daily menu » rate the banner | guess the city | one on oneforums map | privacy policy | DMCA | news magazine | posting guidelines

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > Infrastructure and Mobility Forums > Highways & Autobahns

Highways & Autobahns All about automobility



Global Announcement

As a general reminder, please respect others and respect copyrights. Go here to familiarize yourself with our posting policy.


Reply

 
Thread Tools
Old December 23rd, 2008, 01:24 PM   #261
hkskyline
Hong Kong
 
hkskyline's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 86,955
Likes (Received): 18216

Quote:
Originally Posted by kokanee2 View Post
On the Trans Canada Highway between Banff, AB and Lake Louise, AB, there are a two to three overhead wild-life crossings, and as I understand all highway bridges have been set up as under-grade crossings.

http://www.cpawscalgary.org/campaign...erformance.php
A 26-kilometre, $972-million road project in B.C.
6 August 2008
The Globe and Mail

As Prime Minister Stephen Harper yesterday announced $100-million to widen a 14-kilometre stretch of the Trans-Canada Highway through Banff National Park, another major highway twinning project is under way in neighbouring British Columbia.

The roadway through the Kicking Horse Canyon, east of Golden, B.C., is a narrow, winding, two-lane highway that hasn't had a major facelift since it was built in the 1950s.

As with the road that cuts through Banff park, this section of the Trans-Canada Highway is being widened to four lanes.

Combined, the two construction projects are designed to make driving safer and more efficient, while improving trade ties, officials say.

The B.C. government said that revitalizing this portion of the highway – a link to the province's ports and southern routes – will strengthen Asia-Pacific trade through the Pacific Gateway, and increase tourist travel.

The route carries more than 10,000 vehicles a day during the summer.

The 26-kilometre Kicking Horse Canyon Project not only involves highway widening, but also involves reducing sharp curves and steep grades and replacing narrow bridges.

The first two phases, jointly funded by the province and Ottawa, involved replacing the Yoho National Park 3.2-kilometre bridge and another 5.8-kilometre bridge.

Both replacements have been completed.

The government estimates that changing the entire 26-kilometre stretch will cost $972-million.

***

KICKING HORSE PASS

Posing significant construction, maintenance and operational challenges, Kicking horse Pass has not had major improvements since it was built in the 1950s.

Now, the highway is being upgraded to a modern, four-lane standard with an expected speed limit of 100 km/hour to move traffic more safely and efficiently. The total cost is estimated at $972-million.

***

PHASE 1: complete Yoho Bridge

Distance: 3.2 km

***

PHASE 2: complete Park Bridge

Distance 5.8 km

***

PHASE 3 (segments 1-3): in design

Golden Hill to West Portal

Distance: 8.6 km

***

PHASE 3 (segment 4): in design

Brake check to Yoho Park

Distance: 8.8km

***

Safe passage

To reduce the number of wildlife-vehicle collisions, a number of animal-crossing systems have been introduced around Banff.

***Elliptical, metal culvert underpass

***Prefabricated concrete box tunnel

***Open-span concrete bridge underpass

***Wildlife overpass
__________________
Hong Kong Photo Gallery - Click Here for the Hong Kong Galleries

World Photo Gallery - | St. Petersburg, Russia | Pyongyang | Tokyo | Istanbul | Dubai | Shanghai | Mumbai | Bangkok | Sydney

New York, London, Prague, Iceland, Rocky Mountains, Angkor Wat, Sri Lanka, Poland, Myanmar, and much more!
hkskyline no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old January 8th, 2009, 05:37 PM   #262
hkskyline
Hong Kong
 
hkskyline's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 86,955
Likes (Received): 18216

UN backs conference on global road safety in Russia next year

UNITED NATIONS, March 31, 2008 (AFP) - The UN General Assembly on Monday approved by consensus a resolution welcoming Russia's offer to host the first ministerial conference on road safety next year with the aim of curbing the global epidemic of road deaths.

