4 ms·

Your system is still a ways off and even then still takes up a lot a room and is potentially just as lethal to pedestrians and cyclists.

• TomMarius 8y ago
  Actually, at least according to many transportation experts in my country, there is a certain population density when mass transit stops being effective at all - since too many people want to go to too many different places all around the city. Intelligent individual transportation (e.g. cars mainly from 4 to around 20 passengers) that'd be able to predict and respond to demand (both short term and long term) combined with good subway, light tram and transit tunnels is much more effective once you pass that point. Also consider other factors such as historic cities where a bus doesn't even fit - literally; such cities are all around Europe, hundreds of them. Economic factors such as price per km per m2 occupied could be used to promote ride sharing. Since the system could be connected to street cameras, has faster reaction times, doesn't drive through red lights and so on, no, it definitely would not be as lethal. The number of vehicles required would be much smaller, so the assumption is absolutely baseless - the common solution to safer cycling is less cars, and that's exactly what would happen. Additionally, most parking spaces wouldn't be needed as the cars could park at a centralized garages (desirable because charging) and the new space could be used to create bike-only roads. Buses everywhere would be more lethal since a bus is a large and heavy vehicle and there'd be too many of them. I'm sure you don't feel good riding a bycicle up to a hill next to a bus - for a reason; at least I don't.