4 ms·

I think a pre-requisite to a "good" public transportation infrastructure is a shitty road infrastructure. To me asking for better public transportation is, to q

I think a pre-requisite to a "good" public transportation infrastructure is a shitty road infrastructure. To me asking for better public transportation is, to quote Henry Ford, asking for a Faster Horse. I'm a member of the autonomous vehicle church. I think a fleet of self-driving cars absolutely blows away any bus system. And that's without roads specialized for the self driving car. Once you start custom crafting intersections it just gets even better.

gtremper 12y ago
I agree, in places where there is already extensive road infrastructure, a "public" transportation system using a fleet of autonomous vehicles is much more better use of existing resources.
slyall 12y ago
Some problems with autonomous vehicles: * Time. Lets be optomistic and say they are perfected in 5 years time AND can be added to new cars for minimal cost then then it'll be say 2030 before all the cars on the road have them (assuming laws outlaw manual cars when 90% of people are using driverless ones) * Now at that point we are going to assuming that driverless cars are so good that they get twice the efficiency on your local road and highways resemble NASCAR races (without the 5% chance of a crash each trip) * The problem is that now since driving is so easy the amount of traffic goes up so you are back where you were previously. Anywhere with enough traffic to have problems already has a tonne of latent demand just sitting around ready to generate more journeys. Note: * 5 years is really optimistic for driverless car perfection * 10 years is to ban all manual cars? * Ever tried crossing a NASCAR raceway on foot? * Your assuming driverless vans/buses won't also happen. Share your rid cost with a dozen others, semi-fixed routes (easier to survey/programme), fleet management.
- saraid216 12y ago
  > * Every tried crossing a NASCAR raceway on foot? This is one of the interesting advantages a public transit system has over a self-driving fleet of cars (which, incidentally, I also look forward to). Mass transit depends on the concept of "stops" or "stations". The way people get between destinations (like their home, the shop, etc.) and the transit station is largely by walking. Thus, mass transit necessarily builds in pedestrian friendliness. This isn't true for cars, which do not have such nexi. (Indeed, this lack is generally agreed to be an advantage.) This means that such designs will have to deliberately include pedestrian friendliness in order to have it, rather than being forced into it by the facts of the design requirements. I'm not saying it's a sufficient advantage for one or the other, but it's a definite thing.
- bsder 12y ago
  > 5 years is really optimistic for driverless car perfection I don't think that's true. This is likely one of those problems whose solution accelerates after introduction. Let's assume that 99% of the problem is solved (probably not, but we're worst-casing here). The problem is that you need to stumble on a 1% case and fail in order to fix that bug. At this point, I suspect that we're probably limited by the fact that buggy cases just aren't coming up often enough for the small number of autonomous vehicles that exist. Look at what happened in the DARPA challenge. The first year, nobody got anywhere. It didn't take very long until that challenge went from nobody completed to worrying about things actually moving too quickly.
prawn 12y ago
We will see self-driving buses as well servicing a more budget market. Mass transit isn't going away in a hurry.
stevep98 12y ago
I am a fan of autonomous vehicles too, and that's why I'm also a fan of BRT. 2 years ago, I would have advocated ripping up el Camino and putting BART underneath, all the way from San Jose to Millbrae. Now, we can do the same route with BRT for much less money. Why would I advocate this? It's still a waste, but much less money than something like light rail, which is a disaster. So, go ahead, spend some small millions on BRT, but at least make it cheap to rip out in ten years.
chipsy 12y ago
The capacity of mass transit modes is still worthwhile even in a fully automated universe, once you get dense enough. It's a simple calculation of space usage: If you fit more people in a vehicle, you use less road. Depending on mode and scale, you may save energy too. Now, you could postulate that we'll go smaller with AVs, or we'll develop ways to reconfigure vehicles on demand to synthesize a larger vehicle. But those things are not as clearly on the horizon as an immediate post-AV situation where traffic patterns remain roughly the same(ease of trips encourages more trips per day, cancelling efficiencies), but per-vehicle usage rates are up(due to better sharing). In that situation, we get better safety and convenience, and future zoning will require less parking...i.e. you get a global spike in density, which motivates better transit.

