A new idea for public transit

[The Derpy Democratic Republic Of Herp]

Ok, I thought of a new way of public transit thats

1.Free to ride
2.Is impervious to terrorist attacks
3.Green
4.Awesome
5.Is safer then driving a car

I did this in my NS nation and most people thought it was a good idea.

The idea is:

Big air powered cannons that will blast you from place to place via cannons and safety nets. Safety nets get replaced daily.

What do you guys think about this actually being a real world?

1. You can't operate anything for nothing unless it is an supplement to a profitable service, which in turn can absorb the cost. Even if entirely automatic (e.g Copenhagen Metro), the control staff still needs to be paid.

2. Nothing can be impervious to terrorist attacks unless you tackle the social issues behind it. Britain’s role in the invasion of Iraq caused more problems and now we have ISIL (to avoid confusion with the Egyptian goddess). Austerity and now the Brexit hasn’t helped either – both have an opportunity to fuel local social unrest like the 2011 riots and the post-referendum rise in reported hate crime (BBC, 10 August 2016).

3. Although very hard to be self-sustaining, it is possible to source the power for the system from mostly clean sources (UK uses 24% renewable energy out of all sources), and I hope that the Paris Accord will push the share higher to a point where we can have 100% clean sources. There is plenty of solar and wind for Greece – solar power went from negligible to around 2,400 MWp between 2009 and 2015. For older infrastructure and existing means, the focus has been on getting more miles for money ever since the winglet revolutionised aircraft efficiency (according to NASA). Ryanair and easyJet do not have old planes because they perform better than older ones (Wendover Productions on YouTube, 31 May 2016).

4. I see awesome as in design, but the appeal would decline if it goes unmaintained. This is why it is impossible to operate a transit system for free.

5. Public transport is currently a lot safer than driving but the crime element is down to social issues. In the UK, years of worrying about terrorism have threatened social trust and social relationships.

1. Unless you boost public funding for transportation

2. Human cannonballs have social issues on them?

3. Its compressed air powered. We gots lots of the stuff.

4. See point one.

5. How can you attack a human cannonball rider?

[Petrolheadia]

1. You can't operate anything for nothing unless it is an supplement to a profitable service, which in turn can absorb the cost. Even if entirely automatic (e.g Copenhagen Metro), the control staff still needs to be paid.

2. Nothing can be impervious to terrorist attacks unless you tackle the social issues behind it. Britain’s role in the invasion of Iraq caused more problems and now we have ISIL (to avoid confusion with the Egyptian goddess). Austerity and now the Brexit hasn’t helped either – both have an opportunity to fuel local social unrest like the 2011 riots and the post-referendum rise in reported hate crime (BBC, 10 August 2016).

3. Although very hard to be self-sustaining, it is possible to source the power for the system from mostly clean sources (UK uses 24% renewable energy out of all sources), and I hope that the Paris Accord will push the share higher to a point where we can have 100% clean sources. There is plenty of solar and wind for Greece – solar power went from negligible to around 2,400 MWp between 2009 and 2015. For older infrastructure and existing means, the focus has been on getting more miles for money ever since the winglet revolutionised aircraft efficiency (according to NASA). Ryanair and easyJet do not have old planes because they perform better than older ones (Wendover Productions on YouTube, 31 May 2016).

4. I see awesome as in design, but the appeal would decline if it goes unmaintained. This is why it is impossible to operate a transit system for free.

5. Public transport is currently a lot safer than driving but the crime element is down to social issues. In the UK, years of worrying about terrorism have threatened social trust and social relationships.

1. Unless you boost public funding for transportation

2. Human cannonballs have social issues on them?

3. Its compressed air powered. We gots lots of the stuff.

4. See point one.

5. How can you attack a human cannonball rider?

1. How does boosting public transport costs make staff work for free?

2. Shooting a human from a cannon does not remove societal woes.

3. Yes, but how do you make compressed air?

4. Boosting the budget does not make materials free.

5. Clay pigeon launchers are air cannons and clay pigeons can be shot. Anything shot from an air cannon can be shot down, especially if it is large, like a human.

[The Derpy Democratic Republic Of Herp]

1. Unless you boost public funding for transportation

2. Human cannonballs have social issues on them?

3. Its compressed air powered. We gots lots of the stuff.

4. See point one.

5. How can you attack a human cannonball rider?

1. How does boosting public transport costs make staff work for free?

2. Shooting a human from a cannon does not remove societal woes.

3. Yes, but how do you make compressed air?

4. Boosting the budget does not make materials free.

5. Clay pigeon launchers are air cannons and clay pigeons can be shot. Anything shot from an air cannon can be shot down, especially if it is large, like a human.

1. It highers people that maintain the transportation.

2. By inflating a can full of air they by compressing it?

5. And aiming a gun in the sky isn't suspicious? Just tackle the guy.

[Novus America]

Ok, I thought of a new way of public transit thats

1.Free to ride
2.Is impervious to terrorist attacks
3.Green
4.Awesome
5.Is safer then driving a car

I did this in my NS nation and most people thought it was a good idea.

The idea is:

Big air powered cannons that will blast you from place to place via cannons and safety nets. Safety nets get replaced daily.

What do you guys think about this actually being a real world?

1. You can't operate anything for nothing unless it is an supplement to a profitable service, which in turn can absorb the cost. Even if entirely automatic (e.g Copenhagen Metro), the control staff still needs to be paid.

2. Nothing can be impervious to terrorist attacks unless you tackle the social issues behind it. Britain’s role in the invasion of Iraq caused more problems and now we have ISIL (to avoid confusion with the Egyptian goddess). Austerity and now the Brexit hasn’t helped either – both have an opportunity to fuel local social unrest like the 2011 riots and the post-referendum rise in reported hate crime (BBC, 10 August 2016).

