Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Bus stop balancing is fast, cheap, and effective

worksinprogress.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

621–630 of 656 posts

Re: Bus stop balancing is fast, cheap, and effective

#621

Post by simoncion »

gadders wrote: post #601
simoncion wrote: post #558

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What is the correct number of crazy people you think you should meet on the bus? As many as you'd expect to meet given how many choose to use the bus to go somewhere. Retorts: "Buses shouldn't be mobile homeless shelters." Sure, I agree. But I also agree that someone who has paid their fare and isn't disrupting the safe operation of the bus is entitled to ride the bus. If I want to purchase a ticket and sit my ass…

Having people who need help on buses instead of in treatment isn't safe for them or other passengers. Just look at Jordan Neely or Iryna Zarutska.

Ah. I see what you intend to do with that axe.

Re: Bus stop balancing is fast, cheap, and effective

#622

Post by snk »

adwf wrote: post #568
XCabbage wrote: post #536

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At the heavy end, SUVs weigh about 3 tonnes, while at the light end buses weigh about 12, a 4x difference. 4^4 = 256. So if the claim about the fourth power is true, you'd need to replace 256 SUVs to break even on wear, which is obviously impossible. (I don't really understand how the fourth power of axel weight thing can possibly be true, though. Why would joining two vehicles together into a mega vehicle with doubl…

Plus the SUV is usually point-to-point, leave home, go to work, come back. Whereas the bus is going back and forth ten times per day. In Europe, the numbers differ even more. Lighter weight cars typically 1.5-2 tons, a new London bus can be upto 18 tons when loaded - that's ~5-16 units of wear for the car to 104,976 units for the bus... But this is all supposing we're optimising for road wear, which isn't really the…

I'm old. Back in the olden days - the 1900s - 2-ton cars were not lightweight, the so-called heavy Chevys.

Re: Bus stop balancing is fast, cheap, and effective

#623

Post by simoncion »

sfink wrote: post #597
simoncion wrote: post #564

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Buses have a long tradition of user-hostile design. "Exact change only"... On every pay-in-cabin bus I've ever ridden, this is synonymous with "No change given". The machines are quite happy to accept more money than is needed for a single ticket, and the reason for that is pretty obvious. > It has always baffled me why they make it so hard for first-time users in particular. The SFMTA (the San Francisco bus/train…

>> Buses have a long tradition of user-hostile design. "Exact change only"... > On every pay-in-cabin bus I've ever ridden, this is synonymous with "No change given". The machines are quite happy to accept more money than is needed for a single ticket, and the reason for that is pretty obvious....the most useful information about fares is posted on the paybox inside the bus That's fair, but (1) when I was a kid and s…

I see. Your complaint is that in vehicles that are staffed only with a driver, the driver refuses to handle change, and that -in your youth- your parents didn't provide you with any information (whether directly from them, or published by your local transit authority) about how mass transit worked in your area.

There's not much the transit authority can do about your parents' decision to leave you ill-informed. I can tell you that obligating the solo driver to handle change would be significantly user-hostile for the passengers currently on the vehicle. The tradeoff made is the correct one.

As you're probably aware, there's also good news: for a while now, many (most?) transit systems permit payment with radio cards that are linked to a preexisting pool of money, rather than having to handle cash inside the vehicle.

Re: Bus stop balancing is fast, cheap, and effective

#624

Post by gpvos »

ErroneousBosh wrote: post #569
gpvos wrote: post #511

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you actually had to pay a proper price for your parking space, which is currently heavily subsidized, you would suddenly consider taking public transit instead, even if that were priced at actual cost.

In what way is a piece of ground I own "heavily subsidised"?

Well, you're parking it in other places as well, I assume, unless you're only making pleasure rides with no stops at all. I am speaking more generally than just about your particular situation, which I obviously don't know. But in case you live in an American suburb: their entire financial setup is unsound, which arguably means even your own ground is subsidized. I find the arguments of Strong Towns and Not Just Bikes quite compelling: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Nw6qyyrTeI .

Re: Bus stop balancing is fast, cheap, and effective

#625

Post by jodrellblank »

SoftTalker wrote: post #339
angmarsbane wrote: post #301

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When I was in Mexico City I was blown away and inspired that their bus lanes were actually physically separate from car traffic, sometimes they were even elevated a foot or so alongside car traffic. It made the buses so much faster! I wish bus and bike lanes in the USA were equally separated from car traffic. Different color paint and intermittent bollards don't cut it. If something is worth doing, it's worth doing r…

Nice idea but it quickly runs up against budget realities.

