3 ms·
> That is, replace road lanes with something like tram tracks. My brother, you are describing a train. > I'm imagining vehicles being two/four person pods zip
by firejake308 2y ago
> That is, replace road lanes with something like tram tracks.
My brother, you are describing a train.
> I'm imagining vehicles being two/four person pods zipping around.
Oh, never mind. Yeah, the reason that doesn't work is that if you're going to spend the money to build tram tracks or zip lines or whatever predefined path, then it is only economical to make a few set predefined paths. If you make a predefined path for every possible commute in the city, you will run out of money before getting very far. So ultimately, I would say a train is the closest thing to your ideal.
- defrost 2y agoTram tracks allow dual car | tram use on the same road in manner that train tracks do not. Melbourne has tram tracks throughout the city centre and the cars move about the trams. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8F1_L3v9SHA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8F1_L3v9SHA
- robertlagrant 2y ago> If you make a predefined path for every possible commute in the city, you will run out of money before getting very far. So ultimately, I would say a train is the closest thing to your ideal. This doesn't seem to make sense. Surely a tram is still closer to it than a train. You're comparing the cost of trams to every home vs...the current number of trains? Why make that comparison?