1. sustainable transport – using proper network for each situation – public transport for urban areas and private for rural and suburban? In other words society (as a whole) need to realize and understand what is suitable mean of transportation for different transportation needs, 2. ITS usage in transportation (further implementation) 3. and all issues mentioned before: safety, reliability, congestion (not enforcement – I am not a fan of restrictions, prefer education) Of course it is really hard to put correct position for each issue – my intention was rather to add something than change the importance of each issue.
(1) Parking. I would break the problem down into the following parts: (a) outdated parking codes, where not enough spaces are provided for a given development; (b) residents using garages for everything else but storing cars; (c) overflow from certain neighborhoods into other neighborhoods, thus causing a feud; (d) street parking in the business district where veh’s are too close to driveways, thus blocking sight distance. (2) Residential speeding. Much of this is perception (“people are driving 70 mph!!”) instead of reality (more like 35 mph, actually). I think my #1 request in this realm is to install speed bumps (we don’t do that in my city). (3) School area safety. Something happens to a parent’s ability to reason when his/her child is in the back seat.
There was a book that came out a few years ago describing mega transportation projects. One of the most striking research results was that these projects always came in a minimum of 40% overbudget, sometimes much much more. Also, politicians are always looking at the short term, so if a study shows that a rail line will be lightly utilized, funding does not materialize, even though several years after installation, it would be running over capacity ( e.g. the northeast corridor line). Also, there tends to be a lot of wishful thinking. In Japan, for example, on their high speed lines, they have a tremendous army of workers, to keep the tracks operational, as the tolerances are so tight.Not in the original proposals. So try myopia, short term interests, fraud, lack of skill at the senior level (e.g. the big dig), etc. Sounds a bit like “Lions and tigers and bears… oh my”
The failure to follow the systems engineering process – as in California’s high-speed rail The mantra that anything European is like Ulysses’ sirens Can’t think of a third one – they all circle back around to our basic process, unless you would consider not looking at lessons to be learned from history. Working across interfaces, rather than just up to them, might be a challenge. Amtrak and Metrolink share more that rails: they share passengers. It would be nice to be able to ride an Amtrak train from Solana Beach to Los Angeles and have a convenient connection (five minutes is too short, a couple of hours is too long) to Metrolink to continue one’s journey.Brian: interesting note about cost. A professor from Caltech spoke to the Los Angeles Chapter, which is predominately aerospace, and sort of raked us over the coals for similar performance. His charts were, shall we say, awkward, for our profession. At times it seems the more we fix it the broker it gets.
1. Funding, for with money we can address many of the other issues mentioned already, like poor infrastructure, many of which directly influence the level of safety 2. lack of Planning & Zoning connection to the Transportation sector. Too often the Transportation Sector must must spend more money to compensate for poor Planning & Zoning rules & regulations 3. outdated parking rules that unnecessarily create large unused unshaded concrete (mass) areas that lead to unnecessary heat retention.
The biggest problem is the failure to truly understand and appreciate how transportation evolved in this country, and why our transportation mess looks the way it does today. The lack of real understanding often results in poor decision-making on how to resolve current problems. For example, we would begin make better choices if decision-makers understood how, historically, rail is the only mode that has relied primarily on private investment to acquire, develop, maintain, police and signalize their rights-of-way. And they pay taxes on their rights-of-way. ALL other modes rely primarily on tax dollars to acquire, develop, maintain, police and signalize their tax-free rights-of-way. This long-standing bias in favor of off-track transportation over many decades has distorted decision-making. There are no easy answers, but we need to do a better job of ensuring that we ask each mode to perform the transportation tasks for which that mode is best suited. FUNDING for transportation improvements should not be kept in silos that prevent (or make difficult) the most cost-effective choice. When looking at issues like, say transporting petroleum, and looking at pipeline vs. rail, look at the big picture, not just transportation of oil.
1. The HOS rule change. When using the 34-hour reset, where is there sufficient parking?
2. Specifically. in Denver, CO. , expanded bus/rail lanes and ridership, how many tax hikes must be implemented before enough is enough?
