A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

Go Back   Home » CycleBanter.com forum » rec.bicycles » Techniques
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Chicago: Minus one cyclist



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old September 24th 18, 05:36 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Jeff Liebermann
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,018
Default Chicago: Minus one cyclist

On Mon, 24 Sep 2018 09:25:21 -0700, Jeff Liebermann
wrote:

Total distance
traveled is:
1.0 + 1.4 + 1.0 = 3.4 meters.
At 45 degrees, the minimum road width that this could be accomplished
would be the aforementioned length of the rail crossing, plus twice
the turning radius, which I would guess would be no less than 0.5
meters. Therefore the road width required would be:
(0.707 * 3.4) + (2 * 0.5) = 4.4 meters
With a 3.5 meter wide road, it can't be done without riding into
opposing traffic.


Oops. That should be:
(0.707 * 3.4) + (2 * 0.5) = 3.4 meters
which is still a tight squeeze on a 3.5 meter wide road.

--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D
http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558
Ads
  #12  
Old September 24th 18, 05:53 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Duane[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 401
Default Chicago: Minus one cyclist

On 24/09/2018 12:25 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Mon, 24 Sep 2018 10:01:59 -0000 (UTC), Duane
wrote:

Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Sun, 23 Sep 2018 19:15:51 -0500, AMuzi wrote:

On 9/23/2018 6:33 PM, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Sun, 23 Sep 2018 10:14:27 -0500, AMuzi wrote:

https://maggionews.com/1-man-killed-...ings-saturday/
But he probably wasn't wearing a helmet.
--
Cheers
John B.

Bring your 4" tires to ride in Milwaukee:
https://fox6now.com/2018/09/23/cycli...kee-streetcar/
And a helmet to keep your head out of the track.


"Milwaukee Hop officials lead bike ride down the rails"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=48on9GjIGk0 (2:28)

Or, buy a bicycle with super fat tires that won't get caught in the
tracks:
https://www.google.com/search?q=fat+tire+bike&tbm=isch

So how do I ride though this intersection, being careful to cross each
rail at a 90 degree (perpendicular) angle?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toronto_streetcar_system#/media/File:Toronto_Streetcar_Grand_Junction.jpg


Apparently John has this course you can take...


In Santa Cruz, there's a place where the Big Trees railroad tracks
crosses Hwy 9 at a 45 degree angle, on a downhill:
https://goo.gl/maps/VeDNDkkNnYB2
I recall that there was once a sign suggesting that cyclists cross the
rails by either walking across or crossing at a right angle. There
have been a few cycling accidents at this crossing over the years,
including me, twice.

The problem is that crossing perpendicular to the tracks doesn't work.
In order to do that on the downhill, I had to turn sharply to the
left, which requires leaning the bike over. If I ride all the way to
the right, and start my turn roughly in the middle of the lane, I
might be able to cross safely and straighten out near the left side of
the lane. The problem is that if I don't do it perfectly, I could
easily end up straightening out into opposing traffic.

As soon as my rear tire hit the smooth steel rails, my bicycle slid
sideways while leaning into the turn, and down I went. It wasn't a
smooth fall, but rather two lurches sideways as each tire lost
traction on the tracks. I thought that since I knew about the risk in
advance, my reaction time would be sufficient to prevent falling over,
but that was wrong, twice. My reward was the usual road rash and a
twisted left ankle. My bicycle (Miyata 610) fared better with a
broken cheap resin pedal and a torn rear saddle bag. Umm... twice. I
consoled myself by suggesting that it could have been worse.

The math is easy enough. The wheelbase on my bicycle is about 1
meter. The railroad track is 1.4 meters wide. The road is about 3.5
meters wide. I would need to ride perpendicular to the rails turning
45 degrees where the front wheel hits the right rail, and come out of
the turn where my rear wheel leaves the left rail. Total distance
traveled is:
1.0 + 1.4 + 1.0 = 3.4 meters.
At 45 degrees, the minimum road width that this could be accomplished
would be the aforementioned length of the rail crossing, plus twice
the turning radius, which I would guess would be no less than 0.5
meters. Therefore the road width required would be:
(0.707 * 3.4) + (2 * 0.5) = 4.4 meters
With a 3.5 meter wide road, it can't be done without riding into
opposing traffic.



Yes, I was being sarcastic.


