[Zigurd]

> Loop demonstrated 4500 people per hour with Teslas with human drivers

In what K hole did that happen? All of the experiences I have heard of involve multi minutes long waits for a car to arrive, and then time to load the car and unload at the far end. That adds up to dozens of people per hour if they are lined up and organized waiting to get in a car. Low hundreds per day, on a busy day is barely plausible.

[cornholio]

Hitting almost 4000 was a requirement of the LVCC bid and they actually hit 4400.

This is all public info available from unbiased sources; preferring schadenfreude and rage inducing bait is, of course, a choice you are entitled to.

[Zigurd]

YouTube has many videos of people trying out the Vegas loop. None of them show something that possibly scales to 4400 riders per hour.

[gamerdonkey]

I'm just coming across this discussion now, but I did a little research that I can add to possibly explain the difference between the advertised capacity and the perceived capacity.

The 4400 number is based on a capacity test that the Las Vegas Convention and Visitors Authority performed[1] to certify the Vegas Loop met its contractual requirements, which was 4400 riders per hour. The test was performed with "about 300 people", so results were extrapolated to reach the final number. The LVCVA didn't publish any further information about their methodology, so we can't really comment for sure on how realistic their conclusions might be.

However, a few months after the tunnel opened, there was some criticism[2] saying, "the highest hourly passenger rate hit thus far is 1,355 passengers per hour." It also notied that the ride took 4 minutes instead of the 2-minute goal. A spokesperson from the LVCVA responded:

> “The ride itself does in fact take two minutes,” Nelson-Kraft said. “What wasn’t taken into account are other factors of the Loop experience, like passengers load in and load out time. [...]"

Given that the LVCVA conducted the original capacity "stress test", I think it would be reasonable to guess that they tested only how many passengers can be pushed through the 12-foot-wide tunnel and did not consider loading and unloading as part of overall rates.

[1] https://web.archive.org/web/20210707125245/https://news3lv.c...

[2] https://www.reviewjournal.com/news/news-columns/road-warrior... (soft paywall, viewable with JS disabled)

[cornholio]

The LVCVA is a public authority and the Loop contract had substantial penalties in place, about 30% of the total ~$50 mil amount, tied to various tiers of service the system needed to hit. So right off the bat not only do you have good financial incentives for a good process, but strong legal risk and public scrutiny if things go bad. While the test was not public (for these very reasons), it was attended by auditors from BDO LLP - LVCVA's long standing auditor (and not one hired for the occasion by BoringCo).

The accounting company affirmed the test results, CFO Ed Finger told the board that the auditors observed 157 unique rides and there were no negative findings. These are all public records and board minutes anyone can request and consult.

Essentially, according to what was reported in the media, they had the few hundred volunteers board packed Teslas (3 pax + driver), ride the system, disembark and take another ride, while remaining within the station limits.

I wouldn't call the 4400pphpd result an "extrapolation" - it's a real, instantaneous capacity number once the system reaches steady state, just like you don't have to drive for an entire hour to express your speed in km/h or mi/h.

The figure is of course not indicative for the real rush hour capacity of the station infrastructure, especially the underground stations that have escalators etc., when they are packed with disoriented tourists carrying luggage and not necessarily making an effort to move fast and hit good numbers.

Hence, I think my original point stands firm, Boring has demonstrated vehicle rates that can beat light rail, the basic premise of cheap narrow tunnels is sound. To actually demonstrate competitive numbers in real life scenarios will require larger vehicles, better organized ingress flows and procedures, more and perhaps larger stations etc. But these are all tweakable factors depending on actual demand at a specific station, they can run a mix of vehicles and expand infra where it makes financial sense, but only IF the tunnels have good vehicle rates, ie. no more than seconds of headway with extraordinarily rare in-tunnel break downs.

[Zigurd]

There are some methodology gaps in that 1300 riders number as well. The four minute ride sounds like it assumes ideal availability of cars at the end of the loop segments. If the cars aren't evenly distributed, you won't be able to maintain optimal throughput for an hour.