3. How can trucking company officials justify releasing rookie driver’s with minimal drivetime into single or 2-team drivers within a few weeks of being hired?
I would like to invite you to join intelligent Mobility Future Vision (iMFV) Discussion Board on LinkedIn. with over 900 international supporters ( this is apart from the registered network expertise ) :
iMFV collaboration Group is an independent international young organisation fostering a collaboration between disparate groups with a common goal of building platforms across cities, countries and regions that enable an integrated, society centric support of transport in all its forms.
Example projects:
– iMFV in the Arab Region – creating the future model of smart mobility infrastructure in Development Countries.
– Autonomic Road Transport Systems.
I think the biggest problem is the constant building of an infrastructure that is not sustainable. I have watched portions of I20 and I49 below Shreveport deteriorate from the very beginning. If you are going to build something, make sure you have the funds available now or in the immediate future to sustain that project. That has not happened in the past except in states that stay proactive in their transportation program. Perhaps the feds need to be more active in overseeing not just the project but the care and maintenance 5 years after completion.
Think Transportation, offers a wide range of specialized Transportation Engineering Services including design, traffic engineering and modeling services. From Engineering surveys, traffic impact studies and modeling to roadway geometric and pavement design, to complete management of programs from planning to delivery, we offer it all!
We provide our services to both public and private sector clients and help them deliver transport networks and infrastructure from concept to reality.
At Think Transportation, knowledgeable team’s intellect and skill ensures the success of projects by providing our clients expertise and support in accordance with engineering principles and functional design practices.
Interesting idea. I see the latest comment was more than one year ago. Is there any new development?
I definitely think this is a better idea than hyperloop. However, requiring the car being specialized would make the implementation almost impossible.
Why can’t the rail accommodate the current car structure, even if it means just one type of car, i.e. bus. That way you are combining it with Bus Rapid Transit system, and open the option for other cars in the future.
1. sustainable transport – using proper network for each situation – public transport for urban areas and private for rural and suburban? In other words society (as a whole) need to realize and understand what is suitable mean of transportation for different transportation needs, 2. ITS usage in transportation (further implementation) 3. and all issues mentioned before: safety, reliability, congestion (not enforcement – I am not a fan of restrictions, prefer education) Of course it is really hard to put correct position for each issue – my intention was rather to add something than change the importance of each issue.
(1) Parking. I would break the problem down into the following parts: (a) outdated parking codes, where not enough spaces are provided for a given development; (b) residents using garages for everything else but storing cars; (c) overflow from certain neighborhoods into other neighborhoods, thus causing a feud; (d) street parking in the business district where veh’s are too close to driveways, thus blocking sight distance. (2) Residential speeding. Much of this is perception (“people are driving 70 mph!!”) instead of reality (more like 35 mph, actually). I think my #1 request in this realm is to install speed bumps (we don’t do that in my city). (3) School area safety. Something happens to a parent’s ability to reason when his/her child is in the back seat.
There was a book that came out a few years ago describing mega transportation projects. One of the most striking research results was that these projects always came in a minimum of 40% overbudget, sometimes much much more. Also, politicians are always looking at the short term, so if a study shows that a rail line will be lightly utilized, funding does not materialize, even though several years after installation, it would be running over capacity ( e.g. the northeast corridor line). Also, there tends to be a lot of wishful thinking. In Japan, for example, on their high speed lines, they have a tremendous army of workers, to keep the tracks operational, as the tolerances are so tight.Not in the original proposals. So try myopia, short term interests, fraud, lack of skill at the senior level (e.g. the big dig), etc. Sounds a bit like “Lions and tigers and bears… oh my”
The failure to follow the systems engineering process – as in California’s high-speed rail The mantra that anything European is like Ulysses’ sirens Can’t think of a third one – they all circle back around to our basic process, unless you would consider not looking at lessons to be learned from history. Working across interfaces, rather than just up to them, might be a challenge. Amtrak and Metrolink share more that rails: they share passengers. It would be nice to be able to ride an Amtrak train from Solana Beach to Los Angeles and have a convenient connection (five minutes is too short, a couple of hours is too long) to Metrolink to continue one’s journey.Brian: interesting note about cost. A professor from Caltech spoke to the Los Angeles Chapter, which is predominately aerospace, and sort of raked us over the coals for similar performance. His charts were, shall we say, awkward, for our profession. At times it seems the more we fix it the broker it gets.