Drivel: I wonder if they're going to bury the tracks?
https://gogocharters.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/street-car-intersection-1.jpg



  #13  
Old September 24th 18, 06:08 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Frank Krygowski[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,538
Default Chicago: Minus one cyclist

On 9/24/2018 12:25 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Mon, 24 Sep 2018 10:01:59 -0000 (UTC), Duane
wrote:

Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Sun, 23 Sep 2018 19:15:51 -0500, AMuzi wrote:

On 9/23/2018 6:33 PM, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Sun, 23 Sep 2018 10:14:27 -0500, AMuzi wrote:

https://maggionews.com/1-man-killed-...ings-saturday/
But he probably wasn't wearing a helmet.
--
Cheers
John B.

Bring your 4" tires to ride in Milwaukee:
https://fox6now.com/2018/09/23/cycli...kee-streetcar/
And a helmet to keep your head out of the track.


"Milwaukee Hop officials lead bike ride down the rails"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=48on9GjIGk0 (2:28)

Or, buy a bicycle with super fat tires that won't get caught in the
tracks:
https://www.google.com/search?q=fat+tire+bike&tbm=isch

So how do I ride though this intersection, being careful to cross each
rail at a 90 degree (perpendicular) angle?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toronto_streetcar_system#/media/File:Toronto_Streetcar_Grand_Junction.jpg


Apparently John has this course you can take...


In Santa Cruz, there's a place where the Big Trees railroad tracks
crosses Hwy 9 at a 45 degree angle, on a downhill:
https://goo.gl/maps/VeDNDkkNnYB2
I recall that there was once a sign suggesting that cyclists cross the
rails by either walking across or crossing at a right angle. There
have been a few cycling accidents at this crossing over the years,
including me, twice.


This shot, in central Pennsylvania, is the track crossing with the worst
angle I remember: https://goo.gl/maps/T4JAsTvKSeD2 The tracks are very
near parallel with the road. The sign says "Bicyclists dismount." It's a
good idea (although I didn't.)

Back when I ran our club's century ride, we were careful to avoid a road
with a pair of badly angled tracks - that is, four rails total. But one
year, just after the ride started, bad thunderstorms hit and many riders
used the road with the tracks to shortcut back to the ride's start.
IIRC, we had seven riders crash on the wet angled tracks. Fortunately,
the worst injury was a bleeding elbow.

And I may have posted about the time on one tour when we approached
railroad tracks just after rain had stopped. I cautioned my daughter
that the tracks would be slippery. She gave me an exasperated "Oh, Dad!"
because, of course, she already _knew_ that! Then she slid on the tracks
and fell.

Parents treasure those "Told you so!" experiences.

--
- Frank Krygowski
  #14  
Old September 24th 18, 06:13 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
AMuzi
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 13,447
Default Chicago: Minus one cyclist

On 9/24/2018 11:25 AM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Mon, 24 Sep 2018 10:01:59 -0000 (UTC), Duane
wrote:

Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Sun, 23 Sep 2018 19:15:51 -0500, AMuzi wrote:

On 9/23/2018 6:33 PM, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Sun, 23 Sep 2018 10:14:27 -0500, AMuzi wrote:

https://maggionews.com/1-man-killed-...ings-saturday/
But he probably wasn't wearing a helmet.
--
Cheers
John B.

Bring your 4" tires to ride in Milwaukee:
https://fox6now.com/2018/09/23/cycli...kee-streetcar/
And a helmet to keep your head out of the track.


"Milwaukee Hop officials lead bike ride down the rails"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=48on9GjIGk0 (2:28)

Or, buy a bicycle with super fat tires that won't get caught in the
tracks:
https://www.google.com/search?q=fat+tire+bike&tbm=isch

So how do I ride though this intersection, being careful to cross each
rail at a 90 degree (perpendicular) angle?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toronto_streetcar_system#/media/File:Toronto_Streetcar_Grand_Junction.jpg


Apparently John has this course you can take...


In Santa Cruz, there's a place where the Big Trees railroad tracks
crosses Hwy 9 at a 45 degree angle, on a downhill:
https://goo.gl/maps/VeDNDkkNnYB2
I recall that there was once a sign suggesting that cyclists cross the
rails by either walking across or crossing at a right angle. There
have been a few cycling accidents at this crossing over the years,
including me, twice.

