Prev: Toyota safety crisis prompts 'black box' plan for new cars and lorries
Next: New graphic photos of chopped up Mexicans (Los Zetas)
From: Douglas Stanley on 1 May 2010 09:45
Yesterday morning at about 7:00 A.M. I transported a neighbor to a
clinic for her blood work. I waited in the vehicle and as I was parked
in the lot and facing the road, I was bored so I observed a few
vehicles. (Stopped counting @100). I only noted the side of the 4/way
that was in front of me with the stop to my left.
100 vehicles, 2 with more than one occupant.
100 vehicles, 60+ female occupant.
100 vehicles, 19+ on cell phones.
100 vehicles, 25+ with food/drink.
100 vehicles, 1 reading a newspaper on the steering wheel.
100 vehicles, 30+ violated 4/way stop.
14+ of those on cells violated 4/way stop.
10+ of those with food/drink violated 4/way stop.
18+ of those with food/drink were also on cells.
Texting? Unknown.
3 near collisions by 4/way violators.
Heading back home at around 8:00 A.M. I noted that the great majority
of vehicles on the road contained only one occupant.
This intersection accumulates traffic from several small towns and
then feeds to interstate. Over the past 15 years there have been
several fatalities on the feeders and 4 fatals in numerous collisions
at this intersection.
Speeding is rampant on the feeders. About 3 years ago I was heading to
the hospital on an emergency call. I was traveling at 75-80 in 55
zone. A vehicle passed me at a speed that I would estimate of over 95.
About 3 miles further on this vehicle was off the road in a farm field
and had rolled. Others were stopped so I continued to the hospital.
Learned from newspaper that driver was on drugs and was seriously
injured.
Would a good public transit system work to improve safety as well as
reduced use of fuel? I believe so. I lived in NYC for several years
and I felt their transit system was excellent.
From: richard on 1 May 2010 11:16
On Sat, 01 May 2010 08:45:45 -0500, Douglas Stanley wrote:

> Yesterday morning at about 7:00 A.M. I transported a neighbor to a
> clinic for her blood work. I waited in the vehicle and as I was parked
> in the lot and facing the road, I was bored so I observed a few
> vehicles. (Stopped counting @100). I only noted the side of the 4/way
> that was in front of me with the stop to my left.
> 100 vehicles, 2 with more than one occupant.
> 100 vehicles, 60+ female occupant.
> 100 vehicles, 19+ on cell phones.
> 100 vehicles, 25+ with food/drink.
> 100 vehicles, 1 reading a newspaper on the steering wheel.
> 100 vehicles, 30+ violated 4/way stop.
> 14+ of those on cells violated 4/way stop.
> 10+ of those with food/drink violated 4/way stop.
> 18+ of those with food/drink were also on cells.
> Texting? Unknown.
> 3 near collisions by 4/way violators.
> Heading back home at around 8:00 A.M. I noted that the great majority
> of vehicles on the road contained only one occupant.
> This intersection accumulates traffic from several small towns and
> then feeds to interstate. Over the past 15 years there have been
> several fatalities on the feeders and 4 fatals in numerous collisions
> at this intersection.
> Speeding is rampant on the feeders. About 3 years ago I was heading to
> the hospital on an emergency call. I was traveling at 75-80 in 55
> zone. A vehicle passed me at a speed that I would estimate of over 95.
> About 3 miles further on this vehicle was off the road in a farm field
> and had rolled. Others were stopped so I continued to the hospital.
> Learned from newspaper that driver was on drugs and was seriously
> injured.
> Would a good public transit system work to improve safety as well as
> reduced use of fuel? I believe so. I lived in NYC for several years
> and I felt their transit system was excellent.

Public transit as we know it today? Are you serious?
In most major cities, one has to wait over half an hour between buses, if
you get that lucky. And all you want to do is go 3 miles down the road.

Let's move up to the next level. An automated system. Have a system of
automated cars that run on electrical powered rails. Each car could hold up
to 10 people. When you arrive at a station, there will be a car waiting. If
not, put in a request and one will come from another nearby station.

The cars will be operated by a controller at a central station. Not a
driver. As the system will be independent of the roadways, there will be no
need for traffic lights. You go directly to your destination without
stopping at every "stop" as a bus would. Thus saving you a ton of time.

With electric power, no wasted fuel and no dangerous emissions, less
maintenance and that in turn saves the company a ton of money.
From: Daniel W. Rouse Jr. on 1 May 2010 14:10

"Douglas Stanley" <dstanley(a)logic.net> wrote in message
news:utaot5tap2f4icnau4c2bes8fvko7s9m5n(a)4ax.com...

[snip...]

> Would a good public transit system work to improve safety as well as
> reduced use of fuel? I believe so. I lived in NYC for several years
> and I felt their transit system was excellent.

The state of public transit is so pathetic now that there is no such thing
as a good public transit system. I only use public transit whenever my car
is out for repairs, and during that time I hate being tied down to their
schedules, using their vehicles, and having my travel limited by their
coverage areas.

Most routes are 30 minutes or 1 hour frequency on weekdays, plus some routes
have reduced or eliminated Sunday service. Many routes take close to 30
minutes just to travel about 6 miles, due to frequency of stops, longer
travel routes take one hour or longer to reach their last stop. Buses are
almost never on time, due to a combination of schedules that don't take into
account traffic or wheelchair loading delays, drivers loading passengers at
departure time instead of before departure time, and even some drivers that
take a break even when running late.

