The tram is still usable to all ages and abilities, no? So those who call 30 minutes a long journey still have the 5-10 minute journey option.
The tram, walking, and rolling makes it less exclusionary than a bridge only accessible by private motor vehicles.
The bridge may still be exclusionary, but it is ordera of magnitude less exclusionary than the previous state of affairs (only those with the physical ability to swim that far).
Timothy Zhan’s Thrawn trilogy came out 1991-93.
Then the Timothy Zhan Thrawn trilogy came out in 2017-19.
There’s also the 2020-21 Timothy Zhan Thawn:Acendency trilogy, but I haven’t read that one.
The best part about reading the Thrawn Trilogy, is reading the Thrawn Trilogy afterwards to compare them.
more kinetic energy will impart more speed to the human during the impact impulse.
Partially correct, the speed (technically acceleration) of the human after a collision is limited by the decceleration of the moving object caused by thr human. Since a car and a truck decellerate about the same amount when receiving the counter-acceleration of the human, the force transfer remains similar.
The bowling ball will not slow down in the slightest when is hits the beach ball, accelerating the beach ball up to it’s speed.
The plastic ball will lose significant speed hitting the beach ball, decelerating itself significantly as it accelerates the beach ball.
I’m going to pick some easy math speeds/masses for demonstration. 2,000 kg sedan, 4,000 kg pickup and 100 kg human. Starting velocities of 20m/s and 0m/s. An impact/acceleration time of 1s.
The sedan hits a pedestrian with (f=ma) of 40kN. It takes 2kN to bring the human up to 20 m/s. So the sedan will be somewhere around 38kN, or 19m/s at the end of it and the human absorbing 1.8-2kN.
The truck has f=80kN. Same 2kN for the human. So the truck will be somewhere around 78kN or 19.5m/s at the end. With the human absorbing 1.9-2kN
In either case the we talking a difference of 1.8-2kN for the human. Regardless the mass (and total force) of the vehicle, the relatively small human as a maximum force they can absorb. And that maximum force is heavily related to the speed of the larger object.
Not to say trucks/SUVs aren’t deadly for other reasons (like where and how the force os transferred)
And then there is the SUV class. Aka the non-passenger work vehicle family passenger vehicle.
My understanding is that China has always had a cycling culture of some sort, not a 5-10 year explosion like Paris saw?
Most bike-friendly cities I’ve visited in the last ten years fall into two categories: 1) a comprehensive network that’s been intentionally incorporated into the infrastructure across decades, or 2) quick-and-dirty changes that work really well on some streets with a comprehensive network to be desired. Paris has built a comprehensive network with mostly quick-and-dirty changes in less than ten years. And it’s obvious just riding around that these changes continue to iterate. I was most delighted to track how the striping below my feet had been scraped and relocated as evidence that the bike lanes had been expanded. It’s a work in progress, and that progress is working.
I felt that paragraph adressed it pretty clearly. It’s not that Paris is doing better than X Netherland city. It’s that Paris is tackling the problem with a quick and dirty, but still comprehensive, network. An approach that can be modelled in other cities, even without decades of working towards the goal.
An approach that has inspired me to delegate in my own city as a way to get after this.
And property tax isn’t?
Land Value Tax.
Land Value Tax / Georgism.
Transit should be free.
Yes.
There is some nuance to this. Transit SHOULD be free, but it takes extremely strong political will to improve transit (add more funding) once it has been made free.
Example: X transit is 50% government funded and 50% fare funded.
Government decides to make if free, 100% government funded. Great!
Or government decides to increase funding to 100%, but fares remain. Now there is a 150% budget to improve the transit.
At 50 kph tires are louder. From 30-50 kph tires can be louder.
There’s a lot of factors (notably vehicle weight, tires type and tire age)
Not much noise reduction. After 50 kph, tires are louder than engines anyways.
Sure there are the occasional busted/“tuned” exhaust comes out very loud, but the majority of the din is just wheels on the road.
Daily driving a non-passenger work vehicle family passenger vehicle.
I would rather live in a big house/apartement in walkable area than a big house/apartment in a car dependant area. But thats not the question they asked.
Thats fair, and there are some odd things to me as an outsider.
What does it mean the licence is suspended 3 years? Does she just get it back after 3 years? That’s ridiculous and just increases skill fade. Assuming 3 years is the correct punishement; should it not be a removal of licence with the ability to restart at the beginning of the graduated licence after 3 years?
Also, there was ~2 years from incident to sentencing. I guess that’s a reasonable delay for a case this complex? But is this person just driving around in the interim? Are there a bunch of people jsut driving around awaiting trial and or sentencing?
This isn’t meant to just shit on the Californian system, in my own town of Kingston, ON; a driver ran over and killed a cyclist with witnesses; but the police just didn’t file the charges in time so there was zero consequence. https://www.thewhig.com/feature/kingston-ontario-cyclist-fatality-police
It’s specifically targeted at the concept of the 15 minute city/neighbourhood
A detterent for not following posted motor vehicle regulations.
Not following posted motor vehicle regulations is extremely common in Canada and America. 99% of the time, these failures lead to nothing.
You sped a little? Nothing happened.
Took that “yellow” light that was probably red? Nothing happened.
Changed lanes improperly? Nothing happened.
Exited your lane a little bit? Nothing happened.
Every driver commits many infractions that lead to absolutely nothing happening all the time. But that one time it costs lives, livelihoods, or property. The rules exist to protect against that one time. North American society has decided the we will not engineer away failures. We’ve decided we won’t educate away failures. We’ve decided we will barely enforce failures. Because of this we have forced our hands into operator responsibility and civil liability, and that obliges steep reactions to driving failures that have consequential outcomes.
having no realistic alternative to driving
I am 100% certain there is a bus route along this road. On account of Diego Cardoso de Oliveira, Matilde Ramos Pinto, and their two children being killed waiting for one.
A bus stop that was built on sheer bolts (engineering decision)
A bus stop that was in the recovery zone of the roadway (engineering decision)
On the other side of a curb that allows vehicles to exit the roadway into that recovery zone instead of diverting them into the other lane on a lane departure (engineering decision)
On a road that a driver felt comfortable doing 70mph (112 kph) on when there arw sildwalks and bus stops (engineering decision).
In a vehicle that did not alert the driver of the danger of travelling 70mph (engineering/political decision)
I have mastered the Swindon Magic Roundabout.
I can take on anything now.