The problem is that crossing perpendicular to the tracks doesn't work.
In order to do that on the downhill, I had to turn sharply to the
left, which requires leaning the bike over. If I ride all the way to
the right, and start my turn roughly in the middle of the lane, I
might be able to cross safely and straighten out near the left side of
the lane. The problem is that if I don't do it perfectly, I could
easily end up straightening out into opposing traffic.

As soon as my rear tire hit the smooth steel rails, my bicycle slid
sideways while leaning into the turn, and down I went. It wasn't a
smooth fall, but rather two lurches sideways as each tire lost
traction on the tracks. I thought that since I knew about the risk in
advance, my reaction time would be sufficient to prevent falling over,
but that was wrong, twice. My reward was the usual road rash and a
twisted left ankle. My bicycle (Miyata 610) fared better with a
broken cheap resin pedal and a torn rear saddle bag. Umm... twice. I
consoled myself by suggesting that it could have been worse.

The math is easy enough. The wheelbase on my bicycle is about 1
meter. The railroad track is 1.4 meters wide. The road is about 3.5
meters wide. I would need to ride perpendicular to the rails turning
45 degrees where the front wheel hits the right rail, and come out of
the turn where my rear wheel leaves the left rail. Total distance
traveled is:
1.0 + 1.4 + 1.0 = 3.4 meters.
At 45 degrees, the minimum road width that this could be accomplished
would be the aforementioned length of the rail crossing, plus twice
the turning radius, which I would guess would be no less than 0.5
meters. Therefore the road width required would be:
(0.707 * 3.4) + (2 * 0.5) = 4.4 meters
With a 3.5 meter wide road, it can't be done without riding into
opposing traffic.


Drivel: I wonder if they're going to bury the tracks?
https://gogocharters.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/street-car-intersection-1.jpg



Tibetan Sky Burial works better for trains, as in Chicago:
http://www.yellowjersey.org/photosfr...t/ELSWITCH.JPG

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971


  #15  
Old September 24th 18, 06:54 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Jeff Liebermann
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,018
Default Chicago: Minus one cyclist

On Mon, 24 Sep 2018 13:08:23 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

This shot, in central Pennsylvania, is the track crossing with the worst
angle I remember: https://goo.gl/maps/T4JAsTvKSeD2


Here's a slightly better Google street view image:
https://goo.gl/maps/K5dKHUC9g8o

The tracks are very
near parallel with the road. The sign says "Bicyclists dismount." It's a
good idea (although I didn't.)


Yeah, that's a really bad crossing. I think a sign with the previous
months accident and fatality figures might be more effective. Or
maybe something subtle like "Walk Your Bike or Die"?

This might be amusing|disgusting|informative:
"Single Bicycle Crashes at Skewed Rail Crossing"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YfeQvbIFBks (3:57)
(Note that the video is 2X faster than reality).
The first half of the video shows riders mostly in a bicycle lane that
is only a little narrower than the traffic lane. Notice how many
cyclists that crash, land in the adjacent traffic lane. In the 2nd
half of the video, the city attempted to solve the problem by moving
the bike lane away from traffic, but only succeeded in making things
worse because of the slight slope and only slightly less angled
approach. The moral is that even the city traffic engineers didn't
understand exactly what was happening.

Maybe:
https://www.ilovebicycling.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/angled-railroad-tracks1.jpg

"How to Properly Cross Rail Tracks on your Bike"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KSogGOjEDnI (1:12)
Notice how the two riders in the video both cut across the corners.


--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D
http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558
  #16  
Old September 24th 18, 10:42 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Frank Krygowski[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,538
Default Chicago: Minus one cyclist

On 9/24/2018 1:54 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Mon, 24 Sep 2018 13:08:23 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

This shot, in central Pennsylvania, is the track crossing with the worst
angle I remember: https://goo.gl/maps/T4JAsTvKSeD2


Here's a slightly better Google street view image:
https://goo.gl/maps/K5dKHUC9g8o


You're right. I rode it in the direction I showed.

The tracks are very
near parallel with the road. The sign says "Bicyclists dismount." It's a
good idea (although I didn't.)


Yeah, that's a really bad crossing. I think a sign with the previous
months accident and fatality figures might be more effective. Or
maybe something subtle like "Walk Your Bike or Die"?

This might be amusing|disgusting|informative:
"Single Bicycle Crashes at Skewed Rail Crossing"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YfeQvbIFBks (3:57)
(Note that the video is 2X faster than reality).