The buses themselves--New Flyer low floor or NABI low floor buses used in
the areas closest to me that provide publid transit--give a jarring ride
where every bump in the road can be felt. Low-back transit seating may give
drivers better passenger visibility, but it sure gets uncomfortable after
just a few minutes. Plus, the obvious persence of dirt, dust, discolored
windows, and/or worn out seat cushions seems to show lack of basic cleaning
on the part of the transit agency. Vehicle safety is also questionable on
some buses, IMHO, for anyone who may need to hold onto a
handrail--especially when I see re-welded metal parts or screws backing out
on standee handrails, backing out or missing rubber spacers in standee
handrail parts on NABI buses, and/or screws coming loose on securing the
back seats on New Flyer buses. Finally, the trains never go where I need to
go on a regular basis, so I never use them on a regular basis (and those
also run at 30 minutes frequency or less frequently).

Given the choice, I drive everywhere, no exceptions. That means I choose
when to start my trip to arrive at my destination, when to leave my
destination, what routes to take going to and leaving my destination--my
routing and schedule each and every day--not transit's routing and schedule.
I also get the benefit of a safe, clean and comfortable vehicle that I
maintain and that I am in control of at all times, so then driving is the
only choice for individual freedom.

From: Arif Khokar on 1 May 2010 15:48
Douglas Stanley wrote:
> Yesterday morning at about 7:00 A.M. I transported a neighbor to a
> clinic for her blood work. I waited in the vehicle and as I was parked
> in the lot and facing the road, I was bored so I observed a few
> vehicles. (Stopped counting @100). I only noted the side of the 4/way
> that was in front of me with the stop to my left.
> 100 vehicles, 2 with more than one occupant.
> 100 vehicles, 60+ female occupant.
> 100 vehicles, 19+ on cell phones.
> 100 vehicles, 25+ with food/drink.
> 100 vehicles, 1 reading a newspaper on the steering wheel.
> 100 vehicles, 30+ violated 4/way stop.
> 14+ of those on cells violated 4/way stop.
> 10+ of those with food/drink violated 4/way stop.
> 18+ of those with food/drink were also on cells.
> Texting? Unknown.
> 3 near collisions by 4/way violators.

That would be solved by replacing the 4-way stop with a roundabout.

> Heading back home at around 8:00 A.M. I noted that the great majority
> of vehicles on the road contained only one occupant.
> This intersection accumulates traffic from several small towns and
> then feeds to interstate. Over the past 15 years there have been
> several fatalities on the feeders and 4 fatals in numerous collisions
> at this intersection.
> Speeding is rampant on the feeders. About 3 years ago I was heading to
> the hospital on an emergency call. I was traveling at 75-80 in 55
> zone.

The reason the road is posted at 55 mph isn't a result of a traffic and
engineering study. It's posted at 55 mph because of state law that
makes it the default limit for that class of road (which in itself is a
hold over from the NMSL that was repealed 15 years ago). In all
likelihood, the appropriate limit for the road you were driving on was
75 to 80 mph.

> A vehicle passed me at a speed that I would estimate of over 95.
> About 3 miles further on this vehicle was off the road in a farm field
> and had rolled.

> Learned from newspaper that driver was on drugs and was seriously
> injured.

Which is why he crashed.

> Would a good public transit system work to improve safety as well as
> reduced use of fuel?

Probably, but good public transit systems are hard to come by. One trip
I regularly make takes 10 minutes by car, 17 minutes by bicycle, and 30
to 40 minutes by bus. I could walk the distance in about an hour.
From: Jim Yanik on 1 May 2010 16:26
Douglas Stanley <dstanley(a)logic.net> wrote in
news:utaot5tap2f4icnau4c2bes8fvko7s9m5n(a)4ax.com:

> Yesterday morning at about 7:00 A.M. I transported a neighbor to a
> clinic for her blood work. I waited in the vehicle and as I was parked
> in the lot and facing the road, I was bored so I observed a few
> vehicles. (Stopped counting @100). I only noted the side of the 4/way
> that was in front of me with the stop to my left.
> 100 vehicles, 2 with more than one occupant.
> 100 vehicles, 60+ female occupant.
> 100 vehicles, 19+ on cell phones.
> 100 vehicles, 25+ with food/drink.
> 100 vehicles, 1 reading a newspaper on the steering wheel.
> 100 vehicles, 30+ violated 4/way stop.
> 14+ of those on cells violated 4/way stop.
> 10+ of those with food/drink violated 4/way stop.
> 18+ of those with food/drink were also on cells.
> Texting? Unknown.
> 3 near collisions by 4/way violators.
> Heading back home at around 8:00 A.M. I noted that the great majority
> of vehicles on the road contained only one occupant.
> This intersection accumulates traffic from several small towns and
> then feeds to interstate. Over the past 15 years there have been
> several fatalities on the feeders and 4 fatals in numerous collisions
> at this intersection.
> Speeding is rampant on the feeders. About 3 years ago I was heading to
> the hospital on an emergency call. I was traveling at 75-80 in 55
> zone. A vehicle passed me at a speed that I would estimate of over 95.
> About 3 miles further on this vehicle was off the road in a farm field
> and had rolled. Others were stopped so I continued to the hospital.
> Learned from newspaper that driver was on drugs and was seriously
> injured.
> Would a good public transit system work to improve safety as well as
> reduced use of fuel? I believe so. I lived in NYC for several years
> and I felt their transit system was excellent.
>

you didn't say your locale.
Is a "good public tranport system" feasible?
Economically as well as politically.
How big an area to be covered?

Perhaps you should try taking the public transport yourself,soon.
Get an idea of what it involves.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
localnet
dot com
 |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2
Prev: Toyota safety crisis prompts 'black box' plan for new cars and lorries
Next: New graphic photos of chopped up Mexicans (Los Zetas)