I found these lovely conflicting figures in two seperate RPA publications...
Quote from the www.RPA.ie website:
Metro Will Have the Capacity to Grow to Meet the Long Term Transport Requirements For Dublin
When it opens, Metro will carry around 80,000 passengers per day. This is forecast to grow significantly over time. This is beyond the capacity of an on-street rail system, but will easily be accommodated on Metro, which can operate with longer trains and at a higher frequency.
RPA Quote from the door to door mailing Line F proposal: “Dublin’s first two LUAS lines have proved to be a tremendous success. More than 22 million passengers were served in 2005 growing to 26 million in 2006 and customer feedback has been very positive.”
Publishing PR figures such as this laughs in the face of the public. It’s a clear unintentional statement that the system planned and provided was inadequate and does not serve its intention.
Look at the figures in the two statements:
Metro will carry 80,000 per day (multiplied by 200 work days only in a year (no event days) = 16 million) This is beyond the capacity of an on-street rail system
26 million (divided by 2 LUAS lines = 13 million further divided by 200 working days = 65,000 per day)
So in one publication it is stated that 80,000 passengers per day is way beyond the capacity of an on-street rail system but in another publication it is hailed 65,000 passengers a day carried by an on-street system as a great tremendous success.
So if the system is already at it's max why do they continue to use it?