Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
HIGHWAY : 2,000 cars per lane / hr
. . . 4 lanes = 8,000 cars per hour
. . . 24 hour period : 192,000
. . . assume 4 passengers per car: 768,000
TRAIN : 25,000 passengers per track / hr
. . . 2 track = 50,000 passengers per hour
. . . 24 hour period : 1,200,000
(Much more if a larger capacity train is used, or on a 4 track system)
AIRPLANE : 853 passengers on Airbus A380
. . . assuming 800 flights / day : 682,400
CRUISE SHIP: 7,144 passengers on Oasis of the Sea
Conclusion: Evacuation by train is the winner.
* efficient * economical * comfortable * scalable *
NO traffic jams, NO running out of fuel, NO traffic accidents.
Train... Each AmTrak Passenger Car holds about 70 People, to do 25,000 per hour you would need around 350 Cars + the power units. Just two hours of trains would use the entire national inventory of cars. So it all went well you might be able to move out about 80,000 passengers. You have to allow time to get somewhere and back from Miami up to Savannah GA is a 12 hour OneWay Trip.
Stations are not setup to Move 25,000 people per hour thru it. You could not load and go fast the cars that would fit at the station to move 25,000 People and bags thru.
Airplanes. No US carrier run A380's. Very Few Airport can handle the A380. It takes about 1hr to load the passenger onto a A380 (We are not even talking about how long it would take to clear that many thru TSA). You would need to "Depart" a A380 about every two minutes. to run 800 flights a in one day. At Best There might be 2 A380 Gate, and a number of WideBody Gates (90 minute load times), that could be used.
Train... Each AmTrak Passenger Car holds about 70 People, to do 25,000 per hour you would need around 350 Cars + the power units.
You're making the wrong assumption.
And your capacity calculations reflect it.
Take a PCC street car, for example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PCC_streetcar
Capacity : 52-61 seats.
(Not counting standing capacity, which is 90+ crush load)
Self powered - no power unit required.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light_rail
. . . (streetcar) trains are usually limited by city block lengths to about four 180-passenger vehicles (720 passengers).
. . . Light rail vehicles can travel in multi-car trains carrying a theoretical ridership up to 20,000 passengers per hour.
More advanced systems with separate rights-of-way using moving block signaling can exceed 25,000 passengers per hour per track.
. . . . . . . The Ghan, the longest passenger train in the world stretches further with more carriages | Daily Mail Online
The world's longest passenger train,the Ghan, consists of 44 carriages and two locomotives, The Ghan's Sunday service headed for Darwin at a total length of 3,600ft (0.7miles) (approx 15 city blocks).
. . . . . . . https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Longest_trains
Conventional freight trains in the US can average nearly 2,000 metres (6,600 ft). (approx 28 city blocks)
. . . . . . .
Excluding box-car accommodations, it is entirely feasible to move the mega-masses by electric traction rail.
As to the rolling stock, if we hadn't suffered the dismantling of the electric urban and interurban mass transit system, it would not have been out of the question for neighboring areas to send their excess capacity to help evacuate a multitude. Thus one would have not only heavy rail passenger trains, but interurban and urban self propelled cars.
Thought experiment
Assuming a staging area that was 100 city blocks in length (x 720 passengers), we would embark 72,000 passengers in that area. (400 cars)
Assuming a headway of 15 minutes per train herd : 288,000 passengers per hour or 6,912,000 per 24 hour period.
ONE ONE TRACK.
It would be a logistical challenge, but not out of the question.
Last edited by jetgraphics; 09-08-2017 at 10:23 PM..
.....and we're back to the cars again. Maybe if all the lanes on 75 and 95 were northbound only?
The maximum flow of traffic is approximately 2,000 vehicles per hour per lane.
Assuming a passenger load of 4 per vehicle, comes to 8,000 passengers per hour per lane.
To match 25,000 passengers per hour per track, would require over 3 lanes.
If the vehicles had only 2 passengers (a couple) per vehicle, that would jump to over 6 lanes.
If single occupancy, it would take over 12 lanes.
(The general rule is that a single track has the equivalent carrying capacity of 9 lanes of superhighway)
The flip side - a four track system can carry 100,000 passengers per hour, which would require 36 lanes of superhighway.
An example of a four track network: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_City_Subway
6,407 train cars
Daily ridership: 5,655,755 (weekdays, 2016); 5,758,201 (weekends, 2016)
Daily load of 899 per car; or 38 per car per hour on average.
Imagine if NYC had to cope with automobiles moving 5.7 million people per day on its streets?