gtremper 12y ago

I agree, in places where there is already extensive road infrastructure, a "public" transportation system using a fleet of autonomous vehicles is much more better use of existing resources.

slyall 12y ago

Some problems with autonomous vehicles: * Time. Lets be optomistic and say they are perfected in 5 years time AND can be added to new cars for minimal cost then then it'll be say 2030 before all the cars on the road have them (assuming laws outlaw manual cars when 90% of people are using driverless ones) * Now at that point we are going to assuming that driverless cars are so good that they get twice the efficiency on your local road and highways resemble NASCAR races (without the 5% chance of a crash each trip) * The problem is that now since driving is so easy the amount of traffic goes up so you are back where you were previously. Anywhere with enough traffic to have problems already has a tonne of latent demand just sitting around ready to generate more journeys. Note: * 5 years is really optimistic for driverless car perfection * 10 years is to ban all manual cars? * Ever tried crossing a NASCAR raceway on foot? * Your assuming driverless vans/buses won't also happen. Share your rid cost with a dozen others, semi-fixed routes (easier to survey/programme), fleet management.

saraid216 12y ago
> * Every tried crossing a NASCAR raceway on foot? This is one of the interesting advantages a public transit system has over a self-driving fleet of cars (which, incidentally, I also look forward to). Mass transit depends on the concept of "stops" or "stations". The way people get between destinations (like their home, the shop, etc.) and the transit station is largely by walking. Thus, mass transit necessarily builds in pedestrian friendliness. This isn't true for cars, which do not have such nexi. (Indeed, this lack is generally agreed to be an advantage.) This means that such designs will have to deliberately include pedestrian friendliness in order to have it, rather than being forced into it by the facts of the design requirements. I'm not saying it's a sufficient advantage for one or the other, but it's a definite thing.
bsder 12y ago
> 5 years is really optimistic for driverless car perfection I don't think that's true. This is likely one of those problems whose solution accelerates after introduction. Let's assume that 99% of the problem is solved (probably not, but we're worst-casing here). The problem is that you need to stumble on a 1% case and fail in order to fix that bug. At this point, I suspect that we're probably limited by the fact that buggy cases just aren't coming up often enough for the small number of autonomous vehicles that exist. Look at what happened in the DARPA challenge. The first year, nobody got anywhere. It didn't take very long until that challenge went from nobody completed to worrying about things actually moving too quickly.

prawn 12y ago

We will see self-driving buses as well servicing a more budget market. Mass transit isn't going away in a hurry.

stevep98 12y ago

I am a fan of autonomous vehicles too, and that's why I'm also a fan of BRT. 2 years ago, I would have advocated ripping up el Camino and putting BART underneath, all the way from San Jose to Millbrae. Now, we can do the same route with BRT for much less money. Why would I advocate this? It's still a waste, but much less money than something like light rail, which is a disaster. So, go ahead, spend some small millions on BRT, but at least make it cheap to rip out in ten years.

chipsy 12y ago

The capacity of mass transit modes is still worthwhile even in a fully automated universe, once you get dense enough. It's a simple calculation of space usage: If you fit more people in a vehicle, you use less road. Depending on mode and scale, you may save energy too. Now, you could postulate that we'll go smaller with AVs, or we'll develop ways to reconfigure vehicles on demand to synthesize a larger vehicle. But those things are not as clearly on the horizon as an immediate post-AV situation where traffic patterns remain roughly the same(ease of trips encourages more trips per day, cancelling efficiencies), but per-vehicle usage rates are up(due to better sharing). In that situation, we get better safety and convenience, and future zoning will require less parking...i.e. you get a global spike in density, which motivates better transit.