns or countries might be more likely to use personal vehicles if the public transport options remain crowded and inconvenient.