Live data from Hacker News

10 Mph Moving Sidewalks Could Make Crosstown Buses Obsolete

nymag.com

51–60 of 64 posts

Re: 10 Mph Moving Sidewalks Could Make Crosstown Buses Obsolete

#51
post #20

There was a fast (10 kph) moving sidewalk in the Paris metro station "Montparnasse" for 12 years or so. It never worked out. You can't easily step on it; for years they had to have employees helping people stepping on the fast lane without falling down. And the thing broke down all the time, it was barely available half the time. Finally they replaced it with a good old fashioned 4 kph moving sidewalk. Faster isn't a…

This article is about a walkway that moves slower at the ends, like a ski lift.

The Paris metro one was slower at the ends. The ends were made of gradually faster rolls, so you had to let your feet flat on the ground and dont try to walk until on the main, faster part of the sidewalk. Trying to walk on the gradually accelerating parts was a sure way to fall.

Re: 10 Mph Moving Sidewalks Could Make Crosstown Buses Obsolete

#52
post #29

Doesn't pass physics or business tests. Yeah, bat-shit-crazy fits this. But, hey, NY Mag needed to fill some much needed space to generate clicks. Mission accomplished.

What's wrong with the physics?

This term is a generic concept that has to do with the idea that it just doesn't make sense at a very basic level. No need to get into advanced scientific analysis to figure this out, the "physics" of the thing makes no sense without having to do a single calculation.

For example, compare these two options:

Option 1: Take 10 or 20 bus routes. Each being 5 to 10 miles long. Convert all buses to electric power.

Option 2: Take the same routes. Rip-up 200 miles of sidewalk (yeah, they'll be some overlap, this is just a quick mental exercise). Develop new technology. Install 400 miles of it (you need two directions of travel). Staff for installation, support, etc.

The first passes "physics" in that asking "does it make sense given all we know?" test results in a pretty quick "yes!". The second is such an obscene deviation from what would make sense from almost any perspective that it is surprising anyone would consider discussing it at all.

Take, for example, having 400 miles of active sidewalks. You just replaced a few buses with 400 miles of sidewalk moving most of the time. Why would anyone wait if the sidewalk is right there. Whereas before people would wait a few minutes for a ride now you are going to have dozens of miles of expensive power-consuming active sidewalks moving all the time simply to carry a single person 100 meters to then have them cross the street and get on the next active sidewalk. And, if it snows, now you are carrying tons of snow until you devote a small army of trucks to go clean the snow. I mean, the more you think about the reality of this utopic concept the stupider it sounds.

It'd probably make far more sense to have a small fleet of electric scooters available for rent and use only along a predetermined route. If you get off that route they turn off. So now, you'd have small one or two person clean scooters distributed along a 5 to 10 mile route for anyone to hop on and off as needed. At most you might have to walk a block or two to get one. This isn't an idea that I thought through. I'm just pulling it out of a hat to illustrate that the "physics" of this off-the-cuff concept would make far more sense than ripping-up hundreds of miles of sidewalk to install a monster of a system that makes less than zero sense.

The "does it pass physics" test refers to stuff that just doesn't make sense. Like a miracle, or the earth being 6,000 years old, or buying a supercomputer to do basic math or commuting in a Humvee. In other words, there are things that defy reasonable reality to such an extent that they simply don't make sense.

Re: 10 Mph Moving Sidewalks Could Make Crosstown Buses Obsolete

#53
post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's the business test? The point of municipal transportation is to facilitate the rest of economy, not be a profit unit in itself.

Well, I thought it was obvious. Let's see... You have to dig up and destroy hundreds of miles of walkways. You have to replace brick, concrete and tiles with hundreds of miles of very, very expensive electromechanical technology. You have to do this in TWO directions. You have to hire thousands of workers, technicians and engineers. You have to fund the development of the technology because it doesn't exist for this…

I think you are presuming a method of implementation and routing with some location in mind where this would not be that applicable.

I disagree most strongly about the need to dig up and destroy walkways. We have 3 dimensions to work with - to go up, or, down. In any case I would see this analogous to a public urban rail system such as a metro or a tram.

I don't see it as a big issue to dig a tunnel for this - lots of cities implement rails and such that go wherever public transportation is needed.

The only argument which I agree is the biggest hurdle - which is actually an unknown - is how to make the system sufficiently robust so you don't need an army of engineers to maintain it. The fact that there are no known robust systems is not a good enough argument. Lots of mechanical systems were in the development over a century after someone figured out how to make them as practical to make a major impact(steam engines, automatic weapons).

