this post was submitted on 20 Aug 2024
121 points (98.4% liked)

Fuck Cars

9375 readers
635 users here now

A place to discuss problems of car centric infrastructure or how it hurts us all. Let's explore the bad world of Cars!

Rules

1. Be CivilYou may not agree on ideas, but please do not be needlessly rude or insulting to other people in this community.

2. No hate speechDon't discriminate or disparage people on the basis of sex, gender, race, ethnicity, nationality, religion, or sexuality.

3. Don't harass peopleDon't follow people you disagree with into multiple threads or into PMs to insult, disparage, or otherwise attack them. And certainly don't doxx any non-public figures.

4. Stay on topicThis community is about cars, their externalities in society, car-dependency, and solutions to these.

5. No repostsDo not repost content that has already been posted in this community.

Moderator discretion will be used to judge reports with regard to the above rules.

Posting Guidelines

In the absence of a flair system on lemmy yet, let’s try to make it easier to scan through posts by type in here by using tags:

Recommended communities:

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

The tram-like bus should make travelling around the city much faster, cheaper, cleaner and reliable

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] CarbonIceDragon@pawb.social 35 points 4 weeks ago (4 children)

Tbf, there is a place in public transit infrastructure for busses. Trains are great, but there are routes out there that would be impractical to serve with a full size train or inefficiently expensive to build out tram rails for, but which a bus can serve effectively.

[–] ch00f@lemmy.world 8 points 4 weeks ago (3 children)

We have the South Lake Union Railcar in Seattle. Nobody rides it. And like I’m not one to blame infrastructure, but you can literally walk faster than it moves. Meanwhile there are shitloads of buses with plenty of ridership. Many fully electric with overhead wire.

Meanwhile bicyclists routinely get their wheels caught in the tracks and eat it.

I can’t imagine the efficiency of rail makes much difference in a city environment. The best argument I’ve heard for rail is that it’s more a commitment to developers that the route won’t be changed any time soon.

[–] Sauerkraut@discuss.tchncs.de 10 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

Light rail is almost always more energy efficient, more cost effective, safer, offers a smoother ride, requires less maintenance, and it can be fully automated.

Lots of major cities outside of the US have had great success using light rail. I have no idea how Seattle managed to fuck it up

[–] sunzu2@thebrainbin.org 2 points 4 weeks ago

the secret american sauce of corruption where they spend the money, got nothing to show for it and public just gets to pay the clean up cost for failure

[–] CarbonIceDragon@pawb.social 4 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

the main argument I see for rail is that it doesnt get stuck in car traffic, which should make it easier to keep to a reliable schedule and speed, and that it can have a higher capacity per vehicle. Those would seem to indicate that it should be better than busses for routes that are very busy, provided of course that the rail infrastructure is actually good (able to do a reasonable speed, have reasonable reliability, and separated from other modes of transit to as to not cause conflicts at crossings). If your trains are so slow you can beat them by walking, and directly cross the roads and bike paths, then its not trains as a concept that are the problem, its that you have rather bad trains.

[–] ch00f@lemmy.world 1 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

The rail car in question is not grade separated.

[–] FireRetardant@lemmy.world 1 points 4 weeks ago

It doesn't need to be if you enforce the rules very stirctly at first using both officers on the ground and cameras to fine drivers who think they can just slip into the lane for a bit. Repeat offenders get stricter fines and even impoundment.

You could go one step further and not let cars on the tram line at all without grade seperation. You could do this by building dedicated seperate lanes for the trams or by not including any adjacent car lanes at all. And of course all of this should be done with transit signal priority to reduce the time they waste at red lights and help keep the tram on time with its schedule.

[–] Eiri@lemmy.world 2 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

Does your tram get stuck in traffic or something? Why is it that slow?

I don't know much about trams but I kinda feel like that's not supposed to happen.

[–] Eiri@lemmy.world 4 points 4 weeks ago

I don't think anyone's arguing for no busses. It's more like not only busses.

[–] FireRetardant@lemmy.world 1 points 4 weeks ago

For long term investment the tram wins out in energy efficiency. If you want the next politician in power to easily be able to remove transit, the bus wins.

By building a tram line you cement into the city that it is now a transit corridor. The city can then develop more densely if needed to increase ridership or make the area more catered to pedestrians.

[–] sunzu2@thebrainbin.org -1 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

how is this glider any different from a regular bus?

is this where this thing being deployed?

all i see propaganda of some Liverpool based bureaucrat buying shit with taxpayer money. Is this actually beneficial?

[–] CarbonIceDragon@pawb.social 7 points 4 weeks ago

From the look of it, its is a regular bus, it just looks to have a low floor tram-like design. Which doesnt make it not a bus, but might make it a bit more pleasant to ride.