Budget "realities" that somehow don't affect Mexico, only the USA?

Re: Bus stop balancing is fast, cheap, and effective

#626

Post by iamcalledrob »

pocksuppet wrote: post #577
philwelch wrote: post #435

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Private car ownership is a better everyday solution for almost anyone who can afford it, which includes the vast majority of Americans. If buses tried to compete with cars, they would lose. The only remaining niche for the bus is as a public accommodation for the poor, disabled, and elderly, or occasionally in dense city centers. At least that’s what I think. But if you’re right, and there’s a version of bus transpor…

That can't be the whole equation. Why do so many people in London choose to ride the bus and the tube instead of taking private cars?

Exactly.

The city heavily discourages car use for commuting.

Offices have no parking spaces.

Any parking you do find in central London will be paid at an extreme rate.

To drive into the city costs around $20 per day, increasing much further if you have an older, polluting vehicle.

There is so much congestion that it is usually faster to walk than drive.

Re: Bus stop balancing is fast, cheap, and effective

#627

Post by ErroneousBosh »

gpvos wrote: post #624
ErroneousBosh wrote: post #569

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In what way is a piece of ground I own "heavily subsidised"?

Well, you're parking it in other places as well, I assume, unless you're only making pleasure rides with no stops at all. I am speaking more generally than just about your particular situation, which I obviously don't know. But in case you live in an American suburb: their entire financial setup is unsound, which arguably means even your own ground is subsidized. I find the arguments of Strong Towns and Not Just Bike…

I'm half a planet away from America, and I (mostly) don't live in a town.

Consider that the "one size fits all" approach into forcing people out of cars breaks down very rapidly once you get out of sight of the sickly LED glow of streetlights.

Re: Bus stop balancing is fast, cheap, and effective

#628

Post by femiagbabiaka »

coryrc wrote: post #615
femiagbabiaka wrote: post #613

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bus only lanes exist, but not everywhere (some streets are not wide enough). Additionally, at the moment (and really always) there's a ton of construction on the bridges going in and out of the city, causing buses to miss out on the bus-only lanes for years or more at a time. Bus systems are a complicated beast.

You don't have to allow cars on every single paved surface. Cars aren't supposed to be on wide sidewalks, you don't have to allow them on every single road either.

I think I agree with you. Now the political will to make such a change on the other hand...

Re: Bus stop balancing is fast, cheap, and effective

#629

Post by coryrc »

Retric wrote: post #618
coryrc wrote: post #614

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But those are what we have and they have 3 axles, not 4. We also have many concrete roads and closely-spaced axles, if they had them, would not help. > Looking worse when you resurface on the same schedule isn’t an actual cost. I addressed this: they have to dig much deeper and replace with much thicker road. Much more expensive. It's not "looking worse", it's actively dangerous to cyclists and other road users, so t…

Closely space axels work fine for road surfaces they don’t help on bridges but that’s a separate concern. You can see a plethora of heavy military vehicles etc which use extra axles to avoid getting stuck in the mud due to plastic deformation IE rutting. EX: The 22 ton KTO drives has to deal with rutting on vastly worse road surfaces like mud. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KTO_Rosomak But this is where you need to do…

> Level of ruts you see are considered acceptable or they would be replaced.

I guess you don't know how the USA works, and Seattle in particular. We are spending a fraction of what is necessary to keep infrastructure from failing. We had a major bridge nearly collapse and was out of commission for years. https://www.king5.com/article/news/local/seattle/seattle-dep...

Many of our roads are not what we call acceptable.

> However, ultimately the same entity is paying for the busses and road maintenance.

Hahaha nope. We have so many different organizations with their own funding sources. Roads come from State and local funds. Metro is primarily funded with dedicated sales tax.

> If lighter busses saved taxpayers money that’s what they would use which is a major sign your analysis is inherently flawed.

Sorry, but this is possibly the most naive thing I've ever heard.

Re: Bus stop balancing is fast, cheap, and effective

#630

Post by coryrc »

femiagbabiaka wrote: post #628
coryrc wrote: post #615

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't have to allow cars on every single paved surface. Cars aren't supposed to be on wide sidewalks, you don't have to allow them on every single road either.

I think I agree with you. Now the political will to make such a change on the other hand...

Oh yeah, "you" was the generic "you". Agree on this, I'm working on it slowly in my own town; it's all I can do.
Post reply on HN