Light Rail - Where and how do we get started! (Cincinnati: to buy, bankruptcy)

[kjbrill]

Originally Posted by ArtVandalay84

I dunno, GET OUT OF THE MERGE LANE? If I'm coming up on an on-ramp that's merging onto the interstate, I get out of the merge lane and let them on. I certainly don't stay in the merge lane and slam on my brakes, throwing the traffic behind me into chaos. This is the kind of stuff that causes accidents, Brill. I know you feel like you're being a "good buddy driver" but this is the sort of nonsense that causes wrecks.

Moving over to clear the merge is the most prudent thing to do. But on I-75 in rush hour traffic moving over may also be hazardous to your health. I am not about to challenge a semi for lane space just to clear a merge lane. If you doubt me just try that maneuver on I-75 between Monroe and I-275.

And who said anything about slamming on the brakes? Slowing down is not slamming on the brakes. A 5 to 10 mph differential is more than enough to permit a smooth merge. Now if the driver of the merging vehicle is spatial geometry impaired that is a different kettle of fish. And unfortunately there are many of these. They have no business behind the wheel because the concept of velocity vectors is completely over their head.

Also, any drivers license test should include videos of the state highway patrol's investigation of fatal highway accidents. I had a cousin who was drummed out of the Ohio State Patrol recruitment class he enrolled in because he kept upchucking when they showed the films of the fatal accidents.

But I will still state if you are traveling in the merge lane, fluctuations in speed should be anticipated. If not you are in the wrong lane to begin with. If stating my slowing down to permit merging traffic will cause chaos to the traffic behind me, they are first of all following too close and likely going too fast. This is not a race track with professional drvers only a few feet from each others tail and always looking to pass, though it sometimes feels that way.

I feel the situation is extremely simple - there is absolutely no courtesy extended on the roadways today. Everyone is in just an all-fired rush. It is my God-given right to get there in the minimum possible time. Ignore the fact I did not allocate enough time to begin with. And if I want to endanger my fellow motorists by the speeds I drive, that is their problem not mine as I am in absolute control of my car at all times.

With those thoughts in mind, may the rail advocates find a way to implement them. As I have said before, the objective needs to be transitional - reduce the the amount of road traffic simultaneously with increasing the rail traffic. That is a combination I have seen virtually no proponents or plans for.

[neilworms2]

I hope the average Cincinnatian leaves a hell of a lot more space than 10 ft between then and the vehicle ahead on I-75 during rush hour traffic.

Did you ever hear of the principle of safe stopping distance? If anything goes wrong you are likely in a multi-car pileup. You can try to anticipate what is happening up ahead, but in dense rush hour traffic you frankly don't have a clue.

Ones perception of distance changes quite a bit when behind the wheel, I meant maybe more like 100-200 feet - way more than is recommended for safe traveling or I see in most other cities.

You wouldn't survive in LA traffic, where quite literally everyone is less than 10 feet apart, and I wouldn't be surprised if muticar pileups do happen there, again if people left more room traffic would congeal and their commutes would be unbearably long - its not fun driving in LA your either stuck in traffic for hours or worried because tons of cars are going really fast dangerously close to your own.

To bring this back to rail, that's the reason people are willing to pay such a high cost to solve the problem - its a serious issue there to the point where it even is affecting the national economy - truck traffic travels really slow through LA costing time and money for all members of supply chains, and LA is the nations busiest port too.

It would have been much smarter for them to not rip out the Pacific Electric railway and instead incrementally upgrade it to compensate for the massive growth the region experienced in the last 60 years, but people in Brills generation and older thought highways were the future and would solve so many problems so now people in LA are stuck with a large bill to solve a problem that could have been solved much much more cheaply back in the day.

[kjbrill]

Far as I am concerned those who just love the southern California sun and the desert can wallow in their own self-destructive trafffic. Why wasn't rail installed decades ago when the cost could have been much less than $500 million per mile? Subways in an earthquake prone region seems ludicrous to begin with.

[neilworms2]

Far as I am concerned those who just love the southern California sun and the desert can wallow in their own self-destructive trafffic. Why wasn't rail installed decades ago when the cost could have been much less than $500 million per mile? Subways in an earthquake prone region seems ludicrous to begin with.

In 1989 there was a massive earthquake in San Francisco, part of the bay bridge was wiped out by it, but guess what survived? The BART tunnels, so basically for a month until they could repair the massive bridge, people took the subway instead of driving it shot ridership up 50 percent: 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia - the issue of subways in earthquakes is moot, highways are a lot more dangerous particularly if they aren't designed right. Japan is earthquake prone and 9 major cities there have subways - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rail_tr...t_rail_transit

Far as I am concerned those who just love the southern California sun and the desert can wallow in their own self-destructive trafffic.

Try telling that to someone who wants to be in film production for a living, oh you have to live somewhere where getting a job is impossible. Its a loose loose situation for a lot of people down there - they don't want to live there but they HAVE to live there unless they want to work retail their whole lives :P. Rail transit would definitely improve quality of life for that region.

[SWOH]

Originally Posted by kjbrill

If I interpret you correctly, you mean the parallel traffic just keeps pace witrh the merging ramp so there is no clear path to merge. That is just SICK BEHAVIOR, and I hope a minority in Ohio.

Yep, that's exactly what happens!

Very common in the Dayton area. My friends and I have dubbed the idiots that do it "ramp-chasers". Just part of the embedded passive-aggressive culture.

[TomJones123]

Originally Posted by OHKID

Yep, that's exactly what happens!

Very common in the Dayton area. My friends and I have dubbed the idiots that do it "ramp-chasers". Just part of the embedded passive-aggressive culture.

That's common in Cincinnati too. Drives me nuts. I've had people slow down to my speed, and I've had people speed up when I attempted to speed up to merge, they sped up so I couldn't merge w/o slowing down.

[unusualfire]

It nothing like state route 75 in Dallas.

[jmecklenborg]

>Why wasn't rail installed decades ago when the cost could have been much less than $500 million per mile?

A huge rail network was built in LA in the early 20th century. Then GM and the oil companies conspired to put them out of business. Same as in Cincinnati: a huge streetcar network and even a subway system were scrapped. All by your generation, not ours.

[kjbrill]

Originally Posted by jmecklenborg

>Why wasn't rail installed decades ago when the cost could have been much less than $500 million per mile?

A huge rail network was built in LA in the early 20th century. Then GM and the oil companies conspired to put them out of business. Same as in Cincinnati: a huge streetcar network and even a subway system were scrapped. All by your generation, not ours.

Not my generation, I may be old but not that old. I keep hearing about how GM and the oil companies put the rails out of business. Just another one of the Great Conspiracry theories in this county. What put the rail companies out of business were the rail companies. A bunch of small businesses who never got together and asked how do we combat this new personal luxury called the automobile? They didn't and the automobile won. It is still the winner and the only thing which will reverse it is exorbitant costs to operate. We are nearing that point, but not there yet.

[jmecklenborg]

No, railroads went from being the most powerful industry to having their legs and hands cut off by the federal government. The ICC limited profits to 6% (GM had 20% years in the 1960s) and the federal government built tens of thousands of miles of modern highways. What intercity railroads did the federal government build in the 20th century? That's right, zero. And how come there is always a vote in cities for rail transit projects but not highway projects? Answer that. The game has been rigged for 100 years.