The resolution, sponsored by more than 40 countries, also urged member states "to actively participate in the development of the global road safety status report being prepared by the World Health Organization (WHO)."

Each year, more than 1.2 million people die and 50 million are injured in road crashes.

"Failure to act could not only double the number by 2020, but would see injuries from road traffic placed at the third highest contributor to the global burden of disease and injuries," Slovenia's UN Ambassador Sanja Stiglic told the assembly, speaking on behalf of the 27-member European Union.

She noted that many of these deaths are preventable since road crashes and injuries are mainly caused "by drunk-driving, lack of helmet use, seat belt non-compliance, excessive speed and poor infrastruture design and management."

"I am delighted that the UN has today recognized the scale of human suffering and economic loss caused by road traffic deaths and injuries," said George Robertson, chairman of the Commission for Global Road Safety, which first proposed a global conference in 2006.

"Now we must ensure that the UN conference is not just another talking shop, but secures real commitments and takes real action to reverse the tide of global road deaths," said Robertson, a former NATO Secretary General and former British Defense Secretary.

The resolution hailed the Russian government's offer to host, at an unspecified date in 2009, and "provide the necessary financial report" for a the conference that is to bring together delegations of ministers and representatives dealing with transport, health, education, safety and related traffic law enforcement issues.

Writing in The Washingon Post Monday, Norman Mineta, a former US transportation secretary and currently honorary chairman of Make Roads Safe, the Campaign for Global Road Safety in North America, highlighted a "widening gap" in road safety between rich and poor nations.

He touted the success of highway safety programs in countries such as Sweden, the Netherlands and Australia, largely due to sustained political commitment to the use of seat belts and motorcycle helmets, curbing speeding and drunk driving and investment in safer road and vehicle designs.

"If current trends continue and we leave developing nations to turn this around by themselves, as many as 100 million lives worldwide could be lost to road injuries before this epidemic begins to reverse course," Mineta wrote.

"Countries struggling to meet the UN (poverty-reducing) Millenium Development Goals cannot afford the losses in human and economic potential that these deaths represent, especially when the means to stop this disaster are at hand," Mineta added.
__________________
Hong Kong Photo Gallery - Click Here for the Hong Kong Galleries

World Photo Gallery - | St. Petersburg, Russia | Pyongyang | Tokyo | Istanbul | Dubai | Shanghai | Mumbai | Bangkok | Sydney

New York, London, Prague, Iceland, Rocky Mountains, Angkor Wat, Sri Lanka, Poland, Myanmar, and much more!
hkskyline no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 23rd, 2009, 09:27 PM   #263
ElviS77
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 564
Likes (Received): 54

How to improve road safety...

As the debate on the speed limit thread threatened to get way off topic, I thought I'd start a more suitable thread for all traffic-safety related issues. I didn't find any such thread, so here goes...

First, a disclaimer. I like driving fast, I'm not particularly good at paying attention to rural speed limits, I hate most of our 60 zones (there are quite a few up here...), I love all foreign motorways where a restricted Norwegian can open up... but still, I realise that in order to fight the plague of road fatalities, one needs to try something different. The Swedish "Zero Killed Vision" (adopted in Norway as well) does just that. The goal isn't just a 10, 25, 40 or 50 % reduction, but to aim for no traffic fatalities at all.

As I've said several times in the speed limit thread, 70 kph is the highest speed at which you can expect to survive a head-on crash. Thus, that's the limit one should introduce on bidirectional 2-lane roads. But there are more to this. They propose central crash barriers, more motorways, better guardrails, improved terrain features along the roadside... It's pretty obvious that without such measures, the 70 kph zones are nowhere near adequate. But they're needed, too.

