616
submitted 1 year ago by mondoman712@lemmy.ml to c/fuck_cars@lemmy.ml
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] PonyOfWar@pawb.social 107 points 1 year ago

The point he makes is correct of course, but the way he does the comparison is not very honest. If he wants to compare to the maximum capacity of a tube train, he'd also have to take the maximum capacity of a car, not the average passengers.

[-] mondoman712@lemmy.ml 121 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

But this is what happens. Every rush hour the roads are packed with cars, mostly just with one person in them, while the trains are actually full.

[-] PonyOfWar@pawb.social 47 points 1 year ago

During rush hour you definitely won't have a distance of 10 meters between each car though.

[-] mondoman712@lemmy.ml 35 points 1 year ago

If they're moving there should be, and if not it doesn't seem fair to me to compare transport to a car park.

[-] schroedingershat@lemmy.world 19 points 1 year ago

If the cars are moving at over 5m/s then there will be for minimum safe followong distance.

If they are moving under that, you don't have a transport system that is more capable than a brisk walk.

[-] Nouveau_Burnswick@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

5 m/s is 18kph or ~11mph.

40kph safe stopping distance is 26 meters dry, 30 meters wet. I can't even find data below 40 kph, but 10m would be reaction time alone (no bake time)

[-] nslatz@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

The average speed in London is 8 mph overall, taking traffic into account.

[-] Nouveau_Burnswick@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

Average speed yes, but I doubt anyone is doing 8mph.

It's likely they drive closer to 20 mph (needing a larger safe distance) then stop at lights (needing no safe distance, but probably 3-5m if you have the driving school of thought to be able to have an exit at all times). Then there is all the space occupied by the intersections themselves. These would further space out cars, bringing the average length of X cars higher.

These are all guesses based on my local knowledge, I have been to London in close to a decade, and I did not drive there.

[-] schroedingershat@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Generally guidance for "safe" following distance is to be able to stop before you hit a car that is also stopping with the assumption that the car ahead is stopping at the same rate. So 2 seconds of headway between cars (roughly reaction time alone). Obviously this does not give enough time if the car ahead has a head on collision or similar (but the third car will collide at lower speed and the fourth might stop).

Most traffic is a little closer together than this (hence the prevalence of pile ups), but there is also uneven speed and gaps at traffic lights and similar

[-] icedcoffee@lemm.ee 2 points 1 year ago

You’re making good points and all but I keep reading your username as SchrodingerShat

[-] schroedingershat@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

It's a superposition

[-] MonkderZweite@feddit.ch 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

True. The usual traffic congestion has 2 - 3 meters.

[-] pkulak@beehaw.org 3 points 1 year ago

Sure, but only because they aren’t moving. It should be about the distance traveled in a couple seconds. Less then that and you get a lot of wrecks, so brand new problems.

[-] masterairmagic@sh.itjust.works 32 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

have you seen the trains at rush hour? they are usually filled with 200% capacity.

load more comments (7 replies)
[-] fritz@feddit.de 24 points 1 year ago

No it is fair. Metros are actually completely filled many times per day. Cars almost never are.

[-] biddy@feddit.nl 22 points 1 year ago

No, it's very honest.

When you increase the number of passengers on a train(e.g. rush hour), the volume doesn't increase. The size of the train stays fixed up until it hits capacity.

When you increase the number of passengers on a road, they tend to still have around 1 car/person. Encouraging people to carpool just doesn't really happen. So an "at capacity" road still has most cars with just the driver. This is one of the main reasons cars are so inefficient, people are lugging around capacity for 5 people and tons of cargo, but it never gets used even when the roads are "at capacity".

[-] fresh@sh.itjust.works 14 points 1 year ago

The comparison is completely honest. It is dishonest to pretend that trains aren’t generally full and a line up of cars ever are.

[-] 1rre@discuss.tchncs.de 6 points 1 year ago

Trains are generally at their fullest when cars are at their emptiest, during commuter hours. Tube trains are near empty (maybe 10-15% of capacity) for most of the day and night, whereas those who do drive at those times are likely groups of workmen or otherwise groups of people going to the same place

[-] fresh@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 year ago

Trains are generally at their fullest when cars are at their emptiest, during commuter hours.

