4 ms·

Roads, which is the default everywhere, have literally the least capacity. Single-occupancy vehicles have the worst, followed by normal buses, followed by rapid

Roads, which is the default everywhere, have literally the least capacity. Single-occupancy vehicles have the worst, followed by normal buses, followed by rapid transit buses, followed by rail.

CamperBob2 8y ago
Trains already work as well as they possibly can. There is no room for improvement in fixed rail, no space for progress. Fixed rail is, well, fixed. If it doesn't exist where you are at the moment, or go where you want to go, that's too bad. And if everyone achieves their dream of living next to a fixed rail station, as advocated so enthusiastically in this thread, this is what their homes will look like: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DdzJpM-EMNg&feature=youtu.be https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DdzJpM-EMNg&feature=youtu.be Or does everyone on here just naturally assume the penthouse with the tennis court and helipad will be theirs? Conversely, if you can look at a crowded, congested city full of automotive traffic and think, "This is as well as this system can possibly work," I have to wonder what you're doing on a site called Hacker News. What a single road lacks in capacity, it makes up by being part of a larger network. In every other context on HN, that's considered a good thing. When it comes to transportation, not so much. I will never understand that.
- EliRivers 8y ago
  Fixed rail is, well, fixed. If it doesn't exist where you are at the moment, or go where you want to go, that's too bad. Is that not true of roads? If there is no road right now where I want to go, I'm out of luck. Or do you mean than no new rail is being laid? That doesn't fit my observations. I see new rail and new stations. I wonder if you've got a specific context; perhaps you're thinking of small regions of the USA? Many of us (myself included) do not live in the USA. The USA is notoriously bad at rail.
  - CamperBob2 8y ago
    Take a look out your window... all of your windows. Roads are already pretty much everywhere, for better or worse. Rails are not. I believe that we should be working on forms of transit, both new and old, that take advantage of the infrastructure we already have. The USA's geography is very different from places like Europe and Japan, if that's where you're coming from. Centralized transit is a lot more effective in places where 200 km is considered a long distance, and where the bulk of the population is already compressed into compact urban centers.

Roads, which is the default everywhere, have literally the least capacity. Single-occupancy vehicles have the worst, followed by normal buses, followed by rapid transit buses, followed by rail.

CamperBob2 8y ago

Trains already work as well as they possibly can. There is no room for improvement in fixed rail, no space for progress. Fixed rail is, well, fixed. If it doesn't exist where you are at the moment, or go where you want to go, that's too bad. And if everyone achieves their dream of living next to a fixed rail station, as advocated so enthusiastically in this thread, this is what their homes will look like: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DdzJpM-EMNg&feature=youtu.be https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DdzJpM-EMNg&feature=youtu.be Or does everyone on here just naturally assume the penthouse with the tennis court and helipad will be theirs? Conversely, if you can look at a crowded, congested city full of automotive traffic and think, "This is as well as this system can possibly work," I have to wonder what you're doing on a site called Hacker News. What a single road lacks in capacity, it makes up by being part of a larger network. In every other context on HN, that's considered a good thing. When it comes to transportation, not so much. I will never understand that.

EliRivers 8y ago
Fixed rail is, well, fixed. If it doesn't exist where you are at the moment, or go where you want to go, that's too bad. Is that not true of roads? If there is no road right now where I want to go, I'm out of luck. Or do you mean than no new rail is being laid? That doesn't fit my observations. I see new rail and new stations. I wonder if you've got a specific context; perhaps you're thinking of small regions of the USA? Many of us (myself included) do not live in the USA. The USA is notoriously bad at rail.
- CamperBob2 8y ago
  Take a look out your window... all of your windows. Roads are already pretty much everywhere, for better or worse. Rails are not. I believe that we should be working on forms of transit, both new and old, that take advantage of the infrastructure we already have. The USA's geography is very different from places like Europe and Japan, if that's where you're coming from. Centralized transit is a lot more effective in places where 200 km is considered a long distance, and where the bulk of the population is already compressed into compact urban centers.