Light rail in Cincinnati and Detroit

[Wesley Mouch]

I don't enjoy driving, but I have deep knowledge of computer software, and I absolutely wouldn't trust a computer to do it for me. Computers rely on sensors for knowledge of their environment, and sensors are things which fail. Google "red line crash DC 2009" for an example of what computers can do to people when relying on faulty sensors.

Actually, it always astonishes me when a computer does anything useful, correctly. There are so many parts one would think it statistically impossible, yet it happens. I guess in a universe which can produce Sarah Palin and various Kardashians and make them famous, anything truly is possible.

Planes, trains, and automobiles crash. Plenty of trains crash. We've seen two examples [[Spain, NYC) in the last few months. We've even had a couple of pilot suicides by plane with heavy loss of life. Unfortunate all. And unrelated to how many computer systems were engaged.

[mwilbert]

I'll put a light-rail system up against your Google cars any day. Whether it drives itself or not, it's still a car sucking up space and in an urban environment, it's unworkable to move large numbers of people.

I'm not sure that Google cars will be the formula for success, but something of the sort will end up competing with conventional transit. I'm not sure either one will win comprehensively, but in Detroit I would expect the new-generation vehicles to have an excellent chance of dominance.

I don't enjoy driving, but I have deep knowledge of computer software, and I absolutely wouldn't trust a computer to do it for me. Computers rely on sensors for knowledge of their environment, and sensors are things which fail. Google "red line crash DC 2009" for an example of what computers can do to people when relying on faulty sensors.

If people were better at driving than they are, your point would be more compelling.

[Detroitnerd]

I'm not sure that Google cars will be the formula for success, but something of the sort will end up competing with conventional transit. I'm not sure either one will win comprehensively, but in Detroit I would expect the new-generation vehicles to have an excellent chance of dominance.

Just when I thought I'd seen everything, the anti-transit mentality finds a new way to rationalize its prejudices.

At first it was, streetcars are getting in the way of traffic.

Then for years, it was, "Welp, people like their CARS!"

Now, it's that we'd really love streetcars, but they will get in the way of the next mode of mass transit that hasn't been invented or implemented yet.

Meanwhile, every month that no rail-based rapid transit system is implemented [[and none is still envisioned or planned), thousands of the young people we've collectively spent millions and millions of dollars educating and caring for will leave the state.

They know when you'll finally accept rapid transit in metro Detroit: When Google Cars fly.

[Wesley Mouch]

Just when I thought I'd seen everything, the anti-transit mentality finds a new way to rationalize its prejudices.

At first it was, streetcars are getting in the way of traffic.

Then for years, it was, "Welp, people like their CARS!"

Now, it's that we'd really love streetcars, but they will get in the way of the next mode of mass transit that hasn't been invented or implemented yet.

Meanwhile, every month that no rail-based rapid transit system is implemented [[and none is still envisioned or planned), thousands of the young people we've collectively spent millions and millions of dollars educating and caring for will leave the state.

They know when you'll finally accept rapid transit in metro Detroit: When Google Cars fly.

DN, are any thoughts that don't match yours 'anti-transit'? Nobody is saying let's wait. But this is a 30 year decision. It should be made using the best information of TODAY, not YESTERDAY. That's not anti-transit. Its pro-transit. You needn't be paranoid that other ideas about HOW to accomplish your goals are attacks on the sanctity of your ideas.

[Novine]

"A google car will be able to ride on the ass end of the car ahead of it. This will allow even more single occupancy vehicles on the road!"

It doesn't change the fact that it's never going to be workable in an urban environment. You can never provide enough space on the street and enough parking to accommodate everyone who wants to drive. The successful urban places are the ones that don't try.

[mwilbert]

Just when I thought I'd seen everything, the anti-transit mentality finds a new way to rationalize its prejudices.

Except that I'm not anti-transit. I love transit. I ride subways and commuter rail and [[to a lesser extent) buses all the time. I even like the People Mover. I wish LRT had been funded at least to Ferndale. I don't especially like driving and I want there to be transit even in situations where it isn't particularly economic. But in the end, in Detroit, I don't expect fixed-rail transit to end up being the best choice in another decade or three.

It doesn't change the fact that it's never going to be workable in an urban environment. You can never provide enough space on the street and enough parking to accommodate everyone who wants to drive. The successful urban places are the ones that don't try.

Here I think Novine misunderstands what I expect to develop. I am not suggesting that self-driving cars that are otherwise operated exactly like current cars are the solution.

With the proviso that I am talking about things that don't actually exist, autonomous vehicles should have some huge advantages that make them viable in dense areas.

1) They don't have to park in the dense area. They can let you off and then drive themselves someplace else so that they aren't in the way.

2) You could have a lot more vehicles in the same road network because you don't need on-street parking and the vehicles can drive a lot closer together and respond to traffic signals without delay.

And I'm not saying these vehicles need to be individual self-driving cars either--perhaps automated public van shares or some other kind of shared service will be what ends up dominant. I would expect to see commercial services appear, and perhaps public ones. There was another thread recently about UberX. You could have something like Uber without a driver.

Would this solve all congestion problems? I doubt it. For instance, you might eliminate parking problems for Tigers' games, but getting everyone to within a block or two of Comerica in the 30 minutes before or after a game would still be a problem. But it isn't as if current transit systems don't have trouble coping with peak loads, so I don't really see that as disqualifying.