ISTM that almost all the cyclists who fell made it safely across the
first track, but fell when their front wheel hit the second rail. I
don't know why that is. Do you?

Maybe:
https://www.ilovebicycling.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/angled-railroad-tracks1.jpg


Of course! "Ye Magicke Greene Paint" solves all problems, doesn't it?

"How to Properly Cross Rail Tracks on your Bike"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KSogGOjEDnI (1:12)
Notice how the two riders in the video both cut across the corners.


The two final cyclists shown in the overhead view don't come close to
"90 degree angle" but they came close enough, at least when it was dry.
When it's wet, closer to perpendicular would be better.

I notice the speaker said "... taking a lane like a cyclist should..."
but of course, those are fighting words in some quarters.

--
- Frank Krygowski
  #17  
Old September 25th 18, 12:10 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Jeff Liebermann
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,018
Default Chicago: Minus one cyclist

On Mon, 24 Sep 2018 17:42:27 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 9/24/2018 1:54 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
This might be amusing|disgusting|informative:
"Single Bicycle Crashes at Skewed Rail Crossing"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YfeQvbIFBks (3:57)
(Note that the video is 2X faster than reality).


ISTM that almost all the cyclists who fell made it safely across the
first track, but fell when their front wheel hit the second rail. I
don't know why that is. Do you?


Good observation. My guess(tm) is that the heavier ground loading on
the rear wheel would tend to force the tire into the funnel cross
section rail channel far more than the lighter ground load on the
front wheel.

Maybe:
https://www.ilovebicycling.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/angled-railroad-tracks1.jpg


Of course! "Ye Magicke Greene Paint" solves all problems, doesn't it?


Yep. Anything painted green is owned by the cyclists. Anything
painted black belongs to the cars, buses, and trucks. Anything
painted white belongs to parked cars or pedestrians. Or, something
like that.

"How to Properly Cross Rail Tracks on your Bike"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KSogGOjEDnI (1:12)
Notice how the two riders in the video both cut across the corners.


The two final cyclists shown in the overhead view don't come close to
"90 degree angle" but they came close enough, at least when it was dry.
When it's wet, closer to perpendicular would be better.


Yep, that what I meant by cutting across the (inside) corner.

I notice the speaker said "... taking a lane like a cyclist should..."
but of course, those are fighting words in some quarters.


Careful. The color code of the road, as I previously mumbled,
indicates that anything black belongs to the automobile. In order to
take the lane, a cyclist would need to carry a can of green spray
paint.


Drivel: Duz this mean that I should wear a Pickelhaube helmet?
https://www.phoenix.gov/streetssite/MediaAssets/Understanding%20Symbols%20-%20Bike%20Lane%201.jpg
https://www.google.com/search?q=pickelhaube&tbm=isch


--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D
http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558
  #18  
Old September 25th 18, 11:20 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Sir Ridesalot
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,270
Default Chicago: Minus one cyclist

On Monday, September 24, 2018 at 7:10:18 PM UTC-4, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Mon, 24 Sep 2018 17:42:27 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 9/24/2018 1:54 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
This might be amusing|disgusting|informative:
"Single Bicycle Crashes at Skewed Rail Crossing"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YfeQvbIFBks (3:57)
(Note that the video is 2X faster than reality).


ISTM that almost all the cyclists who fell made it safely across the
first track, but fell when their front wheel hit the second rail. I
don't know why that is. Do you?


Good observation. My guess(tm) is that the heavier ground loading on
the rear wheel would tend to force the tire into the funnel cross
section rail channel far more than the lighter ground load on the
front wheel.

Maybe:
https://www.ilovebicycling.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/angled-railroad-tracks1.jpg


Of course! "Ye Magicke Greene Paint" solves all problems, doesn't it?


Yep. Anything painted green is owned by the cyclists. Anything
painted black belongs to the cars, buses, and trucks. Anything
painted white belongs to parked cars or pedestrians. Or, something
like that.

"How to Properly Cross Rail Tracks on your Bike"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KSogGOjEDnI (1:12)
Notice how the two riders in the video both cut across the corners.


The two final cyclists shown in the overhead view don't come close to
"90 degree angle" but they came close enough, at least when it was dry.
When it's wet, closer to perpendicular would be better.


Yep, that what I meant by cutting across the (inside) corner.

I notice the speaker said "... taking a lane like a cyclist should..."
but of course, those are fighting words in some quarters.