1. Funding, for with money we can address many of the other issues mentioned already, like poor infrastructure, many of which directly influence the level of safety 2. lack of Planning & Zoning connection to the Transportation sector. Too often the Transportation Sector must must spend more money to compensate for poor Planning & Zoning rules & regulations 3. outdated parking rules that unnecessarily create large unused unshaded concrete (mass) areas that lead to unnecessary heat retention.
The biggest problem is the failure to truly understand and appreciate how transportation evolved in this country, and why our transportation mess looks the way it does today. The lack of real understanding often results in poor decision-making on how to resolve current problems. For example, we would begin make better choices if decision-makers understood how, historically, rail is the only mode that has relied primarily on private investment to acquire, develop, maintain, police and signalize their rights-of-way. And they pay taxes on their rights-of-way. ALL other modes rely primarily on tax dollars to acquire, develop, maintain, police and signalize their tax-free rights-of-way. This long-standing bias in favor of off-track transportation over many decades has distorted decision-making. There are no easy answers, but we need to do a better job of ensuring that we ask each mode to perform the transportation tasks for which that mode is best suited. FUNDING for transportation improvements should not be kept in silos that prevent (or make difficult) the most cost-effective choice. When looking at issues like, say transporting petroleum, and looking at pipeline vs. rail, look at the big picture, not just transportation of oil.
1. The HOS rule change. When using the 34-hour reset, where is there sufficient parking?
2. Specifically. in Denver, CO. , expanded bus/rail lanes and ridership, how many tax hikes must be implemented before enough is enough?
3. How can trucking company officials justify releasing rookie driver’s with minimal drivetime into single or 2-team drivers within a few weeks of being hired?
I would like to invite you to join intelligent Mobility Future Vision (iMFV) Discussion Board on LinkedIn. with over 900 international supporters ( this is apart from the registered network expertise ) :
http://www.linkedin.com/groups/IMobility-Future-Vision-2511997/about and a dedicated discussion board for the iMFV in the Arab Region team.
iMFV collaboration Group is an independent international young organisation fostering a collaboration between disparate groups with a common goal of building platforms across cities, countries and regions that enable an integrated, society centric support of transport in all its forms.
Example projects:
– iMFV in the Arab Region – creating the future model of smart mobility infrastructure in Development Countries.
– Autonomic Road Transport Systems.
Download iMFV brochure from http://www.mghfuturevision.co.uk/ITS
I think the biggest problem is the constant building of an infrastructure that is not sustainable. I have watched portions of I20 and I49 below Shreveport deteriorate from the very beginning. If you are going to build something, make sure you have the funds available now or in the immediate future to sustain that project. That has not happened in the past except in states that stay proactive in their transportation program. Perhaps the feds need to be more active in overseeing not just the project but the care and maintenance 5 years after completion.
Think Transportation, offers a wide range of specialized Transportation Engineering Services including design, traffic engineering and modeling services. From Engineering surveys, traffic impact studies and modeling to roadway geometric and pavement design, to complete management of programs from planning to delivery, we offer it all!
We provide our services to both public and private sector clients and help them deliver transport networks and infrastructure from concept to reality.
At Think Transportation, knowledgeable team’s intellect and skill ensures the success of projects by providing our clients expertise and support in accordance with engineering principles and functional design practices.
http://thinktransportation.net
Email: info@thinktransportaion.net
Phone: 092-3432845847 | 092-3152006765 | 092-2134546535.
Interesting idea. I see the latest comment was more than one year ago. Is there any new development?
I definitely think this is a better idea than hyperloop. However, requiring the car being specialized would make the implementation almost impossible.
Why can’t the rail accommodate the current car structure, even if it means just one type of car, i.e. bus. That way you are combining it with Bus Rapid Transit system, and open the option for other cars in the future.