400 Kms Hyderabad metro!

[shaktimaan]

5 minutes ago, Tryad said:

increase housing density around Hyd Metro, including a large portion as public housing since poor people still need to travel to these places to service the kings and queens that live there.

That one thing is enough to make Hyd Metro worthy of investment, but it'll never happen, if even politicians pay lip service to it.

okay, already metro lopala unna vaallu em cheyyali, they should just suffer in traffic and endure long commute everyday?

[Tryad]

1 minute ago, praying said:

uncle upper class vadu car lo pothadu kani metro ekuthada? nuvvu mari america lo culture ni compare chestunnav. Even here have you seen any c level exec going on a metro?

inkevaru eltharu metro lo? bus pass teeskoni poye vaallu metro lo eltaru anukuntunnaava?

look at the rider numbers first.

metro lo people can't even take their daily tools.. so tradesmen traveling in metro is out of question.

main thing is, US ki India ki enti comparison? majority of travel happens in India within 6kms, and mostly by foot or bicycle (combined).. what's the need for metro even in most cities?

[Telugodura456]

7 minutes ago, Tryad said:

who says so? many Asian metros are profitable because they operate at a large scale.

Hyd or Delhi or Bangalore will never achieve that scale even if they build 1000km metro. The key is land use around Hyd metro stations. There's not enough density around Hyd that is sprawling like mad.. So Hyd will never achieve critical mass

metro projects in India are already written off as flops and vanity projects.

just admit that metro exists so upper class people can travel in a/c while 90% of public transit goers still ahve to depend on extremely crowded buses. What about their productivity? I guess it doesn't matter as long as Hyd has the longest metro in India perhaps.

you are right to some extent but it is not for "upper class" people. It is built for investors to think India is worth investing.

Not sure whether it works or not. But thats how policy works. Every political set up in india - to some exception third front - is about attracting global capital. There are defenitely some benefits to it. But clearly they are overdoing it in india.

[no01]

Chatgpt gave 4 cities as examples which are profitable - Tokyo, Hongkong, Singapore and London underground trains.

It also states that Govt subsidies + land density vs population plays major role.

Above cities ki land density is very less and over populated too...and definitely govt subsidies played major role.

 

[Tryad]

Just now, shaktimaan said:

okay, already metro lopala unna vaallu em cheyyali, they should just suffer in traffic and endure long commute everyday?

metro lopala ante? sarigga adigi eduvu.

I'm answering a specific question. Hyd metro is a flop, and increasing it to 400km is not going to change that.

[Tryad]

Just now, Telugodura456 said:

you are right to some extent but it is not for "upper class" people. It is built for investors to think India is worth investing.

Not sure whether it works or not. But thats how policy works. Every political set up in india - to some exception third front - is about attracting global capital. There are defenitely some benefits to it. But clearly they are overdoing it in india.

so reasonable people shouldn't project it as a 'huge success' or 'pride of _____ city' fill whatever city you want. applies even more to Chennai who's metro is just a colossal waste of public money.

the only benefit I can think of is that women (who can afford to travel metro) for some reason feel safer in metro, but that is purely because regular buses are overcrowded due to metro taking up all public transit investment.

 

[Telugodura456]

400 km metro for hyd is a criminal waste - this coming from a huge infra fan.

this is not china which modernized it people first. women employment is still very low in india - workers face many challenged. infact traffic is actually very less in india (congestion is very high - too are not contradictory) because workers are too less for its population.

[Android_Halwa]

4 minutes ago, no01 said:

Chatgpt gave 4 cities as examples which are profitable - Tokyo, Hongkong, Singapore and London underground trains.

It also states that Govt subsidies + land density vs population plays major role.

Above cities ki land density is very less and over populated too...and definitely govt subsidies played major role.

 

The above four metro have been in operation for many decades and London Underground has been operating for over a hundred years now. It took decades for them to turn profitable after govt’s invested in system multiple times, bali outs etc. 

[praying]

6 minutes ago, Tryad said:

inkevaru eltharu metro lo? bus pass teeskoni poye vaallu metro lo eltaru anukuntunnaava?

look at the rider numbers first.

metro lo people can't even take their daily tools.. so tradesmen traveling in metro is out of question.

main thing is, US ki India ki enti comparison? majority of travel happens in India within 6kms, and mostly by foot or bicycle (combined).. what's the need for metro even in most cities?

metro is not going to solve and cater all the segments of people, andaru carlu bikelu meeda hours of travel badulu if you can convert the percentage of those people ( who are in lakhs specially IT and other soft jobs) to move to metro, it sovles the traffic problem, conjetion and also pollution, pani mutlu teesukuni paala canlu esukuni bus lo elletodu bus lone pothadu as usual but they also benefit will less traffic

[Telugodura456]

2 minutes ago, Tryad said:

so reasonable people shouldn't project it as a 'huge success' or 'pride of _____ city' fill whatever city you want. applies even more to Chennai who's metro is just a colossal waste of public money.

the only benefit I can think of is that women (who can afford to travel metro) for some reason feel safer in metro, but that is purely because regular buses are overcrowded due to metro taking up all public transit investment.

 

It is actually exactly that - its a pride thing - not a useful thing. Like ISRO and its wasteful rockets. I would still argue metro is better than isro.

but 400 kms is criminal.

[hyperbole]

7 minutes ago, Tryad said:

metro lopala ante? sarigga adigi eduvu.

I'm answering a specific question. Hyd metro is a flop, and increasing it to 400km is not going to change that.

Hyderabad metro clocked 5 lakh plus ridership in a day this month and second highest in India, how can you call it failure man. For 70 odd kms it is a big hit

 

https://government.economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/smart-infra/hyderabad-metro-rail-single-day-ridership-crosses-5-lakhs-on-july-3/101490506

[Tryad]

11 minutes ago, praying said:

uncle upper class vadu car lo pothadu kani metro ekuthada? nuvvu mari america lo culture ni compare chestunnav. Even here have you seen any c level exec going on a metro?

America lo metro projects are flops anna. except NYC and Chicago.

other cities like Tokyo, Singapore, HK lo andaru potharu metro lo.

India should aim to replicate Asian cities, and not US anna. US lo antha balisina kodis intent on driving cars like psychos everywhere.

[BulletBaskar]

31 minutes ago, Dallas_c_how_dare said:

Sare em cheddam antav mari?

paagal galla tho discussion waste bro

oka agenda i.e., to waste ppl time vallaki

[praying]

1 minute ago, Tryad said:

America lo metro projects are flops anna. except NYC and Chicago.

other cities like Tokyo, Singapore, HK lo andaru potharu metro lo.

India should aim to replicate Asian cities, and not US anna. US lo antha balisina kodis intent on driving cars like psychos everywhere.

agreed with your comments uncle, tokyo, singapore they have diff values, mana india lo diplomats that are in high ranks also will not go in public transport, India lo unna mentality is no matter what anything public transport is cheap thats it end of story, akkada asian countries lo laga high income unna vallu madda bhi poru, ivanni reality ki chala dooram aina alochanalu anna..

 

 

[hyperbole]

11 minutes ago, no01 said:

Chatgpt gave 4 cities as examples which are profitable - Tokyo, Hongkong, Singapore and London underground trains.

It also states that Govt subsidies + land density vs population plays major role.

Above cities ki land density is very less and over populated too...and definitely govt subsidies played major role.

 

Tokyo has a population of 3.5 crores basically most of the country live in that city. It is understandable