The problem with the 1 for 2 theory is that I suspect it is crush capacity they are comparing, definitely not seat numbers.

Those D1 class have half the seats of a W, so there should be 2 of them for every W replaced.

Regards,

> On 5 May 2015, at 8:23 pm, Matthew Geiermatthew@... [TramsDownUnder] TramsDownUnder@...> wrote:

>

> I think the problem with the new order for 'E's is they are duping the

> public with the old line 'but the capacity is the same'.

>

> I've seen it time and time again - particularly with trains. Cut the

> frequency of service but make the trains longer and then explain 'what

> are you all complaining about, you line has greater capacity than before!'.

>

> Never mind that the service is now significantly less convenient than

> before due to the longer interval between services.

>

> On the basis that we should be all happy that each shiny new E class are

> replacing 2 older trams, we might as well take it to the extreme and run

> 10 car coupled sets twice a day. What's the problem, you have the same

> number of seats/spaces per day don't you ?.

>

> Of course making the service less attractive by reducing the frequency

> is a great way to suppress demand and cure the over crowding problem.

> Push more people into cars so the business case for that expensive toll

> road you want to build looks better.

>

>