This sounds great, though 2042?! Really?? Can we not just get on with it...

Sounds like someone making trams has a direct link to the city council. Unless these are replacing buses there is no benefit to the current system. The proposed tram route to Newton Mearns for instance still misses out two thirds of the area ironically running through the most affluent part where people all have cars.

isn't this what electric buses do?

Exciting development - if a little slow (in line with typical uk public transport development)

Can't lie and say that the route up through clydebank would be fantastic, anything to free us from the number 2 bus

The Scottish Government can’t even get a couple of ferries built let alone this proposal. Another shambles in the making.

Fantastic idea. Map the existing infrastructure, but present in a different format and suggest running different format carriages..hey presto a 'new' idea!
This isn't a milestone to anywhere, it's just a rebadge of the starting line.
The routes and vehicles are an issue, but the real stumbling block is cost. At the moment the cost between personal car taking you exactly where you want when you want is far to close the public transport options. Either the cost of driving into and around the city needs to be increased or public transport needs to be subsidised to the point that one is far more attractive than the other.

Fantastic idea. Map the existing infrastructure, but present in a different format and suggest running different format carriages..hey presto a 'new' idea!
This isn't a milestone to anywhere, it's just a rebadge of the starting line.
The routes and vehicles are an issue, but the real stumbling block is cost. At the moment the cost between personal car taking you exactly where you want when you want is far to close the public transport options. Either the cost of driving into and around the city needs to be increased or public transport needs to be subsidised to the point that one is far more attractive than the other.

I'd welcome any improvements to the Glasgow public transport system. I think the most important change would be first to unify everything under one system. I should be able to get a day ticket (ideally ~£5) valid for all buses, subway, local rail and, in the future, trams.

The line to Newton Mearns has some issues. With the rate of expansion of Newton Mears , there does seem to be an effort to link up these new areas. Also , there is no linkage for example through Clarkston and then either to Castlemilk or EK or perhaps both. Just seems to be single purpose lines which is a shame unless they have planned for expansion later.

The full delivery is into the 2040s, they are not saying they will not get started, just it will be a prgressive set if lines that gets delivered, watch for the easy metro conversions first and the creation of some missing links in the infrastructure, so adding a spur from Paisley Gilmore to the airport will get done ASAP and then they will extend the QUH whist converting some exiting lines to metro running etc, you heard it here first folks....

#10 if we all can have a bit more patience for the development of the next level of travel we can use the Lion Chambers hoverport, the Egyptian Halls hyperloop terminal and the 50 Argyle Street escalator to the moon which I'm awaiting final designs on...

Tram train is the way that Newcastle has delivered with their Metro system and makes good sense for Glasgow
it can provide a more intensive local service on many radial and inner 'loop' routes (some still in use, others still recoverable, or connectable with light rail vehicles able to negotiate steeper gradients & tighter curves with greatly reduced loadings on track & structures)
Key to this can be removing local trains from Glasgow Central and Queen Street High level platforms, and reinstating 4 tracks at both low level stations to offer a very frequent cross-city service
4 tracking between Yorkhill and Jordanhill Junctions with a combined 'new' station for Finnieston to serve Argyle Street (Sandyford) and SEC complex eliminates a big bottleneck when any small disruption demands train regulation through this bottleneck. Maryhill services can then run through from Anniesland, and initially terminate at Hyndland (connections plus Gartnaval Hospital with more direct trains for more staff and clients) Ultimately those trains could loop via Bellgrove and avoid the delays of reversing at Queen Street and Anniesland
G&SW services from Clyde Coast can run via the Union Railway and the rump of the viaduct into St Enochs, with almost 2 metres of lowering the rails across Briggait, and 250 metres to drop and pass under Stockwell Street, to run in to Central Low Level (platforms 18 and 19 reopened), and through to Finnieston or beyond
Unless taken back for rail the Stobcross Tunnel under Kelvingrove Park can become a walking & cycling link from Kelvinbridge to SEC (and both Finnieston Stations) - well lit and a Scottish version of Leake Street with urban street murals very much more - with the old rail links to KGV Dock & Deanside branch still very much recoverable the tram train can run in to QEUH and then on to Glasgow Airport via Renfrew - and put this large town plus the major residential development at Kings Inch back on the rail network

The new map shows a plan which is not particularly ambitious. It is way too bias for travel in and out of the city centre to single destinations. No Erskine - Bishopton link, nothing worth having west of Paisley Canal. Mix of light / heavy for journeys to Glasgow Airport, no suburban link (mind you Glasgow folk only know their own back yard and the City Centre) and no thought to improve travel for those trunk travellers from Northern and Eastern Scotland who arrive at Queen Street and want to go further than George Square. Similarly dire for travellers between the south and Glasgow Airport with no possibility of any West Coast Main line services going anywhere but the congested Central - which is the ultimate destination for only a few. .