You must log in or # to comment.
A 175m road scaled in reference to the 35m wide lane:
Quality contribution. I completely overlooked the relative sizes.
I completely overlooked the relative sizes.
Your mum’s fat. And so is your nana.
relatives 🥁
Okay, but if you look carefully at the top of the inverted pyramid, you’ll notice that there are no homeless people allowed to participate.
Also, the bottom has no less than six trees which is Woke.
The whole thing stinks of socialism.
Like we should, idk, pool our resources to “improve” our lives or something…
Nah, I’d rather burn prehistoric forests in my trukk because I’m so free.
America, fuck yeah
“Now I’m gonna go roll coal just to own the libz”
I guess for bicycles, you’d get that down to about 7 meters. Estimated from heavily used bike lanes in Copenhagen where at rush hour two bikes per second pass (7200 persons per hour). Edit: Here is a video of bike rush hour in Amsterdam - try to count the number of persons passing per second.
Fun fact: The distance at which bikes with good paths are faster than metros / rapid transit / commuter rail, or light rail is surprisingly large. I commute to the center of Munich, 14 kilometers one way. It is about 50 minutes on the bike and 60-75 by light rail. And I go at leisurly speed. Plus the bike is much more reliable (outside of icy winter weather, where bike paths are not cleared).
Edit: I’d like to add that for bikes, you don’t need necessarily need a single 7 meter wide connection. Four connections, each 2 meters wide, will do fine, too!
Or just work remotely from home.
Infographic not to scale (for some reason)
One should include bikes and also costs per person per journey. Will probably need logarithmic scale.
My limited experience with public transit in Texas is that it costs way more for me because I still have to drive 25 miles to the train station, pay 10 bucks to park, pay another 10 for the train that only comes like 5 times a day, walk the last mile in 110 degree heat, and come back earlier than I’d like to catch that final train trip and then pay for a new window for my car because someone broke into it.
Seriously - we suck at transit here.
That pisses me of too. Especially since cars are even worse than the infographic makes it look like.
Helsinki just had 0 traffic deaths this past year because they focused all their funding on improving public transportation and bike lanes, disincentivizing car use, and punishing motorists who use their phone or speed by setting up cameras.
I sure wish somebody would look at that incredible success story and try to emulate it here. Unfortunately, public transit seems to be getting less reliable over time instead, which just encourages more car use.
Where’s “here”?
USA.
America?
Whenever someone brings up a European city like this, they seem to ignore the fact that the entire country of Finland is roughly the size of the state of Montana. It’s like comparing apples and oranges.
Okay? We can still compare Helsinki to a similar sized American city. I don’t see how that’s unfair.
A very large blender and a single water truck.
or blended and sent down a tube! then you get reconstituted into a person at the other end of the pipe.
who needs the train.
*reconstitution methods tbd
Isn’t this pretty much how the teleportation tech in Star Trek works?
their version is a bit less moist
Commuter smoke. Don’t breathe this.
Tienanmen-core
I’m afraid I don’t understand your comment, my good sir. Nothing has ever happened in Tiananmen. Certainly not in 1989.
I was gonna say people need to sacrifice for the greater common good but then I realized what community this was and knew people were on my same wavelength.
What is this nonsense? We’re better than that
What nonsense?
50k PPHPD is near the top of what can be easily achieved in a metro with one track per direction, but certainly achievable. 2x4m wide tracks and some space for ancillary equipment and fencing is reasonable.
You get maybe one passenger per two seconds in a car lane, or about 1800 per lane per hour. That implies 28 lanes each way, 55 total, or about 165m assuming 3m lanes (pretty narrow). Seems fair to me.
No comment on buses, cyclists, or pedestrians.
Roads with 56 lanes are not a thing and I don’t see the need for implying they were. In reality you would probably get way less route capacity as transport just doesn’t scale linearly like that. There is a perfectly fine graphic on Wikipedia that gets the same message across without implying anything absurd.
roads with 56 lanes are not a thing.
Maybe not yet. Keep following the “just one more lane, bro” planning strategy and we will have them by 2050.
Isn’t them not being a thing kinda part of the point. You see how stupid the building must get to reach the same throughput
Partly this is because there are 2-4 roads in parallel attempting to move the same number of people, or demand is unmet because people can’t get to where they want to go when they want to go.
How about a subway?
A subway is a metro line located underground. Throughput is the same. Its just more expensive to dig the tunnels
this is why you contract out the tunnel construction to past you, when labor was cheaper. worked in london, nyc, paris… hell of a trick
NYC, home of the $2b price tag for a km of rail.
$2b today, but if you just use 1920s labor… EH? IT’S FREE TUNNEL REAL ESTATE
In practice, throughput is not the same. There are fewer cars underground that just park on the tracks, fewer traffic accidents, demos etc. Subways make you independent of almost everything that happens above ground. When Beijing introduced the subway system, that first allowed people to estimate quite precisely when they would arrive at their destination.
Also, fewer people plan to build a park underground or use that real estate otherwise. So the above-ground use of space is restricted to the station entrances. The calculation would even be different in places like Seoul, where the subway system doubles as a public bunker system.
You seem to think of a tram. A metro is grade separated. So nothing, but the trains should be on the tracks at all times.
So this for example is a metro, but not a subway:
Can the roughly 1000 people per minute board the metro in a minute?
Or rather, since there are 2 metros in 9m, and traffic in all directions, can 500 people board a metro in a minute if another 500 people have to unboard first, or just 100 if not everybody uses the same stop?
Usually these systems rely on people getting on/off at different stops, rather than one stop seeing full volume. If it’s one stop, chances are it’ll look like a terminus station and you’ll need several platforms and possibly dual-side boarding to each train. It’ll be quite a bit wider than tracks with no station, or a minimalist station.
