Infrastructure

Topic: Infrastructure (Read 64584 times)

Re: Infrastructure

Reply #75 – 2015-12-10, 12:34:06

Helsinki picture from article:

The "bicycle tube/snake" ("cykelslange" in Danish means both) in Copenhagen is cooler,

Stockholm might beat both in a few years. There are already bicycle tunnels, like in the Netherlands, but when a major railway upgrade in Stockholm is finished, the access tunnels might be turned into the world's longest (barely) bicycle tunnel through central Stockholm.

Re: Infrastructure

Reply #76 – 2015-12-10, 14:55:42

Will you be able to cycle in using a slope or will this be using e.g. escalators or elevators?

Re: Infrastructure

Reply #77 – 2015-12-10, 17:51:46

With Stockholm that is one of the remaining questions (together with security and a number of other issues to be considered), the island in question is fairly hilly, and while the tunnel itself is reasonably level, the accesses could have often significant height differences to connect to existing bike network. Maybe something like this?

[video]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TANb2p-HwlE[/video]

Copenhagen on the other hand is reasonably flat.

[video]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c2XFh1K2uBU[/video]

Re: Infrastructure

Reply #78 – 2015-12-10, 19:59:31

Quote from: jax on 2015-12-10, 12:34:06

Helsinki picture from article:

When I was living in Helsinki, there was a railway at the bottom of that ditch.

Making a city bicycle-friendly is very difficult. Most cities in the world have been built thoroughly wrong. Any optimism that they can be transformed into healthy places is unjustified.

Re: Infrastructure

Reply #79 – 2015-12-10, 20:42:04

Whereas to deride them for trying while they are trying to become relatively healthier just smacks of pessimism.

Re: Infrastructure

Reply #80 – 2015-12-10, 23:21:53

That's an imbecility. Bycicles can and must dislocate in the roads and streets our taxes already payed for. There's no reason for building more.
All those lanes for cycles are a pretext to charge more money from the tax payers. You will pay it.

Re: Infrastructure

Reply #81 – 2016-02-05, 20:47:01

We (the US) invest much, much too little in infrastructure.

This has been the case since The Great Pretender took office in 1981, and is part of that worthless carcass' legacy.

As a result, if any of you are in the States, I highly advise not driving through the state of Alabama. I once thought MS had the worst roads, then traveled across Alabama on my way to Atlanta.

Fairly sure Ethiopia and Somalia have better roads than the bammers do.

And of course, bridges are beginning to fail across the country.

Will it change? Hell no.

No, instead we have to foot most of NATO's bill, prop up Israel's economy and defenses, pay for much of the UN, supply "foreign aid" across the globe, etc.

Our leaders post-Carter have made it clear that they don't give a damn about American infrastructure and American domestic needs, rather foreigner's needs must come first.

Re: Infrastructure

Reply #82 – 2016-02-06, 16:44:50

Quote from: Colonel Rebel on 2016-02-05, 15:47:01

No, instead we have to foot most of NATO's bill, prop up Israel's economy and defenses...

http://journalistsresource.org/studies/international/foreign-policy/u-s-foreign-aid-to-israel-2014-congressional-report
About $3.1 billion in 2015.

I watched a documentary yesterday on Frontline, Netanyahu at War, and like the man less than ever.

A substantial part of our fiscal problems has to do with our meddling in other countries beginning with WWI. Follow that with WWII, Korea, Vietnam, Afghanistan and other smaller, less expensive, adventures.

Re: Infrastructure

Reply #83 – 2016-03-16, 10:12:12

Here is an article about the transformation of Amsterdam from a Brussels-like car-positive environment into the much more livable city it is today.

http://calgarybuzz.com/2016/02/sustainable-amsterdam-transformation/

Quote

Dinca and her Californian partner briefly moved back to North America for nine months in 2013, drawn by Vancouver’s reputation for world-class quality of life and progressive politics. But a frustrated stint into the bicycle advocacy scene – including the fledgling Streets for Everyone – would often end in the same reaction from local leaders: “This isn’t Amsterdam”. But, drawing on those archival photos she had collected over the years, Dinca reminded them that, as recently as the 1980s, neither was Amsterdam.

Re: Infrastructure

Reply #84 – 2016-05-25, 06:20:42

Quote from: Frenzie on 2016-03-16, 10:12:12

Here is an article about the transformation of Amsterdam from a Brussels-like car-positive environment into the much more livable city it is today.

http://calgarybuzz.com/2016/02/sustainable-amsterdam-transformation/

That's a nice story. The key statement seems to be "It wasn’t just about building bike lanes," insists Dinca, "But building streets that act as destinations rather than traffic sewers, and slowing everyone down to a speed where people will chose to walk or cycle."

I also thought that specific bicycle lanes here and there where they fit are the wrong approach. Such an approach widens the streets and roads more than ever. It assumes that there are three kinds of traffic - pedestrian, motor, and bicycle. What if in the future we discern four types of traffic in terms of city planning? This would complicate the matters further.

Bicyclists have a speed, so there should not be excessive angles on their way. Futile sharp turns I experience enough when I have to do my biclycling in the city. Insofar as bicycles need straighter paths, they are like cars. But in dense traffic bicyclists are slow enough to fit together with pedestrians and, whenever they stop, they are pedestrians, so I think they right approach is to fit bicyclists together with pedestrians, and plan broader and straighter paths for pedestrians so that there's enough room for bicyclists at the same time.

The result would be occasionally like jogging paths, occasionally like promenades. Tramways can be easily accommodated in the mix and crossing with car lanes have to be planned the way they are planned with tramways. Everybody will win, I think.

Re: Infrastructure

Reply #85 – 2016-05-26, 01:10:47

That mention colonel of the roads in that State was interesting and touching how widespread that is. It was just that well over a year ago I think Obama mentioned it but was mentioned that around 18,000 bridges are under question nationally? Phew.

Re: Infrastructure

Reply #86 – 2016-05-27, 06:35:51

"Shovel-ready" jobs

The "planners" always seem to know what they're doing, until after… Then they run for cover.

Re: Infrastructure

Reply #87 – 2016-05-27, 06:58:01

It's more fun, and gives more votes, to build new than to maintain old. Better to remember the bridge I got built than the one I ensured wouldn't fall down. Builders are remembered, maintainers are not.

Then, of course, sometimes new is better.

Re: Infrastructure

Reply #88 – 2016-05-27, 10:09:42

Quote from: jax on 2016-05-27, 06:58:01

Builders are remembered, maintainers are not.

Destroying also seems to reflect some attraction.

Re: Infrastructure

Reply #89 – 2016-05-28, 00:58:30

Well you get out with the spade Oaky and get some fresh air!

Re: Infrastructure

Reply #90 – 2016-05-29, 14:09:28

How long would this trip take? And, what about Syrian infrastructure?

Re: Infrastructure

Reply #91 – 2016-05-30, 04:09:10

Hope you are not taking the moral high ground on infrastructure my dear man.

Re: Infrastructure

Reply #92 – 2016-06-01, 04:06:43

Quote from: rjhowie on 2016-05-27, 16:58:30

Well you get out with the spade Oaky and get some fresh air!

Well, I did some of that when I was young, RJ. (I doubt you did…) I get plenty of fresh air! (Can't get the distributors to deliver my beer directly…

I've asked; they won't!)
I still don't know where you get the idea that I'm a "hermit". Admittedly, my circle of friends is small; my ambit of acquaintances is considerably wider, but I'm always meeting new people: When I'm out and about, I often find "interesting" situations — and I often poke my nose in. (An old habit that I've yet to break, even though I know I should: Eventually, I know, I'll find myself in a bear-trap.) Luckily, I drinks a bit — so I'm often game for whatever…
Which is to say, Howie, I'm not as tame as you.

Re: Infrastructure

Reply #93 – 2016-06-01, 09:38:18

I imagine @jax should like this article about the new longest railway tunnel in the world, depending on whether he speaks French (but I'm sure there'll be English and German equivalents aplenty): http://www.lemonde.fr/economie/article/2016/05/31/saint-gothard-la-suisse-voit-le-bout-du-tunnel_4929482_3234.html

I'm more worried about the afterthought at the very end of the article. Apparently the new tunnel will be effectively diverting 20 L/s from the Rhine to the Adriatic, good for a total of 125,000 L/year.

Re: Infrastructure

Reply #94 – 2016-06-02, 02:27:51

Ah Oakdale, always dribble out with something when in a corner. Your small circle is a hermit's problem dear man. As for fresh air as a boy was in a national youth organisation and later as a leader took boys on hikes and even myself have hiked through the Scottish highlands. my last job which I was in for 22 years seen me essentially in a walking routine and now have a new pair of hiking boots for drifts into the country. If you joined me I would have to slow down for you to keep up.

That new rail tunnel at Switzerland is something else and taken decades to complete and a wee while ago watched a documentary on the building which was clever and interesting me being a rail fan so i am glad i live in a country with a busy system.

Re: Infrastructure

Reply #95 – 2016-06-02, 03:29:36

RJ, I've hiked (among other, smaller ranges…) the Appalachians, the Rockies and the Sierras. You climb wee hills, and think you've done something — Are you telling me you spent 22 years "teaching" children to walk?!

I'd bet you don't drive. Too "complicated" and too expensive, on your earnings — which amounts to little more than the dole… When the North Sea oil runs out… Well, it won't matter to you.
And when your bile finally chokes you, I will shed crocodile tears.

Would you like to read a good book, written at your level? Try Dale Carnegie…

Re: Infrastructure

Reply #96 – 2016-06-03, 06:31:29

Subtle attempt at disproving my assertions.....

Re: Infrastructure

Reply #97 – 2016-06-03, 11:23:59

To you, assertion is the only way to support your contentions… Howie, so I guess you won't answer a simple question. Ah, well! What else would you expect from a Glaswegian?

(Either a hooligan or a Nancy Boy, eh? What other options were there?)

Surely you know that if you keep attacking someone they will eventually fight back?
I ask you to stop you're fantastical attacks on me, RJ. Else I'll respond in kind… And I doubt you'd like that.

Re: Infrastructure

Reply #98 – 2016-06-04, 13:31:36

Quote from: Frenzie on 2016-06-01, 09:38:18

I imagine @jax should like this article about the new longest railway tunnel in the world, depending on whether he speaks French ...

I'm more worried about the afterthought at the very end of the article. Apparently the new tunnel will be effectively diverting 20 L/s from the Rhine to the Adriatic, good for a total of 125,000 L/year.

No Frankish spoken here, but the Gotthard Base Tunnel is a big, impressive and important thing, 20 years well spent digging a hole. Here in a more user-friendly language

https://youtu.be/UDrHNTB8wW4

The water I wouldn't worry about, that should be between 1/12000 and 1/30000 of the river flow, and Italy is in need of some nice tall Alpine water.

Re: Infrastructure

Reply #99 – 2016-06-04, 16:13:15

Quote from: jax on 2016-06-04, 13:31:36

The water I wouldn't worry about, that should be between 1/12000 and 1/30000 of the river flow, and Italy is in need of some nice tall Alpine water.

Maybe so, but they wrote that it changed the water center of Europe by several cm.

Poll

Poll