בפועל קיבולת BRT יכולה להיות גבוהה יותר
הקישור שנתת מענין, אם כי הכתיבה (לדעתי) לא מספיק בהירה ותמציתית. מויקיפדיה:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bus_rapid_transit In practice, real-world delays and headway disruptions cause a practical limitation of around 12,000 to 19,000 pph for light rail systems.[10] A survey by the UK Transport Research Laboratory reported the following peak passenger flows (passengers per hour) for BRT transitways. These were based on actual verifiable counts in real world conditions:[11] * Designated Lane: Ankara, Istanbul, Abidjan 7,300 – 19,500 * Designated Lanes with Feeders Curitiba, Brazil 13,900 – 24,100 * Designated Lanes with Bus Ordering (Travelling in Clusters) Porto Alegre 17,500 – 18,300 * Designated Lanes with Overlapping Routes, Passing at Stations and Express Routes Belo Horizonte, São Paulo 15,800 - 20,300 * TransMilenio, Bogotá 35,000 - 40,000[12] Many BRT systems, such as Ottawa's OC Transpo and Brisbane's South-East Busway, are based on multiple bus routes sharing a common dedicated busway to bypass congestion, especially to/from a central business district. In this form, the BRT system's passenger capacity is limited by vehicle capacity multiplied by vehicle headway of the busway. As buses can operate at headways as low as 10 seconds between vehicles (compared to at least one minute headways for rail vehicles), actual busway capacity can reach passenger rail capacities. In the NBRTI's May 2006 report, average headways of 13 seconds at busy intersections were observed in the TransMilenio BRT system.[8] At the high end of capacity, the Lincoln Tunnel XBL bus lane between New Jersey and New York City carries 62,000 pph in the 4-hour morning peak, more than any light rail line. אין פה התיחסות למחיר (כפי שהזכרת) אבל יש פה קביעה מבוססת על מציאות , (ולא על חישובים) שמבחינת קיבולת הBRT עדיף בתנאים מסוימים. יהודה