Oh, you wanted to get off the train? Tough shit, GPS is out.
-
Oh, nevermind, I see we're back to your silly notions again.
I think we all know you've got at least a three-onion-a-week habit. I wouldn't be surprised if you bought canes in bulk at Sam's Club.
-
You misunderstand; once the piggyback is stationary, the passengers move into the big train for the duration of their journey; they move back to the piggyback unit when they want to get off.
Yeah, I got that, but it seems like a wildly bad idea for all kinds of reasons. Not the least of which are that you have to have your stations quite far apart, or else, given the big train doesn't stop, you've got a real short window for people to make the transition without getting cut in half.
-
a wildly bad idea
QFT
make the transition without getting cut in half
What on earth are you talking about? More likely is that you'll have problems with people missing their chance to move, or being part way because they're a bit slow at moving around (and their zimmer frame gets stuck easily and …)
The actual station need not be on the line that the main train takes, of course. Having multiple routes through a station is relatively simple and not too expensive in terms of land or engineering costs.
-
What on earth are you talking about?
Look, if the lower train doesn't stop, and someone's halfway through the hole in the roof when the upper car detaches, what do you think is going to happen?
I'm not sure there's a reasonable safeguard, if you're not willing to accept the idea that it's OK to occasionally make a passenger modular, so I predict this will never happen.
-
I'm not sure there's a reasonable safeguard
I remember once hearing of an invention called a 'door'; apparently, when it's open, you can go through it, but when it's closed, you can't. I've even heard tell of a 'door' that can be 'locked'…It's amazing how far technology has come…
-
I'm not sure there's a reasonable safeguard
There is: can't detach while the hatch is open, which a relatively simple physical interlock to implement, and the closing of the hatch will be impossible with a person in the gap (again, we know how to do that). The danger then becomes one of a person who won't/can't get out of the gap and the piggyback not being able to detach on schedule. But that's not so different from the issues you have with running a passenger service on time anyway.
Except with much more complex engineering and more expense. Won't ever happen.
-
I remember once hearing of an invention called a 'door'; apparently, when it's open, you can go through it, but when it's closed, you can't. I've even heard tell of a 'door' that can be 'locked'…
That's great, except you can't close the door when there's a person in the doorway, so I guess you'll have to skip detaching the upper car, meaning anyone who was planning on getting off at the next stop gets a free ride past wherever they were going.
-
OK, now you're just being obtuse
-
But that's not so different from the issues you have with running a passenger service on time anyway.
As I was typing while your post came through, that means the upper car is going to go an extra stop or more. I hope there's room for it at the next station, and of course, you have to decide you don't care how many people get delayed because they got taken too far.
Oh, and have fun dealing with teenagers deciding to use this safety feature to DoS the train! To avoid that you'll probably put a cop on every car.
Except with much more complex engineering and more expense. Won't ever happen.
Yeah, I think that was my point. It seems like a pretty cool idea, but a few seconds of thought unveils a host of problems.
-
OK, now you're just being obtuse
NO YOU'RE BEING OBTUSE!
Seriously, I can't tell if you're missing my point or going for humor, but I'm assuming the latter.
Imagine jerkwad teenagers standing in the stairwell to prevent the upper car from detaching. What happens when you get to the next stop? Hope you built it big enough for more than two upper cars, and that you don't have a jerkwad on the NEXT one trying the same trick.
-
Oh, I'm with you on the practicalities of that train design, but you're not really describing a problem that doesn't exist in some form on current trains either. Yet it never seems to be a significant issue.
-
you're not really describing a problem that doesn't exist in some form on current trains either.
Yes, but in a much weaker form. This idea seems much more likely to be able to cause problems. Perhaps the guy who thought it up is a devotee of an obscure, ancient religion that practices human sacrifice. Think of it like that tower in Ghostbusters.
-
you're not really describing a problem that doesn't exist in some form on current trains either
You can't wait in a train door before it gets to a station in such a way that the train is prevented from stopping or opening its doors. Even if you block the door, the others can open and people have a chance to move to the next exit
-
But you can wait in a train door once it's open, and since the train can't move until the matter is resolved and the door closed, there's a strong pressure against obstructing the door. Similar logic can be applied to the piggyback train.
-
Similar logic can be applied to the piggyback train.
Except for the physics. Once the hatchway between the upper and lower levels opens, if someone stands athwart it, either he has to be physically moved out of the way, the lower train has to stop, the upper train can't detach--meaning you maybe can't load a new car, either, or you have to let him get cut in half. It all seems very iffy.
You could perhaps prevent this with an elevator. But if the elevator gets stuck, you've got an even worse problem!
-
Again, not debating the practicality of the design! Just addressing that one concern, s'all
-
Heh. I think that one concern is sufficient to prove the _im_practicality of the design.
Also I'm going to tie an onion to my belt so I can gripe about the thing.
-
Look, I work off "proof by pudding".
There's no technology in this proposal we couldn't have built in 1930. Therefore, since we haven't built it yet, it must be shit.
-
There's no technology in this proposal we couldn't have built in 1930. Therefore, since we haven't built it yet, it must be shit.
That's not really any actual disagreement with what I'm saying, but here's an onion for your belt[1] anyway.
[1] It's a Simpson's reference. I wouldn't want you to get confused.
-
if someone stands athwart it ... the lower train has to stop
That is the usual, accepted way that things like this work. Trains already have an emergency stopping function, with a big old placard announcing the size of the fine for improper use next to the button.
-
Correct; they handle the majority of commuter train journeys in and out of London.
Woooah careful with your superlatives there buddy. Thameslink is one of many train operators in London. They no doubt handle a lot of journeys, but "majority"
-
Correct; they handle the majority of commuter train journeys in and out of London.
Majority? No.
