>>1230025>>1229315That whole argument about maneuvering around obstacles is a moot point. It's incredibly retarded in the first place to build a modern LRT with tracks on the side of the street and not in the middle, and without a ROW. Plus an LRT warrants taking measures to prevent obstacles in the first place.
Meanwhile a trolleybus is simply a way to electrify a bus, which is a good thing but it doesn't magically turn it into something more than a bus, even if it's a large, biarticulated bus (it's still smaller than an average sized modern LRT which is 30-60m long). So a trolleybus makes more sense if it's used like a conventional bus with bus lanes on the side of the street, in which case indeed it may need to avoid obstacles.
Trolleybuses are just buses, superior buses because they're electric and don't need large batteries or charging points, but buses nonetheless. It's as retarded to argue trolleybus vs LRT as it is to argue bus vs LRT. Both have their applications, and both can be misused in places where you'd ideally need a different kind of transport.