However, even before we get into a serious no-fatalities-mode, there are things to be done. In addition to the aforementioned, bike and pedestrian paths separate from the road makes sense, as does over- and underpasses. T and X junctions can be replaced by roundabouts or, on busier sections, trumpets or diamonds, variable speed limits might make sense... I'll be back with more comments and suggestions, feel free to contribute.
ElviS77 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 23rd, 2009, 09:56 PM   #264
ChrisZwolle
Road user
 
ChrisZwolle's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Zwolle
Posts: 43,623
Likes (Received): 19413

Quote:
The goal isn't just a 10, 25, 40 or 50 % reduction, but to aim for no traffic fatalities at all.
Those guys who invented that lack realism...

In the Netherlands, annually 81.000 people are hospitalized after work-related accidents, yet we don't ban working? Understand me, every road fatality is one too much, but it just happens.
ChrisZwolle no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 23rd, 2009, 10:14 PM   #265
Verso
Islander
 
Verso's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Ljubljana
Posts: 22,087
Likes (Received): 4749

Agree with Chris.
Verso no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 23rd, 2009, 10:56 PM   #266
RawLee
Registered User
 
RawLee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Budapest
Posts: 9,447
Likes (Received): 1083

Quote:
Originally Posted by ElviS77 View Post
As I've said several times in the speed limit thread, 70 kph is the highest speed at which you can expect to survive a head-on crash. Thus, that's the limit one should introduce on bidirectional 2-lane roads. But there are more to this. They propose central crash barriers, more motorways, better guardrails, improved terrain features along the roadside... It's pretty obvious that without such measures, the 70 kph zones are nowhere near adequate. But they're needed, too.
But if you remove the chance of getting hit by a coming car,then the 70 safety speed also gets higher. If you go with 70,and the other car comes with 70 also,that means a collision at 140. So to have a similar impact with terrain or a car going in the same direction,one would have to have a speed difference of 140.
(0 vs 140 in case of terrain, x vs x+140 in case of an other car).
RawLee no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 23rd, 2009, 11:01 PM   #267
ElviS77
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 564
Likes (Received): 54

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisZwolle View Post
Those guys who invented that lack realism...
No, they seriously don't, but they do have a massive job ahead of them, not least to convince all doubters like you guys. Remember, when one finally got seat belt laws in place, fatalities dropped by a third (at least in Norway). Around 1970, more than 500 were killed on Norwegian roads annually, currently we're at 250 - even though traffic volumes have at least quadrupled. So if you're willing to make long-term plans and long-term commitments, these ideas aren't merely flights of fancy.

Another thing, worse for the speed lobby, is that governments might just take a much more severe stand in a few years and use technology. It's very possible to make computers overrule drivers, I prefer to be allowed to do most of my driving unassisted.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisZwolle View Post
In the Netherlands, annually 81.000 people are hospitalized after work-related accidents, yet we don't ban working? Understand me, every road fatality is one too much, but it just happens.
No, there's always one or more reasons. More often than not, speeds higher than the road conditions can take are involved. As for the work-related accidents, I don't know a single Norwegian work place which doesn't aim for zero injuries. I would be really surprised if the Dutch are very different in this respect...

Besides, this thread is not intended only to deal with the Swedish vision of truly safe roads. Which methods are effective and/or cost-effective? Which are less useful? Which are pointless? In short, how can we improve statistics further.
ElviS77 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 23rd, 2009, 11:04 PM   #268
ChrisZwolle
Road user
 
ChrisZwolle's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Zwolle
Posts: 43,623
Likes (Received): 19413

You will always keep people not paying attention or driving recklessly, no matter what kind of things you design or traffic laws are in operation... People will drive with alcohol in their blood, or with drugs.

