131–140 of 153 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
TL;DR - Teleportation will solve public transit problems.
if teleportation is impractical you could just use a faster bus, like USB 3.0 or more lanes like PCIe
Earlier quoted context omitted.
London subway trains teleport themselves?
No they don't. When you hear "to regulate the service" what they actually do in my experience is delay trains to try and introduce a more even service. So if you have trains that are: |--|--|--|------------|--| Then they will delay some of the trains such that it becomes: ---|--|--|--|--------|----| i.e. reduce the speed of the lead trains to try and reduce bunching. So generally if you hear "to regulate the service"…
Maybe the empty rear bus should overtake the front bus, but that's not always possible.
Teleporting to a random stop would be really annoying for people who had to get out at the next stop. That's only an acceptable solution when the bus is completely empty.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That delays all people who are already on the delayed bus even more.
Not necessarily. If the full bus stays in front, then there will be lots of people waiting at every future stop, trying to get on the full bus, taking ages to do so. If the full bus lets the empty bus pass, then all the people waiting at the next stop can get into the empty bus. When the full bus arrives at the next stop, right behind the formerly empty bus, nobody needs to get on, only people need to get off, so the…
Would it help to have the trailing bus pass the leading bus when they bunch up? My reasoning: (1) As the article said, full buses move slower because more passengers means more boarding/unboarding time at stops. (2) The lead bus is the fuller, slower one. Slower bus in front means buses get closer together. (3) If one bus passes the other, then you have the faster bus in front and the slower one behind. They should t…
EDIT: it doesn't really help with the bunching, but it does help load balance between the two buses. I've been on rides where two buses passed each other several times.
1. The buses have predetermined stop times, signalled by a beep. You don't get on in time, you don't get on at all. Makes the delays predictable, regardless of the number of passangers.
2. Lines go from A to B and back, rather than in circles, so the delays cannot accumulate.
These are known and widely used. There is no reason why this should happen.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
if teleportation is impractical you could just use a faster bus, like USB 3.0 or more lanes like PCIe
everybody gets on/off at the same time instead of one by one (every seat has it's own door?)
There was also no door lock, so people could start leaving the train before it fully stopped.
The lack of a door lock is also why they're not used anymore.
I don't remember the source, but the key differentiator [in that country] is that there is a person at the bus stop that tells the bus driver the time that the previous bus was there. This will cause said driver to increase/decrease speed in effect to counter bunching with the next bus.
Unfortunately, I also don't remember how rigorous the study was.
I remember a while ago reading about how bus arrival times in some South American country were studied and showed to follow psuedorandom distributions. I don't remember the source, but the key differentiator [in that country] is that there is a person at the bus stop that tells the bus driver the time that the previous bus was there. This will cause said driver to increase/decrease speed in effect to counter bunching…
Would it help to have the trailing bus pass the leading bus when they bunch up? My reasoning: (1) As the article said, full buses move slower because more passengers means more boarding/unboarding time at stops. (2) The lead bus is the fuller, slower one. Slower bus in front means buses get closer together. (3) If one bus passes the other, then you have the faster bus in front and the slower one behind. They should t…
They will sometimes do that in Vancouver (or at least they did when I lived there). The lead bus will skip stops if it's able (no one getting off) leaving the passengers for the following bus, but if it has to stop, the trailing bus will just go ahead if it has no one getting off at that stop. EDIT: it doesn't really help with the bunching, but it does help load balance between the two buses. I've been on rides where…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No they don't. When you hear "to regulate the service" what they actually do in my experience is delay trains to try and introduce a more even service. So if you have trains that are: |--|--|--|------------|--| Then they will delay some of the trains such that it becomes: ---|--|--|--|--------|----| i.e. reduce the speed of the lead trains to try and reduce bunching. So generally if you hear "to regulate the service"…
There are express services but only on the metropolitan line (which uses above ground tracks shared with non-TFL trains).