This is pretty common at major sports arenas.
The same of course applies to other transit options: high-capacity bus stops take up space, and motorway interchanges and especially carparks also take up a lot of space.
If you want to account for boarding platforms in the metro example, you also have to account for the parking in the car example to make a reasonably fair comparison.
Not a problem. Stations where a lot of people board and unboard at the same time have sometimes platform where one side is for boarding, and the other for unboarding. Plus, trains can have more doors per car.
Yes, these kinds of transfer numbers are easily possible (even though other posters have said you don’t actually have 1,000 getting on or off at one stop). As an example, consider the subway of Toronto, Canada on its busiest line, Line 1. A subway train is 138m (450 ft) long with 6 cars (though there is no internal barrier between cars) and a capacity of about 1,500 people. Each car has 4 door sets per side, and these door sets are about 1.5m (5 ft) wide. People can easily fit through them in pairs, so moving 4 or more people per door set when in a rush is very doable. With 24 door sets (only one side opens at a station), that’s 96 people entering or exiting per second, so 10 or 11 seconds for 1,000 people. If you think 4 per second per door is too optimistic, then it’s 1,000 people in 20 seconds.
id wager that in toronto, you could build all the subways and LRT and trains, and the road traffic would stay the same. people don’t look at cars just for convince, its a cultural thing in north America, that your life is sorted out, like having a house, a good job, savings/retirement fund. people look and treat you weird if you don’t have a car or can’t drive (ask me how i know that)
People ARE assholes like that, but they will take nice public transit if it’s convenient. Especially if you want to have a drink or two going out or to a friend’s house.
Sometimes if it’s really convenient people take it instead of driving in rush hour which helps everyone!
you would be surprised how many people drink and drive. im telling you, unless there’s a dramatic shift in culture around transportation, or the next generation realizes that cars aren’t a great thing to be using, if someone can get a car and a license, they will do so as soon as possible, its so engrained even some jobs require you to have a license. People will use that lame duck as a excuse to get one.
That’s why road diets and reducing road capacity is also important. Like Amsterdam, Copenhagen, Madrid or Vienna, the space dedicated to cars also have to be reduced in order to incite people to use something else than a car.
they tried doing that in a stretch of toronto and it was removed as soon as it was put up, the drivers just have that much leeway here
The problem with mass transit is that each person can’t go directly to the doorstep of each specific place they need to be. And they wouldn’t be able to haul a whole lot of stuff like a week’s worth of groceries & dog in a kennel on its way to/from veterinarian appt, & 5 children & lumber from Home Depot.
Honestly, in a denser city focused on transit and not cars, and without shit zoning laws, these aren’t really problems for most people.
You should have a supermarket, school and other essentials within walking distance of your home. Even the vet, hairdresser, etc. That’s what a human, livable city is like.
Mass transit can get you close enough. Walking 10-15 minutes to your destination is good for your health. Especially for seniors. We wouldn’t have such an obesity crisis if people got up and moved more. Humans are built for walking.
Who the heck is hauling lumber every day/week? It’s cheaper to rent a van/truck for the couple days a year than it is to own and maintain a car. I bet the lumber yard has a delivery service.
If you have 5 kids and need a car to take them places, great, cars still exist. If you have mobility issues, cars still exist. If you live in the countryside, cars still exist. But I think these cases should be exceptions to the rule. Most of those 50k people who are just commuting to work every day could be taking public transit and contributing to a more livable city.
Are you a moron? I have a car. I go to work every day with a bike. I take my children to daycare with my bike.
I go to large market with my car once a week. I go to vet a once a year. If i order large quantitys of anything building related i order it straigh to home.
You could have said all that without asking me if I’m a moron. What was the purpose of that?
I’m envious of your lifestyle. But my lifestyle is such that I am constantly traveling 2 hours North 2 hours south 6 hours East driving 70 mph every Which way, a bicycle would not get me to all the places I need to be, I would drop dead from exhaustion and weather exposure if I tried to bicycle to all the places I need to go. You are fortunate you have found your happy place and it’s all within bicycling distance.
You are right. I had a bad day. Sorry.
But i havent found my happy place. I live in a city that has build so people can use bike as a commute.
We dont have massive suburban areas or megamalls that makes cars necessary. Also both pedesterian and public transportation has huge part in the citys layout.
Of course people in rural areas and people whose work necessitas driving to different locations are always going to need cars.
Yeah as someone that lives in a city with mass transit, you change your habits.
You shop two or three times week at somewhere in walking distance. You walk to the vet, and you order lumber online with next day delivery.
If I genuinely need a car, there’s one parked in the next street I can rent with an app.
On top of that parking here is a pain in the arse, and the average traffic speed is something like 7mph.
Before cars, people often just died because they couldn’t walk
Yeah I’m so glad walking was invented after cars started roaming the earth
/s
The tradeoff is time waiting for the train, and destinations available to you. I hate people way more than I hate cars, so cars it is. Personally I drive 2 cars to work with my left butt cheek in one car, and my right butt cheek in the other car just to be extra inefficient.
so cars it is.
I fucking hate people more than you do, trust me, but your rational doesn’t support your conclusion. unless your point is “i hate people so want to aid in destroying the planet so we all suffer” which, i guess, is an option.
a real asshole option. gigantic supperated scabbed over sphincter of a bloody discharge of an option but sure, you do you
Username checks out
That’s a wide track…
a 175m wide road would be well over 35 lanes of car traffic, closer to 58. Not 7.
Just as a 9 meter wide space for metros would be just for metros.