Really, a zero-fatality traffic is an utopia... Only tiny countries like Liechtenstein or San Marino can reach that.
ChrisZwolle no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 23rd, 2009, 11:05 PM   #269
ElviS77
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 564
Likes (Received): 54

Quote:
Originally Posted by RawLee View Post
But if you remove the chance of getting hit by a coming car,then the 70 safety speed also gets higher. If you go with 70,and the other car comes with 70 also,that means a collision at 140. So to have a similar impact with terrain or a car going in the same direction,one would have to have a speed difference of 140.
(0 vs 140 in case of terrain, x vs x+140 in case of an other car).
Absolutely. As I've said all along, the 70 limit from the Zero Killed Vision deals with undivided 2-lane highways, not 1+1/2+1 highways with a central barrier or motorways. Some Swedish motorways have seen the limit raised to 120 lately, even though safety is a major concern.
ElviS77 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 23rd, 2009, 11:09 PM   #270
ElviS77
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 564
Likes (Received): 54

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisZwolle View Post
You will always keep people not paying attention or driving recklessly, no matter what kind of things you design or traffic laws are in operation... People will drive with alcohol in their blood, or with drugs.

Really, a zero-fatality traffic is an utopia... Only tiny countries like Liechtenstein or San Marino can reach that.
One should still aim for such figures. Besides, a Big Brother-style highway management system would remove concerns regarding speeding, reckless, drunk or drugged drivers... but of course also all fun in driving. It might just happen, and that would be really bad.
ElviS77 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 23rd, 2009, 11:31 PM   #271
phattonez
Bleed Dodger Blue
 
phattonez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: The City of Angels
Posts: 1,773
Likes (Received): 38

Quote:
Originally Posted by ElviS77 View Post
One should still aim for such figures. Besides, a Big Brother-style highway management system would remove concerns regarding speeding, reckless, drunk or drugged drivers... but of course also all fun in driving. It might just happen, and that would be really bad.
The only way to have completely safe environments is to remove all responsibility and treat everyone like children. Frankly, I'm not a child and damn if I'm going to be treated like one.
__________________
“Violence is not necessary to destroy a civilization. Each civilization dies from
indifference toward the unique values which created it.” - Nicolás Gómez Dávila

"A wicked man puts up a bold front, but an upright man gives thought to his ways." - Proverbs 21: 29
phattonez no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 24th, 2009, 05:00 AM   #272
Verso
Islander
 
Verso's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Ljubljana
Posts: 22,087
Likes (Received): 4749

Quote:
Originally Posted by ElviS77 View Post
Remember, when one finally got seat belt laws in place, fatalities dropped by a third (at least in Norway). Around 1970, more than 500 were killed on Norwegian roads annually, currently we're at 250 - even though traffic volumes have at least quadrupled. So if you're willing to make long-term plans and long-term commitments, these ideas aren't merely flights of fancy.
It's not so hard to lower the number of deaths by some new method, when the number is high, but when it's already low, that will be hard to accomplish. Maybe you think numbers are still high in developed countries, but unless you prohibit driving or make another radical decision, I doubt you'll lower them significantly. As for cars driving all by themselves, I'm all for it (it wouldn't be fun any more though).
Verso no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 24th, 2009, 09:56 AM   #273
Robosteve
Registered User
 
Robosteve's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Sydney
Posts: 376
Likes (Received): 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by phattonez View Post
The only way to have completely safe environments is to remove all responsibility and treat everyone like children. Frankly, I'm not a child and damn if I'm going to be treated like one.
I disagree. That's largely how the government treats drivers here, with excessively low speed limits that don't leave it up to the individual to drive to conditions, zero blood alcohol tolerance for the first three years of driving and signs which say things such as "New Work, No Lines Marked - Do Not Overtake Unless Safe".

I think the best way to improve traffic safety is to do the opposite; drop regulations such as speed limits in rural areas and introduce a proper driver training program as part of the public education system, to give drivers the skills they need to decide for themselves what is and isn't safe.