How robust is the most robust implementation possible and how expensive it is are the two major questions to my mind. If it's too expensive to maintain - then it's too expensive to maintain.

Re: 10 Mph Moving Sidewalks Could Make Crosstown Buses Obsolete

#54

This has been proposed many times. Here is one plan from 1937 that would have been located where the Market Street BART tunnel is now: http://blog.sfgate.com/thebigevent/2015/07/10/35-years-befor...

The future used to be much more interesting.

Check out Whale Bus:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/14/Fr...

Re: 10 Mph Moving Sidewalks Could Make Crosstown Buses Obsolete

#56
post #30

And that's because buses are THE WORST form of transportation imaginable. Anything is better than a bus. Buses have never been the opposite of obsolete. They were always a step backwards. Trolleys with dedicated lanes make sense. When travelling distances of less than 30 miles, buses are for people who hate themselves.

A trolley is a bus with an overhead electricity supply.

Streetcars can operate on rails too, and thus are not implicitly buses.

There is evidence of this still embedded in the pavement of cities which have, or used to have, above-ground trolley systems.

Re: 10 Mph Moving Sidewalks Could Make Crosstown Buses Obsolete

#57
post #31

And that's because buses are THE WORST form of transportation imaginable. Anything is better than a bus. Buses have never been the opposite of obsolete. They were always a step backwards. Trolleys with dedicated lanes make sense. When travelling distances of less than 30 miles, buses are for people who hate themselves.

You're probably American, I've learnt from HN that you have a sub par bus network there. I live in Istanbul and find buses quite pleasing. Your city design and your public transportation system are to blame.

Traffic and the comparative size of automobiles, compared to buses, means buses get stuck in congestion and delayed more readily in shared roadways. Buses almost always have to compromise with the surrounding vehicles and yeild right-of-way to others, which pretty much means they go slower, and you suffer a longer ride.

Waiting for a bus usually means waiting outdoors. There are tons of reasons why bus stops are no fun at all.

Re: 10 Mph Moving Sidewalks Could Make Crosstown Buses Obsolete

#58
post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're probably American, I've learnt from HN that you have a sub par bus network there. I live in Istanbul and find buses quite pleasing. Your city design and your public transportation system are to blame.

Traffic and the comparative size of automobiles, compared to buses, means buses get stuck in congestion and delayed more readily in shared roadways. Buses almost always have to compromise with the surrounding vehicles and yeild right-of-way to others, which pretty much means they go slower, and you suffer a longer ride. Waiting for a bus usually means waiting outdoors. There are tons of reasons why bus stops are no f…

Everything need not be fun and comfortable. Publ7c transport is cheaper, safer and better for environment. Also you can only drive when driving a car, but when you are not driving the vehicle you're on you get to make use of the travel time.

Re: 10 Mph Moving Sidewalks Could Make Crosstown Buses Obsolete

#59
post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A trolley is a bus with an overhead electricity supply.

Streetcars can operate on rails too, and thus are not implicitly buses. There is evidence of this still embedded in the pavement of cities which have, or used to have, above-ground trolley systems.

Streetcars are generally not called trolleys - unless they are heritage streetcars using trolley poles, generally only in the States. Modern streetcars or trams use pantographs.

Re: 10 Mph Moving Sidewalks Could Make Crosstown Buses Obsolete

#60
post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's wrong with the physics?

This term is a generic concept that has to do with the idea that it just doesn't make sense at a very basic level. No need to get into advanced scientific analysis to figure this out, the "physics" of the thing makes no sense without having to do a single calculation. For example, compare these two options: Option 1: Take 10 or 20 bus routes. Each being 5 to 10 miles long. Convert all buses to electric power. Option…

> if it snows, now you are carrying tons of snow until you devote a small army of trucks to go clean the snow

I don't think you've thought this part through. Not that snow isn't a problem that needs dealing with, but "carrying tons of snow" is not the problem you have. If this works anything like a traditional conveyor belt then while it is running it is dumping all the snow at one end, the same end where it is dumping all the passengers, whereupon you are no longer "carrying" that snow. There could be heating elements or blowers along the way that melt the snow such that it drains off the side, or perhaps the slowing-down-at-the-end step involve grating separation such that snow falls through to some lower level? Something along those lines. I'm not sure what the precise solution for snow-on-a-conveyer-belt is but surely it would make use of the massive running conveyer belt as part of the solution, not rely on a "small army of trucks".

Post reply on HN