If that's true, then we are obviously comparing like-for-like: busy train commute time, busy car commute time. Which makes it a completely fair and representative comparison. "This isn't fair because what about when no one is commuting?" is a weird complaint.

That said, I'm skeptical that for most of the day trains are "near empty" and that for most of the day cars are "likely full of groups of workmen". Do you have a source for that?

[-] 1rre@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

If I were to say "at 3am, almost all grocery stores are empty, yet almost all houses are occupied, so look how much land is being wasted by grocery stores" would that be fair and representative, or picking and choosing a time to suit what I'm trying to say?

Even if we do pick and choose in favour of cars, the train is still probably more space efficient even with only around 30-50 people on board so why put yourself in a position where you can be rightfully called out as misrepresentating the data?

For the last part, have you been to London? Outside of 7:30-9:30 and 16:30-20:00 you're pretty much guaranteed a seat anywhere on the network - when you consider that 27% of the capacity of a piccadilly line train is seating, I would call a train that's 10-25% full near empty in the same way that a car with 1 person in would be near empty... And if you look at the streets of London during the day, it's all taxis and vans, generally the taxis are a mix of families and people alone, leaning towards families as it makes more sense financially to get one the more of you there are, and the vans generally have groups of people who are using them for work

[-] bigschnitz@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 year ago

Completely honest! All cars are at least 4.5m, especially in the city where hatchbacks like the golf (4.2m) reign supreme. And what driver doesn't love driving in bumper to bumper traffic, named for the more than two full car lengths between them and both the car in front and behind.

Not to say that the point they are dishonestly trying to make is invalid, but this is definitely playing with assumed numbers to exaggerate the point.

[-] fresh@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 year ago

ah yes, the 0.3 meters difference in car length makes this completely "dishonest". Throw the whole thing out because they used 4.5 instead of 4.2.

I don't even get your point about car following distance. A line of totally immobile cars bumper to bumper is illustrative of nothing. Using the ideal scenario for car storage is hardly "more honest". I have no idea what is motivating all this weird nitpicking.

[-] bigschnitz@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

ah yes, the 0.3 meters difference in car length makes this completely "dishonest". Throw the whole thing out because they used 4.5 instead of 4.2.

If it was paired with a second data point that was honest then obviously not, but when it provides two metrics and both are exaggerated to embellish the claim then it clearly isn't trying to be even handed.

I don't even get your point about car following distance. A line of totally immobile cars bumper to bumper is illustrative of nothing. Using the ideal scenario for car storage is hardly "more honest". I have no idea what is motivating all this weird nitpicking.

Are you kidding me? Two full car lengths each side is unheard of even on an Autobahn in heavy traffic. This is by far the most disingenuous claim - it alone literally approximately quadruples the distance the cars require. Heavy traffic in city streets should approximate something like 1m each side (half a car length total). Obviously a fully loaded train is orders of magnitude better either way, but an honest comparison wouldn't overstate the length required for the cars by a multiple of 4.

[-] notatoad@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago

I was under the impression that the tube is consistently pretty damn close to maximum capacity at peak times. Is that wrong?

[-] Drinvictus@discuss.tchncs.de 6 points 1 year ago

No because on a busy time of the day it's not hard to reach maximum capacity or close to maximum capacity on a train. But if those individuals decided to drive they would not use their cars to maximum capacity. Or you can look at it the other way around. If people driving right now (therefore the average use) started to use the train, they would not use the train up to its average use. They would use it to its maximum capacity.

[-] kresten@feddit.dk 6 points 1 year ago

Furthermore, 10 meters is a little high given it would be tight traffic

[-] Firipu@startrek.website 5 points 1 year ago

A bicycle is so much more efficient than a car!

3 people one a bike in 2m vs 3km for cars, 1 person per car, with a 1km gap between every car !