They only cover the Midland Mainline as far as Bedford. The rest isn't Thameslink.
The East Coast Mainline? Not Thameslink, and even when they do cover it in the future, only to Peterborough.
West Coast Mainline? Again, no.
-
onion for your belt
Grampa: We can't bust heads like we used to. But we have our ways. One trick is to tell stories that don't go anywhere. Like the time I caught the ferry to Shelbyville. I needed a new heel for m'shoe. So I decided to go to Morganville, which is what they called Shelbyville in those days. So I tied an onion to my belt, which was the style at the time. Now, to take the ferry cost a nickel, and in those days, nickels had pictures of bumblebees on 'em. "Gimme five bees for a quarter," you'd say. Now where were we... oh yeah. The important thing was that I had an onion on my belt, which was the style at the time. I didn't have any white onions, because of the war. The only thing you could get was those big yellow ones...
As someone who doesn't watch simpsons this confused me greatly so i looked it up.... i'm still a little confused but i'm pretty sure i know where you were going now.
-
-
As someone who doesn't watch simpsons this confused me greatly so i looked it up
What've you been doing for the last couple weeks when everyone else was making those jokes?
-
but you're not really describing a problem that doesn't exist in some form on current trains either.
Whaaaat? Other trains have a concept of, "stop at the fucking platform" which gets rid of the inherent problems with this idea.
-
What've you been doing for the last couple weeks when everyone else was making those jokes?
Probably dreaming of Morgy cheese-steaks with fried onions...
yep that's why we'd be taking the ferry to Morganville - for the cheese steaks.
-
FTFY its from a long way back.
still accurate. i don't watch simpsons.... I have seen the treehouse of horror ones btut hat's about it.
What've you been doing for the last couple weeks when everyone else was making those jokes?
skimming probably. i "read" everything but i don't pay too much attention to the discussions that are.... "vigorous arguments" or appear to be heading in that direction.
-
What've you been doing for the last period of time significantly larger than a couple weeks when everyone else was making those jokes?
I'm not sure how long people here have been making those jokes, but it's a lot longer than a couple of weeks.
-
yep that's why we'd be taking the ferry to Morganville - for the cheese steaks.
Is "cheese-steaks" how they used to say "shoe heels" at the time?
-
Is "cheese-steaks" how they used to say "shoe heels" at the time?
Was dur'n the war - steak was mighty tough.
-
Is "cheese-steaks" how they used to say "shoe heels" at the time?
That depends on how overcooked the steaks are.
-
i don't watch simpsons
Gotcha. Well, this particular thing seems to have settled on a meaning similar to accusing someone of being old and confused.
-
Gotcha. Well, this particular thing seems to have settled on a meaning similar to accusing someone of being old and confused.
Wait, what?
-
someone of being old and confused.
more or less what i got from the IMDB quote i used when i first commented on my confusion.
and i may be about to enter my third decade but i am not old galldarnit!
-
Wait, what?
Hasn't it? That wasn't the original intention of the bit, but handing someone an onion for their belt lately seems to be used here similarly to "would you like a cane" or "have you yelled at those kids on your lawn".
-
-
FTFY.
oh six oh two eighty six..... Unless i'm doing my math wrong.... oh.
i was doing my math wrong.
/me waves my cane at @loopback0
gerrof my lawn you and your fancy maths!
-
i may be about to enter my third decade
oh, that episode is from the early 90s so it's prolly older than you then.
-
oh six oh two eighty six
t's prolly older than you then.
not really. i just can't math correctly.
-
I thought it meant you thought I was Experienced, Wise and Cunning.
;)
Status: making up new stories about Morganville.
Real status: :jittery:, coke machine has gone Jefferson Airplane and completely sold out again...
see, you can see I'm really old and wearing an onion because I made a reference to Jefferson Airplane
Filed under: wanted jittery - found
-
Whaaaat? Other trains have a concept of, "stop at the fucking platform" which gets rid of the inherent problems with this idea.
You're not gonna trap me that easily!
@accalia said:and i may be about to enter my third decade but i am not old galldarnit!
Technically, you're about to exit your third decade, and enter your fourth ;)
I know; I've made that journey already…
…and Hanzo'd by @loopback0
-
Did you use 'technically' to try and soften the blow?
-
Did you use 'technically' to try and soften the blow?
Well, I can't be too mean to my queen…
-
I looked this up a while back because I was curious if it had anything to do with the Onion Knight from A Song of Ice and Fire.
Spoiler alert: it doesn't. Unless the Onion Knight was a super sly Simpson's reference in the first place.
-
Unless the Onion Knight was a super sly Simpson's reference in the first place.
Given how the Onion Knight got his name it seems pretty unlikely.
-
Yeah, I got that, but it seems like a wildly bad idea for all kinds of reasons. Not the least of which are that you have to have your stations quite far apart, or else, given the big train doesn't stop, you've got a real short window for people to make the transition without getting cut in half.
If you were getting off at the next stop, you could just loiter in the buggy, no point going downstairs in order to immediately go back upstairs...
-
I'm not sure there's a reasonable safeguard, if you're not willing to accept the idea that it's OK to occasionally make a passenger modular, so I predict this will never happen.
Can't make an omelette without breaking a few eggs...
Mmmm... omelette... brb hungry now...
-
Sure, but if someone else prevents your buggy from getting off at it's stop, then at best, you have to wait until you get to the next one, get off there, wait for the next train in the other direction, and hope that there's no performance artist/suicidal doofus on that train.
Doesn't China have people who set themselves on fire as political protests every once in a while? Imagine a bunch of them getting together and sabotaging every buggy on one line. You could snarl up thousands of people fairly easily, probably, with a dozen or so martyrs.
-
I guess the worst case scenario is that they have to stop the train. Oh noez...