G r i d l o c k
One might conclude that it is imperative that the USA get "back on track" to deal with the inevitable population growth and increased population density of its cities. We can't just keep expanding roads and highways and superhighways.
Oh, and let's not forget that steel wheel on steel rail has a 20:1 fuel advantage over rubber tire on pavement. (95% savings in fuel)
Americans have no interest in that lifestyle. No need to be locked up in a smelly box shoulder to shoulder with strangers for no reason. And there is no demand for it, either.
We have no energy shortage but we do have a shortage of taxpayers who would even fund the thing and keep it in the black - without a single benefit.
People who choose to live in dense stacked Urban settings can live with that choice.
And yes now that Florida has hit 20 million people we don't need any more transplants here to escape the high taxes they paid elsewhere and to look at palm trees.
I suggest you take a look at the existing rail network which is never sold out as it is.
Americans have no interest in that lifestyle. [PERHAPS] No need to be locked up in a smelly box shoulder to shoulder with strangers for no reason. [Referring to a specific transit system?] And there is no demand for it, either. [Plenty of demand - just not political demand.]
We have no energy shortage but we do have a shortage of taxpayers who would even fund the thing and keep it in the black - without a single benefit. [I prefer private enterprise. And there IS a fuel shortage, or do you think that oil imports are for some other thing.]
People who choose to live in dense stacked Urban settings can live with that choice. [As long as the world population keeps doubling every 40-50 years, there isn't an alternative, if agricultural land must also double.]
And yes now that Florida has hit 20 million people we don't need any more transplants here to escape the high taxes they paid elsewhere and to look at palm trees. [And you come to that conclusion by what?]
I suggest you take a look at the existing rail network which is never sold out as it is.
If you are referring to the AMTRAK passenger rail network, yes, it is pitiful. It takes a government to foul up the most efficient form of land transport.
You may not be aware, but before the advent of public subsidy of the competition (automobiles - petroleum - pavement), privately owned electric traction rail transit accounted for 90% of all travel, urban and interurban. (Not including steam powered "heavy" rail passenger service that never made a profit)
But everyone believes that Americans freely chose the automobile (and all the costs that come with it) over the far cheaper rail transport... and its nickel fare.
The truth is deeply buried since there are many guilty parties that deliberately killed America's once great rail network (which had more track miles and rolling stock than any other country).
> Government subsidized the competition, while taxing rail. (Rail companies had to pay property taxes, while cars and buses traveled upon tax payer subsidized roads)
> Government froze fares, which prevented the rail companies from passing on higher taxes and overhead expenses to their customers, as did all other businesses.
> Government regulations and restrictions added costs (streetcar companies had to maintain any paved road their tracks ran on or crossed, at their expense).
Then as the companies went bust, or were bought up by conspirators, they were further crippled to turn public sentiment against them and their rights of way were torn up so they could never ever come back.
If you want to know why, just inquire as to how much of your yearly budget goes to ownership, upkeep, insurance, fuel, parking, taxes, etc for the automobile, and also check out how much of the GDP is expended to support that form of transport.
If Americans shifted to a transport system that would slash fuel costs by 90% (and effectively wipe out all those who got wealthy by subterfuge), you can understand their reluctance.
In 1963, Alweg proposed to the city of Los Angeles a monorail system that would be designed, built, operated and maintained by Alweg. Alweg promised to take all financial risk from the construction, and the system would be repaid through fares collected. The City Council rejected the proposal in favor of no transit at all. (thanks to Standard Oil)
....
It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out Americans were punked.
.....and we're back to the cars again. Maybe if all the lanes on 75 and 95 were northbound only?
People complained about not doing that sooner but SCOTT said they had to have way to move gasoline into the southern part of the state to keep stations supplied for those doing normal work, first responders staying and to supply those going north...
One big problem to me being from another state is that none of the interstates in FL have access lanes that follow the interstate all the way from one exit to another
You get off at intersections and you have access lanes TO the interstates but nothing between
In Texas you can drive along the side of most interstates and most in cities at least are 3 lanes--
There are lights at intersections but still you can have longer lights allowing traffic flowing north and then allow cross traffic to merge with north bound
You can even do that on toll roads--w/o paying tolls...it is just not as fast because of intersection traffic lights
That was another issue with people coming onto freeways from areas--
They had to wait in LONG lines to get through intersection and merge w/northbound traffic...
If you are referring to the AMTRAK passenger rail network, yes, it is pitiful. It takes a government to foul up the most efficient form of land transport.
You may not be aware, but before the advent of public subsidy of the competition (automobiles - petroleum - pavement), privately owned electric traction rail transit accounted for 90% of all travel, urban and interurban. (Not including steam powered "heavy" rail passenger service that never made a profit)
But everyone believes that Americans freely chose the automobile (and all the costs that come with it) over the far cheaper rail transport... and its nickel fare.
The truth is deeply buried since there are many guilty parties that deliberately killed America's once great rail network (which had more track miles and rolling stock than any other country).
> Government subsidized the competition, while taxing rail. (Rail companies had to pay property taxes, while cars and buses traveled upon tax payer subsidized roads)
> Government froze fares, which prevented the rail companies from passing on higher taxes and overhead expenses to their customers, as did all other businesses.
> Government regulations and restrictions added costs (streetcar companies had to maintain any paved road their tracks ran on or crossed, at their expense).
Then as the companies went bust, or were bought up by conspirators, they were further crippled to turn public sentiment against them and their rights of way were torn up so they could never ever come back.
If you want to know why, just inquire as to how much of your yearly budget goes to ownership, upkeep, insurance, fuel, parking, taxes, etc for the automobile, and also check out how much of the GDP is expended to support that form of transport.
If Americans shifted to a transport system that would slash fuel costs by 90% (and effectively wipe out all those who got wealthy by subterfuge), you can understand their reluctance.
In 1963, Alweg proposed to the city of Los Angeles a monorail system that would be designed, built, operated and maintained by Alweg. Alweg promised to take all financial risk from the construction, and the system would be repaid through fares collected. The City Council rejected the proposal in favor of no transit at all. (thanks to Standard Oil)
....
It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out Americans were punked.
In Texas where we have second/primary home, our state Govt for decades has had strong GOP presence
They don't like to spend money on infrastructure by taxing
They go into "partnerships" with companies to build toll roads to help with traffic congestion in various cities
Houston, Dallas, Austin, San Antonio all have some form of private toll road that has some financial connection to the state but the state doesn't really get the financial return as the private company
PEOPLE who use the tolls have already paid taxes to the state to support highway construction then they pay their tolls when they use the roads and that money goes to the private companies..the state normally guarantees a certain return on the construction funding...
One road built east of Austin was so lightly traveled that the company was losing money---and I think the state was forced to take it back from the private company...
so toll roads are often marketed to voters as the "new" "better" way to save them money because taxes are not raised to pay for construction bonds to finance are lied to....because when tolls collected and other tax money pay off the bonds then the roads can either be turned into a "free" freeway or stay a toll road and add to the state's coffers...
When the tolls pay off the roads constructed through private financing the company OWNERS continue to be enriched by the drivers paying tolls...and the state often has no power to make them update and maintain the roads because they are private roads basically...
In Texas where we have second/primary home, our state Govt for decades has had strong GOP presence
They don't like to spend money on infrastructure by taxing
They go into "partnerships" with companies to build toll roads to help with traffic congestion in various cities
Houston, Dallas, Austin, San Antonio all have some form of private toll road that has some financial connection to the state but the state doesn't really get the financial return as the private company
PEOPLE who use the tolls have already paid taxes to the state to support highway construction then they pay their tolls when they use the roads and that money goes to the private companies..the state normally guarantees a certain return on the construction funding...
One road built east of Austin was so lightly traveled that the company was losing money---and I think the state was forced to take it back from the private company...
so toll roads are often marketed to voters as the "new" "better" way to save them money because taxes are not raised to pay for construction bonds to finance are lied to....because when tolls collected and other tax money pay off the bonds then the roads can either be turned into a "free" freeway or stay a toll road and add to the state's coffers...
When the tolls pay off the roads constructed through private financing the company OWNERS continue to be enriched by the drivers paying tolls...and the state often has no power to make them update and maintain the roads because they are private roads basically...
It's even worse than you can imagine.
The federal and state governments collect around 46.6 cents in tax for each gallon of on-highway diesel fuel and 40.6 cents for each gallon gasoline.
Commercial trucks make up only 10.6% of all registered vehicles, but pay 33.7% or $31.3 billion in combined federal and state highway-user taxes.
Commercial truck taxes average nearly $16,000 per vehicle.
BUT
Road damage is roughly proportional to the fourth power of the axle load. A 20,000 lb axle causes 16 times as much damage as a 10,000 axle, and 160,000 times as much damage as a 1,000 lb axle (wider tires mitigate the effect slightly). 99% of the traffic damage to roads and highways comes from trucks and buses, while only 33.7% of the cost is borne by them.
It's a giant game of SHIFT the cost to the other guy who can't object.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