Fuck cars, but he's pushing it too much in one direction to try and make a point.

[-] pjhenry1216@kbin.social 5 points 1 year ago

That's not an honest comparison. A full tube train is very common. A road of cars all being full is not. That's simply ridiculous.

[-] fcuks@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

haha yeah with a 10meter gap between cars....

[-] drekly@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

And also a realistic distance between cars. You think cars in London leave 10m gaps? More like 1m 🤣

[-] LimitedWard@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

Eh I'm not so sure I agree with that. Competent subway systems in rush hour tend to be completely full whereas cars in rush hour typically only have a single person inside. So I do believe it's an apples-to-apples comparison in the ways that actually matter.

[-] WalrusDragonOnABike@kbin.social 2 points 1 year ago

Agreed its not very honest. Transportation is about getting places, not filling roads. Average speed of the tubetrain is more than double that of cars, even without dumping all of these extra people onto the roads. After accounting for that, you would need to quadruple the length so that it can match the passenger miles.

[-] LordOfLocksley@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Totally agree. It's still almost 2 miles of cars, but that isn't nearly as impactful as saying 7.2 miles

load more comments (5 replies)
[-] grue@lemmy.ml 21 points 1 year ago

Now try adding up all the square footage parking spaces take.

For example, consider that adding a parking space to a 400 sq.ft. studio apartment — or adding two spaces to a 800 sq.ft. two-bedroom — effectively increases the total square footage by a whopping 50%. And since concrete parking decks are more expensive to build than habitable area of dwelling units, that likely represents a greater than 50% increase in costs.

And yet people unironically defend minimum parking requirements while simultaneously removed about housing costs.

[-] foudinfo@jlai.lu 14 points 1 year ago

Wait, 10 meters between cars ?? In traffic ?

[-] schnokobaer@feddit.de 2 points 1 year ago

Not unreasonable for slow-ish city traffic. Should be more for highway speeds, sure, but he compares it to the tube and overlays the distance on London.

[-] beirdobaggins@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

Sounds like it would be fun to be a tube train. At least for a little while.

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 03 Aug 2023
616 points (94.9% liked)

Fuck Cars

9776 readers
4 users here now

This community exists as a sister community/copycat community to the r/fuckcars subreddit.

This community exists for the following reasons:

You can find the Matrix chat room for this community here.

Rules

  1. Be nice to each other. Being aggressive or inflammatory towards other users will get you banned. Name calling or obvious trolling falls under that. Hate cars, hate the system, but not people. While some drivers definitely deserve some hate, most of them didn't choose car-centric life out of free will.

  2. No bigotry or hate. Racism, transphobia, misogyny, ableism, homophobia, chauvinism, fat-shaming, body-shaming, stigmatization of people experiencing homeless or substance users, etc. are not tolerated. Don't use slurs. You can laugh at someone's fragile masculinity without associating it with their body. The correlation between car-culture and body weight is not an excuse for fat-shaming.

  3. Stay on-topic. Submissions should be on-topic to the externalities of car culture in urban development and communities globally. Posting about alternatives to cars and car culture is fine. Don't post literal car fucking.

  4. No traffic violence. Do not post depictions of traffic violence. NSFW or NSFL posts are not allowed. Gawking at crashes is not allowed. Be respectful to people who are a victim of traffic violence or otherwise traumatized by it. News articles about crashes and statistics about traffic violence are allowed. Glorifying traffic violence will get you banned.

  5. No reposts. Before sharing, check if your post isn't a repost. Reposts that add something new are fine. Reposts that are sharing content from somewhere else are fine too.

  6. No misinformation. Masks and vaccines save lives during a pandemic, climate change is real and anthropogenic - and denial of these and other established facts will get you banned. False or highly speculative titles will get your post deleted.

  7. No harassment. Posts that (may) cause harassment, dogpiling or brigading, intentionally or not, will be removed. Please do not post screenshots containing uncensored usernames. Actual harassment, dogpiling or brigading is a bannable offence.

Please report posts and comments that violate our rules.

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS