Looking for transport of the future

[chatelot16]

road accidents are not a problem but a solution to unemployment

finally excuse me from this quote from the subject humor (black)

[sen-no-sen]

progress is doing better, it agrees to your question or you want to make questions and answers argued alone?

Can we speak of progress when the whole system pushes to destruction?

the question is not to compare which does the
more death.

The orientation of society is precisely to make the least deadly choices possible.

What do you want me to swallow with your theory?

It is not a question of MY theory, but of common sense.
All serious politics is directed towards how to minimize the nuisance on the environment and society.

You're in luck ! because in the 80 years we were 16'000 dead, 4 times more than the existing minimum that you announce! But it does not seem to bother you more than that.

It's not about my numbers but about road safety ...
In addition my remark is based on the fact that the excessive development of the automobile has created a multitude of problems, and that the solution is not to "revive" the automobile ....

The fact that there are more 18000 dead on the roads in 1973 saddens me obviously and the policies of the time have reduced by a factor 4 the number of deaths, but it is still much too high !
This is why it is necessary to go even further, especially by reducing the number of vehicles on the roads, things that anyway will happen whether you like it or not ...

The graph of the dead (which I have not printed) from decades to decades and from year to year on the road I have already seen, unlike you

Regarding the subject, I think you're really addressing the wrong person!

[sen-no-sen]

Idea already developed on the forum:
High speed vacuum transport:

http://www.moteurnature.com/actu/uneactu.php?news_id=27083

It is a moment of anthology of the French cinema, Louis de Funès receives a tire, Bourvil had never seen one. Thank you Gérard Oury. This technology is now used only in supermarkets, or hospitals (to quickly convey cash or drugs), but in the middle of the last century, the pneumatic tube was a common way to send messages to Paris as in London.

Elon Musk, founding boss of Tesla Motors, proposes to revive this technology, by associating the principle of magnetic levitation train propulsion (Maglev). A large tube under low pressure (but not under vacuum, which would be too expensive and too complex), where capsules would be propelled electrically at a very high speed, without magnetic levitation, but without friction, since there has neither wheels nor rails. This is potentially a good idea, which will be found in detail in this document
Elon Musk is not known for his lack of ambition, he proposes this Hyperloop project as a connection between Los Angeles and San Francisco. The Hyperloop would be aerial, and built just above the Interstate 5, the highway that makes the entire West Coast of the United States, with 2 tubes, to go in the South-North direction and vice versa, able to accommodate capsules of a dozen passengers over 1000 km / h, which would cross California in 30 minutes. All along, photovoltaic cells would supply the Hyperloop with renewable energy.

[Zypp0]

Sen no sen: The subject that I argue is free car, well? or not good? Sen no sen in what subject are you? on what subject do you answer that I can understand you? For now, your text is more like free swimming than a free car.

Finally, with the death average from 1970 since before you didn't have the figures that were also high, you will not get 4000 deaths but a much higher general average, so stop on the current year to say one can do better or worse is not correct. That's what I was saying we are still in a general average of 8000 per year, you were wrong in putting up 4000 and I will not go back over it. A death of today is worth as a death of yesterday! I would say the politicians of the time left to their successor what they were incapable of, nothing has changed, it is still like that nowadays. On this side there are not many better than others. Some allow themselves to increase others to decrease, so I disagree with you and your so-called glory; "the misfortune of some makes the happiness of others". The policies allowed nothing, what made it possible to save it was the automobile and the drivers who became aware of the danger, not the policy or the reduced speed. You are still wrong.

[sen-no-sen]

ZyppO wrote:

Sen no sen: The subject that I argue is free car, well? or not good? Sen no sen in what subject are you? on what subject do you answer that I can understand you? For now, your text is more like free swimming than a free car.

I answered this question: it all depends on what logic one places the notion of "free auto".
My remark, which apparently you took very badly, was based on the notion of the "revival" of the automotive sector, which is not at all the solution to environmental and economico-social problems.

This is what I said we are still in a general average of 8000 annual, you were wrong by 4000 and I will not return the top.

On econology we appreciate a minimum good faith!
When I talked about 4000 annual deaths on the roads of France, it was obviously in the present, I do not see the point of playing on words!

Some allow themselves to increase others to decrease, so I disagree with you and your so-called glory; "the misfortune of some makes the happiness of others".

Thank you also not to distort my words, or did I speak of "the misfortunes of some and the happiness of others" ... ?????

The politicians did not allow anything, which saved the car and drivers who are aware of the danger, not the policy or the speed that has decreased. You are still wrong.

the mandatory wearing of the belt?
the control of alcohol?
Radars?
Refresh me memory, who has implemented measures, motorists?

[Zypp0]

Sen no sen: You say the policies of the time allowed to divide by 4 the number of deaths.

I tell you no, the policies have not reduced the number of deaths by 4, do you think it is they who make the rain and the good weather of the roads and the funeral chart? I save you and you I do not save you? it is they who are responsible for themselves who make or do not make the laws corresponding to the graph and we can not say that after the first 2 necessary measurements the curve has descended significantly, the introduction of the following measures are not graphically significant .

We realized that car speed was killing in 1973 and that it had to be limited one way or another in any way, etc. we can not say that overnight everything worked out well. I'm not going to make the whole comments of the point-by-point measurements and their faintly significant effects for a good part ..

The speed regulation and signaling panels have not decreased since their introduction 40 years ago, however what has decreased accidents is the awareness of the danger by the media, traffic information, meteorology, the quality of materials, braking, tires, windows, glasses, lighthouses, passive safety, but still rescue, also in hospitals with technology, roads and highways, new vehicle cheaper, traffic jams in cities and low speed , the price, the number of unemployed without a car, the list is long, but what you say seems unfair to me. You almost seem to say everything is better than expected thanks to the policies .. I say no,
they have just managed to maintain a curve that is far too high and too slow between the correct and the incorect.

We do not have the same reading of the table you and me.

[Janic]

why speak in terms of "or" rather than in terms of "and".
the number of deaths is in terms of total deaths or injuries, whereas it would be more accurate to express them in ratio and, moreover, sector by sector rather than globally. The main current causes are always alcohol (0.5 is always too much, the only acceptable threshold remains 0), neuroleptics and other drugs generating drowsiness, fatigue, lack of sleep. Taken separately we can minimize each parameter, but often they are cumulated, the less respected speed, etc ...
However, it seems difficult to take a blood test before each movement of an individual, or to ensure that it will respect the signs and other incentives for caution and respect for others. So it is doubtful that in the future, individual and collective consciousness will be different.

[Christophe]

Good graphic and beautiful intervention of Chirac !! What did he say at the time?

Otherwise this curve should be related to the kilometers traveled! We drive a lot more now than in 1970 ...

The downward trend is therefore even stronger!

Now it's not that thanks to the repression and road safety as this graphic makes him believe: in 30 years, cars have become safer (active and passive), medicine has progressed, relief is generally faster and better equipped, roads are surely safer too (a lot of round points have pushed these 20 last years) ... in short ... full of other factors come into play ...

[sen-no-sen]

However, it seems difficult to take a blood test before each movement of an individual, or to ensure that it will respect the signs and other incentives for caution and respect for others. So it is doubtful that in the future, individual and collective consciousness will be different.

Absolutely!
It's unfortunate to say, but you do not have to rely on people's consciousness to change things! And this is true in all areas!
It is for this reason that it is necessary to act upstream of the problem in reducing the number of vehicles in circulation.


ZyppO wrote:

The speed regulation and signaling panels have not decreased since their introduction 40 years ago, however what has decreased accidents is the awareness of the danger by the media, traffic information, meteorology, the quality of materials, braking, tires, windows, glasses, lighthouses, passive safety, but still rescue, also in hospitals with technology, roads and highways, new vehicle cheaper, traffic jams in cities and low speed , the price, the number of unemployed without a car, the list is long, but what you say seems unfair to me. You almost seem to say everything is better than expected thanks to the policies ..

Of course, there are co-factors that have made it possible to reduce the number of deaths: advanced medicine, increased prices at the pump, traffic information, passive safety, carpooling etc.
Nevertheless, the policy of prevention, deterrence and repression has been proven to be a fact.
A seatbelt is good ... on terms of putting it.
The crash test has allowed the development of shock-absorbing box, that's good, but beyond 100km / h physics brings us back to reality!
But all this is not a panacea, it will never be repeated enough: better prevention than cure!

It is for this reason that the best way to travel is to reduce at the source the need for transportation through proximity and natural means.

[Christophe]

Of course, there are co-factors that have made it possible to reduce the number of deaths: advanced medicine, increased prices at the pump, traffic information, passive safety, carpooling etc.
Nevertheless, the policy of prevention, deterrence and repression has been proven to be a fact.

We agree lol! We have obviously written our 2 messages at the same time!