deacdiggler
"Well known member"
- Joined
- Mar 28, 2011
- Messages
- 23,883
- Reaction score
- 11,908
I see 2. One high and one low.
For one thing you have 4 lanes of traffic but only one that goes straight through.
Only the bridge one can be continuous. I believe the "at grade" one has to cycle for pedestrian/bicycle traffic which are the outter lanes. It would cost a lot of quid.ya but it would be a continuous flow, no stopping for lights
That traffic flow thing also depends on people not being idiots and changing lanes at the last second etc which is a fatal flaw. People will always be idiots.
Only the bridge one can be continuous. I believe the "at grade" one has to cycle for pedestrian/bicycle traffic which are the outter lanes. It would cost a lot of quid.
One concept that is gaining traction for freeway intersections is the "diverging diamond" interchange. Reduces congestion and is cheap (uses existing bridges). There's one in Charlotte somewhere I think.
http://www.divergingdiamond.com
It makes sense, but given the relative lack of traffic at the Poplar Tent and 73 intersections, seems like a waste of money, or a "let's try this somewhere it doesn't matter before doing it at Concord Mills."Concord: http://www.wsoctv.com/news/news/local/diverging-diamond-interchange-open-monday-concord/nhHK9/
Two have opened there in the last 6 months. That one on Poplar Tent, then one right nearby on Hwy 73...I actually drive that every day to work and it is amazing....much quicker/easier.
That traffic flow thing also depends on people not being idiots and changing lanes at the last second etc which is a fatal flaw. People will always be idiots.
Well....yeah. Newtonian/Relativity physics is very well understood and predictive models extremely accurate...on computers that might power your TV remote. Many experiments have been run...like putting shit in orbit and flying to the moon. In this case you're talking about the motion of just 4 entities (asteroid, earth, moon, sun). That's kids play compared to the complexities of climate modeling/science...where you have millions of variables, no ability to test or validate, no understanding of the basic mechanisms occurring, etc. They probably predicted its path to within a few miles of where it traveled.lol, NASA is so confident in their science that we barely heard about an apocalypse rock but they're supposedly way fucking off on climate change.
Well....yeah. Newtonian/Relativity physics is very well understood and predictive models extremely accurate...on computers that might power your TV remote. Many experiments have been run...like putting shit in orbit and flying to the moon. In this case you're talking about the motion of just 4 entities (asteroid, earth, moon, sun). That's kids play compared to the complexities of climate modeling/science...where you have millions of variables, no ability to test or validate, no understanding of the basic mechanisms occurring, etc. They probably predicted its path to within a few miles of where it traveled.
They aren't the same type of predictive model.ohh, got it. predictive models are good, in this case.