Disney Irish
Premium Member
And? Sometimes you have to go backwards to go forwards....
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Long live the Eastern Gateway or how I learned to love the Anaheim City Council after the election.
- Thread starter truecoat
- Start date
And? Sometimes you have to go backwards to go forwards....
Darkbeer1
Well-Known Member
So are they Illegal Aliens or undocummented persons? The proper legal term used by the Federal Government (including Obama and prior administrations) is Illegal Aliens.
Who said which term is transit term is correct?
As I understand it, the foreign countries where they are located in the Middle East and China call them Trackless Trolleys.
planodisney
Well-Known Member
This is a seriously interesting thread!!!!!!
Thanks everyone.
Thanks everyone.
lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
It’s like me saying that I no longer use a car that runs on gas as mine runs on petrol. Yes, other places may have different vocabulary but this is very clearly a case of deceit. The whole purpose is to try to convenience people it is something else because streetcars are somewhat trendy at the moment and it may trigger the right key words so as to be eligible for state and/or federal funding. A trackless streetcar is a bus, and just like buses and streetcars it is going to be most efficient and useful operating in a dedicated travel lane, which means giving up car lanes.
Last edited:
Darkbeer1
Well-Known Member
But if the Federal Government uses Trackless Trolley and those vehicles are eligible for grant money. Of course the local government will be using that term.
lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
In this report the federal government is using trackless trolley as a secondary term for trolleybus. The other documents from the Department of Transportation are about existing trolleybus systems as trackless trolley appears to be the term used in Pennsylvania and Massachusetts for their trolleybuses.
VJ
Well-Known Member
Have you heard Chapek's recent comments akin to "if it's good enough for our competitors, it's good enough for us"?
Curious Constance
Well-Known Member
Yeah, his comment was something like their reasoning for doing so much IP is because their competitors would be doing the exact same thing in their shoes. Cuz everyone knows, all the innovators and leaders got where they are today by doing exactly what everyone else is doing in the exact same way everyone else is doing it.
Disney Irish
Premium Member
Honestly this is such a nitpicky thing.
If you have such a problem with the term Trackless Trolley or Trackless Streetcar then call it an Autonomous Wireless Electric Bus on a guideway. Or how about a Trackless Electric Train....
Technology changes, so trying to apply 1800s-1900s meaning for terms really is a losing battle. So just because the DOT hasn't updated its term sheet for more modern technologies doesn't mean the name doesn't apply.
Last edited:
lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
We’re not talking about archaic terms that have not been used in centuries. These systems all presently exist not just as heritage lines and continue to be built. Terms also exist for these modern technologies. A bus with multiple cars is an articulated bus. A bus that drives itself is a self-driving bus. Wireless electrical charging is inductive charging. There are lots of streetcars and trolleys that are not articulated, self-driving or use inductive charging. This is a Robert Moses-style con to get dedicated bus lanes and bus infrastructure out of people who would otherwise oppose it.
FerretAfros
Well-Known Member
Except that it really isn't nitpicky. As I alluded to before, I have extensive experience in the transit industry, and planners, designers, regulators, builders, manufacturers, and operators all agree that these are bus systems. The only people who try to claim that these are something else are the politicians who just want to attend a ribbon-cutting and get a feather in their cap for the next election cycle. This isn't just a case of the government being out of date with the latest terminology; it's what all of the technical disciplines agree is the proper categorization.
Over the last 10-15 years, the industry tide has shifted dramatically away from light rail after its brief resurgence. With the exception of dense urban cores, which have the ability to support urban rapid rail (think urban subway, 10,000+ riders per hour in each direction during peak periods) and commuter heavy rail (like southern California's Metrolink, sharing tracks with freight lines, still thousands of riders per hour during peak periods), nearly every urban rail project could easily be substituted for a well-designed bus system. With high-frequency service and (as needed) dedicated right-of-way and signal prioritization, buses can easily meet ridership demand at a fraction of the cost.
Why spend billions of dollars to build a light rail line, when a bus rapid transit equivalent could be had for under $200 million? Particularly when it's a single line primarily serving infrequent users (rather than a network intended for daily riders), it's very easy to apply placemaking and branding to make it stand out, feel special, and be unintimidating. Plus, smaller vehicles allow for more frequent service, which increases ridership; most people would rather have a 60-person articulated bus arrive every 5 minutes than a 120-person street car every 10 minutes
If we as a country can move beyond the stigma of buses being undesirable, we could solve a lot of our transportation issues at a fraction of the price of what we're spending now. But until then, we'll continue to have the most expensive rail construction in the world, while the majority of commuters sit in their own cars in traffic.
Disney Irish
Premium Member
And this sounds like an argument made by someone who is a proponent for only cars as people's primary mode of transportation. Not saying you are, but that it what it sounds like. So agree to disagree.
Disney Irish
Premium Member
I got a better term for both of you....
Off-wire Inductive Trolleybus.
Lets be realistic here. Most Trolleybuses today use a hybrid system anyways, as there are sections of the routes of most of these that don't have overhead wires. So they covert to a regular diesel (or natural gas) bus during those sections, but are still called a Trolleybus. I can attest to that as a majority of San Francisco's trolleybuses do this. For the areas where there is no overhead wire they lower their contact poles and just go natural gas with some older lines still using diesel. And even these are being replaced by completely electric hybrid trolleybus (both overhead lines and battery for non-wired sections) recently ordered by SF MUNI.
So now let's go back to this system that Darkbeer was talking about. Ok, so instead of using overhead lines, it uses a wire embedded in the ground to draw power through inductive charging. Because it still uses a wire just like other trolleybuses just in the ground instead of overhead, I think the term should be updated. Any vehicle that gets its power either partially or fully from a guide wire either overhead or inductively should be called a Trolleybus.
Last edited:
Disney Irish
Premium Member
Does the Disneyland Railroad count?
Kidding, I rode a BART train just the other day going into San Francisco.
Last year in LA, I rode the blue line, transferred to the expo line to get to the Vikings/Rams game. I also road the shortest railroad 2 days later when I went down the Angel's Flight railway.
Earlier this year, I rode the Blue line from Ft Snelling to downtown Minneapolis to see a free Katy Perry concert courtesy of Capitol One. She was in town as part of the promotion for the Final Four.
Darkbeer1
Well-Known Member
So far this year, I have taken both Amtrak and Metrolink many times (True traditional Train Service).
Also LA Metro rail, which is both light rail service and heavy rail/rapid transit lines. (All six lines)
And of course, multiple amusement park trains, including some built by Bud Hurlbut.
And a geese aka Motors, basically a School Bus that runs on rails.
Also LA Metro rail, which is both light rail service and heavy rail/rapid transit lines. (All six lines)
And of course, multiple amusement park trains, including some built by Bud Hurlbut.
And a geese aka Motors, basically a School Bus that runs on rails.
Phroobar
Well-Known Member
Why did you take the train instead of something else?
The only other option was driving and I didn't want to do that. The game started during rush hour so the train took about the same time or less and I didn't have to pay for parking.