Of course, some regulations are strictly necessary - the basics such as which side of the road to drive on and to stop at a red traffic light - but does a 2x2 freeway with smooth curves, a wide median and several kilometres between each junction really need a 110 km/h speed limit? (There are at least three examples of this near Sydney, because apparently the NSW state government has decided that nobody can safely handle a car going any faster than 110.) Or, indeed, any speed limit at all?
Robosteve no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 24th, 2009, 10:14 AM   #274
rene154
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 465
Likes (Received): 113

Quote:
Originally Posted by RawLee View Post
So to have a similar impact with terrain or a car going in the same direction,one would have to have a speed difference of 140.
That's not true. If you hit a car of about the same mass with 70 km/h head on, you have the SAME distance to come to a full standstill as in the situation where you hit a tree. It's all about the distance you have to loose the kinetic energy.
rene154 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 24th, 2009, 12:06 PM   #275
Total
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 46
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by rene154 View Post
That's not true. If you hit a car of about the same mass with 70 km/h head on, you have the SAME distance to come to a full standstill as in the situation where you hit a tree. It's all about the distance you have to loose the kinetic energy.

I must disagree, to put it complicated: if the speed vectors are parallel but have opposite directions, the difference in speed is sum of the absolute vector values (if the mass of both cars is the same...)

Or simple: it is not same if the tree is standing or rushing to you at 70 kph. If it is standing it is waiting for you to hit it, if it is not, when you start the crash, it is still going towards you and you have less distance to loose the kinetic energy.
Total no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 24th, 2009, 12:09 PM   #276
H123Laci
BANNED
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Budapest, HUN
Posts: 1,647
Likes (Received): 3

Quote:
Originally Posted by ElviS77 View Post
The goal isn't just a 10, 25, 40 or 50 % reduction, but to aim for no traffic fatalities at all.
thats easy: handcuff everybody to something very stable and there will be no traffic fatalities at all...

Last edited by H123Laci; March 24th, 2009 at 12:17 PM.
H123Laci no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 24th, 2009, 12:16 PM   #277
H123Laci
BANNED
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Budapest, HUN
Posts: 1,647
Likes (Received): 3

Quote:
Originally Posted by Total View Post
I Or simple: it is not same if the tree is standing or rushing to you at 70 kph. If it is standing it is waiting for you to hit it, if it is not, when you start the crash, it is still going towards you and you have less distance to loose the kinetic energy.
nope.

a moving tree with the same weight as the car has the same affect as the standing tree...
H123Laci no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 24th, 2009, 12:31 PM   #278
H123Laci
BANNED
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Budapest, HUN
Posts: 1,647
Likes (Received): 3

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisZwolle View Post
You will always keep people not paying attention or driving recklessly, no matter what kind of things you design or traffic laws are in operation... People will drive with alcohol in their blood, or with drugs.
yeah.
and dont forget the suicides... which can be done (and hide) by "traffic accident"...
H123Laci no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 24th, 2009, 12:55 PM   #279
Total
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 46
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by H123Laci View Post
nope.

a moving tree with the same weight as the car has the same affect as the standing tree...
So... if moving tree and standing tree have same effect...

I am in my car, standing, in neutral, with brakes on (just to be detailed), and tree hits me with 70 kph... nothing happened?

Or lets say i am in a car moving at 30 kph, and hit a car head-on that was driving in opposite direction with speed of 70 kph it is same as i hit standing tree with 30 kph?!?

I mean, for non-relativistic speed, you can look situation of head on collision from perspective of side beholder (each object has its speed) or from perspective of one object, where other object is only moving with sum speed of both speeds the side beholder sees... (i guess there is simpler way of explaining it)

But all in all, we agree you have to get rid of kinetic energy which is: (m*v^2)/2... or i am wrong from that point?

Last edited by Total; March 24th, 2009 at 01:59 PM.
Total no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 24th, 2009, 01:31 PM   #280
H123Laci
BANNED
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Budapest, HUN
Posts: 1,647
Likes (Received): 3

Quote:
Originally Posted by Total View Post
I am in my car, standing, in neutral, with brakes on (just to be detailed), and tree hits me with 70 kph... nothing happened?
the result is mainly depends on the attitude of the tree...

here is a demonstration vidio...
H123Laci no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Related topics on SkyscraperCity


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 10:40 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us | privacy policy | DMCA policy

tech management by Sysprosium