Careful. The color code of the road, as I previously mumbled,
indicates that anything black belongs to the automobile. In order to
take the lane, a cyclist would need to carry a can of green spray
paint.


Drivel: Duz this mean that I should wear a Pickelhaube helmet?
https://www.phoenix.gov/streetssite/MediaAssets/Understanding%20Symbols%20-%20Bike%20Lane%201.jpg
https://www.google.com/search?q=pickelhaube&tbm=isch


--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D
http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558


I learned how to cross railway/streetcar tracks at a very early age in Toronto Canada. The intersection of King, Queen and Roncesvale is one of many intersections with streetcar tracks going every which way and are especially hazardous if you're making a left turn onto another street. I found that the trick was to lift the front wheel as it approached the rail or if going fast enough to bunny hop over them. Most of the time it was better to just lift the front wheel as I rode towards the rail. If the angle of approach is good the rear wheel won't slip into or along the rail even when it's wet.

Some of those people in the linked video about crashes at the railway crossing are really lucky they didn't get run over. A couple of them were pretty close to having that run down feeling.

Cheers
  #19  
Old September 25th 18, 01:47 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Duane[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 401
Default Chicago: Minus one cyclist

On 25/09/2018 6:20 AM, Sir Ridesalot wrote:
On Monday, September 24, 2018 at 7:10:18 PM UTC-4, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Mon, 24 Sep 2018 17:42:27 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 9/24/2018 1:54 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
This might be amusing|disgusting|informative:
"Single Bicycle Crashes at Skewed Rail Crossing"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YfeQvbIFBks (3:57)
(Note that the video is 2X faster than reality).


ISTM that almost all the cyclists who fell made it safely across the
first track, but fell when their front wheel hit the second rail. I
don't know why that is. Do you?


Good observation. My guess(tm) is that the heavier ground loading on
the rear wheel would tend to force the tire into the funnel cross
section rail channel far more than the lighter ground load on the
front wheel.

Maybe:
https://www.ilovebicycling.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/angled-railroad-tracks1.jpg

Of course! "Ye Magicke Greene Paint" solves all problems, doesn't it?


Yep. Anything painted green is owned by the cyclists. Anything
painted black belongs to the cars, buses, and trucks. Anything
painted white belongs to parked cars or pedestrians. Or, something
like that.

"How to Properly Cross Rail Tracks on your Bike"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KSogGOjEDnI (1:12)
Notice how the two riders in the video both cut across the corners.

The two final cyclists shown in the overhead view don't come close to
"90 degree angle" but they came close enough, at least when it was dry.
When it's wet, closer to perpendicular would be better.


Yep, that what I meant by cutting across the (inside) corner.

I notice the speaker said "... taking a lane like a cyclist should..."
but of course, those are fighting words in some quarters.


Careful. The color code of the road, as I previously mumbled,
indicates that anything black belongs to the automobile. In order to
take the lane, a cyclist would need to carry a can of green spray
paint.


Drivel: Duz this mean that I should wear a Pickelhaube helmet?
https://www.phoenix.gov/streetssite/MediaAssets/Understanding%20Symbols%20-%20Bike%20Lane%201.jpg
https://www.google.com/search?q=pickelhaube&tbm=isch


--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D
http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558


I learned how to cross railway/streetcar tracks at a very early age in Toronto Canada. The intersection of King, Queen and Roncesvale is one of many intersections with streetcar tracks going every which way and are especially hazardous if you're making a left turn onto another street. I found that the trick was to lift the front wheel as it approached the rail or if going fast enough to bunny hop over them. Most of the time it was better to just lift the front wheel as I rode towards the rail. If the angle of approach is good the rear wheel won't slip into or along the rail even when it's wet.

Some of those people in the linked video about crashes at the railway crossing are really lucky they didn't get run over. A couple of them were pretty close to having that run down feeling.

Cheers


It's one of those bad places. Bottom of a downhill with a railroad
crossing that mostly requires you to go into the traffic lane to take it
at 90 degrees. On top of that, if you're not expecting it you can be at
speed coming down. You mostly have two choices. One is to be slow
enough to deal with the tracks and the other is to be in the lane. Hard
to say which is best without knowing the area.

