In message , at 18:05:20 on Thu, 17 Aug
2017, Clank remarked:

I'm gonna bet that worldwide more buses have toppled over in the
last 12 months than trams in the last ten years...

While still on the road (remember, leaving the road and hitting a
kerb/barrier doesn't count). And what's the ratio of installed base of
buses vs trams.
--
Roland Perry

In message , at 23:41:14 on
Thu, 17 Aug 2017, remarked:
I'm gonna bet that worldwide more buses have toppled over in the
last 12 months than trams in the last ten years...

While still on the road (remember, leaving the road and hitting a
kerb/barrier doesn't count). And what's the ratio of installed base of
buses vs trams.

Has a bendi bus ever done something like this?
https://www.reddit.com/r/Catastrophi...ls_into_crowd/

Does look somewhat due to over-speed.
--
Roland Perry

On 18.08.2017 12:18 AM, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 18:05:20 on Thu, 17 Aug
2017, Clank remarked:

I'm gonna bet that worldwide more buses have toppled over in the
last 12 months than trams in the last ten years...

While still on the road (remember, leaving the road and hitting a
kerb/barrier doesn't count).

And why is that, pray tell? I presume this means the Croydon tram incident
doesn't count either, since it left the rails and hit an OLE support...

And what's the ratio of installed base of
buses vs trams.

I'm terms of investment to protect the most people, that's irrelevant -
solving the problem of buses rolling will save many more people than
solving the problem of trams rolling.

In message , at 15:23:07 on Fri, 18 Aug
2017, Clank remarked:
On 18.08.2017 12:18 AM, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 18:05:20 on Thu, 17 Aug
2017, Clank remarked:

I'm gonna bet that worldwide more buses have toppled over in the
last 12 months than trams in the last ten years...

While still on the road (remember, leaving the road and hitting a
kerb/barrier doesn't count).

And why is that, pray tell?

The activity being measured is over-speed causing the vehicle (bus or
tram) to topple over. A lot of the KSI in such a situation is caused by
the scraping of the broken windows on the ground/tracks.

I presume this means the Croydon tram incident
doesn't count either, since it left the rails

toppled

and hit an OLE support...

Having slid on its side.

And what's the ratio of installed base of buses vs trams.

I'm terms of investment to protect the most people, that's irrelevant -
solving the problem of buses rolling will save many more people than
solving the problem of trams rolling.

Not if the investment has to be implemented on 1000x times as many
vehicles.

In any event, we are still a little short of reports of buses which
toppled over sideways *while on the road" and taking a curve too fast.

Vehicles leaving the road for a number of reasons, then eventually
hitting some obstacle which unusually toppled them over, will have a
different injury profile. Especially the ones that didn't end up
rolling.
--
Roland Perry

On 18.08.2017 7:00 PM, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 15:23:07 on Fri, 18 Aug
2017, Clank remarked:
On 18.08.2017 12:18 AM, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 18:05:20 on Thu, 17 Aug
2017, Clank remarked:

I'm gonna bet that worldwide more buses have toppled over in the
last 12 months than trams in the last ten years...

While still on the road (remember, leaving the road and hitting a
kerb/barrier doesn't count).

And why is that, pray tell?

The activity being measured is over-speed causing the vehicle (bus or
tram) to topple over. A lot of the KSI in such a situation is caused by
the scraping of the broken windows on the ground/tracks.

I presume this means the Croydon tram incident
doesn't count either, since it left the rails

toppled

and hit an OLE support...

Having slid on its side.

And what's the ratio of installed base of buses vs trams.

I'm terms of investment to protect the most people, that's irrelevant -
solving the problem of buses rolling will save many more people than
solving the problem of trams rolling.

Not if the investment has to be implemented on 1000x times as many
vehicles.

In any event, we are still a little short of reports of buses which
toppled over sideways *while on the road" and taking a curve too fast.

Vehicles leaving the road for a number of reasons, then eventually
hitting some obstacle which unusually toppled them over, will have a
different injury profile. Especially the ones that didn't end up
rolling.

I'm going to ask a question I already know the answer to:

Is your interest in this to,

(A) consider safety recommendations which might have a positive effect on
the rate of injury in public transportation,
(B) to reassure yourself that you're always right and everyone else is wrong
by asserting that it is a scandal that the world did not implement
provisions to guard against a scenario whose definition is entirely within
your whim and will indeed change every time you are challenged?

The corollary question is,

Does your answer make you feel good about yourself and your priorities?



To make you feel comfortable, I will award bonus points for not answering
the question, general obfuscation, and appeal to authority/breeding/former
employers/the Hackney Carriage Licensing Board (Cantab).

In message , at 17:35:34 on Fri, 18 Aug
2017, Clank remarked:
On 18.08.2017 7:00 PM, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 15:23:07 on Fri, 18 Aug
2017, Clank remarked:
On 18.08.2017 12:18 AM, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 18:05:20 on Thu, 17 Aug
2017, Clank remarked:

I'm gonna bet that worldwide more buses have toppled over in the
last 12 months than trams in the last ten years...

While still on the road (remember, leaving the road and hitting a
kerb/barrier doesn't count).

And why is that, pray tell?

The activity being measured is over-speed causing the vehicle (bus or
tram) to topple over. A lot of the KSI in such a situation is caused
by the scraping of the broken windows on the ground/tracks.

I presume this means the Croydon tram incident
doesn't count either, since it left the rails

toppled

and hit an OLE support...

Having slid on its side.

And what's the ratio of installed base of buses vs trams.

I'm terms of investment to protect the most people, that's irrelevant -
solving the problem of buses rolling will save many more people than
solving the problem of trams rolling.

Not if the investment has to be implemented on 1000x times as many
vehicles.

In any event, we are still a little short of reports of buses which
toppled over sideways *while on the road" and taking a curve too fast.

Vehicles leaving the road for a number of reasons, then eventually
hitting some obstacle which unusually toppled them over, will have a
different injury profile. Especially the ones that didn't end up rolling.

I'm going to ask a question I already know the answer to:

Is your interest in this to,

(A) consider safety recommendations which might have a positive effect on
the rate of injury in public transportation,

Yes; and those recommendations should of course take into account the
severity and frequency of incidents, as well as the costs of rolling out
technological change.

(B) to reassure yourself that you're always right and everyone else is wrong
by asserting that it is a scandal that the world did not implement
provisions to guard against a scenario whose definition is entirely within
your whim and will indeed change every time you are challenged?

It hasn't changed one iota.

Nor have you produced much evidence of buses trying to take bends at
3.5x the speed limit and toppling over as a result.

--
Roland Perry