We have a set of tracks going from Pincourt into Terrace Vaudreuil where
there isn't any bike path and you are in the lane. But in order to take
them at a right angle, you need to move into the oncoming lane. This is
at the top of a hill and there are two sets of tracks. It's not easy to
see oncoming traffic. There have been several accidents there and the
railroad did repair the tracks so that the ruts are now less pronounced.
But it's still tracks. There's not really anything you can do except
to be careful.

In the case shown in the video, the bypass that the city put in seems to
make sense as long as it's well indicated.
  #20  
Old October 3rd 18, 07:17 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Radey Shouman
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,747
Default Chicago: Minus one cyclist

Frank Krygowski writes:

On 9/23/2018 8:15 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 9/23/2018 6:33 PM, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Sun, 23 Sep 2018 10:14:27 -0500, AMuzi wrote:

https://maggionews.com/1-man-killed-...ings-saturday/


But he probably wasn't wearing a helmet.
--
Cheers

John B.


Bring your 4" tires to ride in Milwaukee:
https://fox6now.com/2018/09/23/cycli...kee-streetcar/
And a helmet to keep your head out of the track.


Street cars puzzle me. They have much higher first cost than buses,
they have much less route flexibility than buses. Their tracks
introduce new hazards.

Sure, they're trendier, and fashion is ridiculously powerful, but
buses could be made just as fashionable.

https://humantransit.org/2009/07/str...ent-truth.html


There is a social status aspect to trams vs buses, at least in the US,
but there are also practical and political aspects. I just ran across
this comment on website, which addresses some of them.

From http://slatestarcodex.com/2018/10/02...comment-674523

-------------------%---------------------%---------------------
po8crg says:
October 3, 2018 at 4:19 am

The big advantage of first-generation trams over trolleybuses is that
they were invented first, so lots of cities built tram systems before
trolleybuses were invented.

Trams require less overhead wiring than trolleybuses (trams have one
pickup and do a neutral return through the rails; trolleybuses need two
wires, both a live and a neutral). This means that they can use the
(simpler and more reliable) pantograph rather than a trolley pole for
electrical pickup. Trolleybuses get dewired much more often than trams
do, and take longer to connect back up. A mechanical arm with a camera
and a bit of AI is probably capable of doing an auto-pickup while moving
these days, which makes that much less of a problem – until very
recently a dewired trolley had to stop and the driver had to hook the
poles back up manually.

The big advantage of second-generation trams (ie post-1970s) over
trolleybuses is that they can be much longer. Because of the rails, a
long, multiply-articulated tram will stay in lane when going around a
corner, which is a problem for buses/trolleybuses even with a single
articulation.

Trams are regularly over 50m long, which is far longer than any
trolleybus can be safely – which means that a single tram can carry far
more passengers, making them a useful intermediate-capacity system
between bus/trolleybus and metro.

The other advantage for trams is one that isn’t much talked about – Bus
rapid transit like Bogota or Brisbane, whether petrol buses or
trolleybuses, is a big improvement over normal buses. But BRT schemes
can be squeezed politically or financially – add a short section of
buslane that’s just paint and not physical segregation; add a section of
mixed traffic; cross a road through a signalled junction rather than
grade separation; take away signalling priority at a junction; etc. The
danger for a BRT scheme is that it gets cut down to a few improvements
for the existing buses. Trams, because you have to lay track, can’t be
cut back that much – either there is track somewhere or there isn’t. The
worst cases are the US cities that have unarticulated trams in mixed
traffic; those are completely pointless. But tram schemes work out much
better on average because it’s harder to chip away at a tram scheme
without cancelling large bits of it (the worst is generally taking
dedicated lanes and letting buses in, or replacing grade separated
junctions with at-grade ones with signal priority for the trams). This
is not something that politicians talk about, because it involves an
admission of how crap politicians are, but when politics turns against
trams, they tend to get cancelled; when politics turns against BRT, they
tend to get cut back to pointlessness, which results in lots of really
bad BRT schemes which then gives BRT a bad name.
-------------------%---------------------%---------------------
--
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Nearly minus my son :( wafflycat UK 34 November 7th 06 10:14 AM
Ti-prep minus the Ti pg Techniques 5 August 16th 06 01:03 PM
Jimmymac, Chicago cyclist retracts lies, begs forgiveness! MOJO Techniques 2 January 13th 06 05:05 AM
Doesn't 7 minus 1 equal 6 Lance Armstrong? D. Ferguson Racing 0 August 27th 05 03:13 AM
minus 5 this morning davep UK 12 February 27th 04 12:41 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:31 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.