3. Although very hard to be self-sustaining, it is possible to source the power for the system from mostly clean sources (UK uses 24% renewable energy out of all sources), and I hope that the Paris Accord will push the share higher to a point where we can have 100% clean sources. There is plenty of solar and wind for Greece – solar power went from negligible to around 2,400 MWp between 2009 and 2015. For older infrastructure and existing means, the focus has been on getting more miles for money ever since the winglet revolutionised aircraft efficiency (according to NASA). Ryanair and easyJet do not have old planes because they perform better than older ones (Wendover Productions on YouTube, 31 May 2016).

4. I see awesome as in design, but the appeal would decline if it goes unmaintained. This is why it is impossible to operate a transit system for free.

5. Public transport is currently a lot safer than driving but the crime element is down to social issues. In the UK, years of worrying about terrorism have threatened social trust and social relationships.

Those are not the major problems.
These are.
1) It is incredibly dangerous. Of the some of only 100 people to have done it, 30 died. Those who have not died frequently suffer broken limbs or backs.
2) It creates G-forces of 7-12gs, which a normal person cannot handle.
3) You have to be a specially trained gymnast in awesome shape in protective gear to do it successfully and land safely. It still is very hard on the body and most can only handle a few shots a day at most.
4) Properly and safely preparing the cannon, passenger and airbag or net for a single shot usually takes hours.
5) The range of the cannon is a maximum of a mere 60m. Most shots are much shorter, 10 to 30m.
6) The cannons are extremely expensive and only work in good weather.
And so on.

[Risottia]

The rest of us might not need cannons, but you certainly do!

Those are not for transit. And why are you oggling my guns?

You have never got used to professional ogglers, have you.

[Herskerstad]

Is this for real?

[Novus America]

Is this for real?

I do not see how it possibly can be.

[Xeng He]

Ah the circus mode of transport. A classic idea.

Better hope the person aiming the cannon gets the angle right or you will be such a surprised amount of strawberry jam on the pavement.

Also, I should add that I really doubt any safety net is going to do a thing if you're going any appreciable distance.

[USS Monitor]

Can I just ask, why do you love cannons so much?

Why not?

Cannons are very useful, just not for this.

[USS Monitor]

Those are not for transit. And why are you oggling my guns?

It is kinda hard not to really.

Well, this is why my gunports have covers. Hmph!

[Pythagaslavia]

This is a great idea honestly. It may need some work on minor safety issues, and you can't really load someone in a wheelchair into a cannon. You'll have to require people to agree that the operator of the system won't be responsible if, wrong word, when they die, but otherwise, it's bound to solve those damned traffic problems!

[Australian rePublic]

This exact same idea was a joke in an anti-drink driving poster. Here's why it would't work
1. This jas to be one of the most dangerous methods of people moving ever proposed. EVER!
2. This wouldn't be very effective. A metro/subway/rapid transit train every 2 minutes can move hundreds, if not thousands of people PER TRAIN. Light rail can move a few hundred PER TRAM. This would only move one person or so in the same period, per cannon
3. The coat of leasing helmets will be enourmace
4. It's not disabled friendly
5. There's this thing called buildings... (and this is in addition to other dangers)
6. People would be too scared to use the system

[Neanderthaland]

I'm against anything that makes getting blown on your way to work a mundane occurrence.

[Minivanistan]

This exact same idea was a joke in an anti-drink driving poster. Here's why it would't work
1. This jas to be one of the most dangerous methods of people moving ever proposed. EVER!
2. This wouldn't be very effective. A metro/subway/rapid transit train every 2 minutes can move hundreds, if not thousands of people PER TRAIN. Light rail can move a few hundred PER TRAM. This would only move one person or so in the same period, per cannon
3. The coat of leasing helmets will be enourmace
4. It's not disabled friendly
5. There's this thing called buildings... (and this is in addition to other dangers)
6. People would be too scared to use the system

1. It is supposed to be fun. Safe is boring.
2. Mass transit is not exactly cost effective. It loses its sponsors hundreds of millions of dollars annually. Again, let us at least be entertaining about it.
3. Looking back at number two, just buy the helmets. Again as a public work, it is not required to pay for itself.
4. We can work on that. More on it later.
5. Yes, the obstacles of an urban environment really calls for a mortar vs. cannon design that could be better engineered to accomaodate things like people in wheel chairs, blind folk with their dogs, and most importantly the morbidly obese (submits plans for nuclear powered version).
6. Then take the subway scaredy cat. The driver is drunk and hooked on crack, the train has no brakes, and the fidgety guy standing next to you has a 9mm. Good luck!

[Australian rePublic]

This exact same idea was a joke in an anti-drink driving poster. Here's why it would't work
1. This jas to be one of the most dangerous methods of people moving ever proposed. EVER!
2. This wouldn't be very effective. A metro/subway/rapid transit train every 2 minutes can move hundreds, if not thousands of people PER TRAIN. Light rail can move a few hundred PER TRAM. This would only move one person or so in the same period, per cannon
3. The coat of leasing helmets will be enourmace
4. It's not disabled friendly
5. There's this thing called buildings... (and this is in addition to other dangers)
6. People would be too scared to use the system

1. It is supposed to be fun. Safe is boring.
2. Mass transit is not exactly cost effective. It loses its sponsors hundreds of millions of dollars annually. Again, let us at least be entertaining about it.
3. Looking back at number two, just buy the helmets. Again as a public work, it is not required to pay for itself.
4. We can work on that. More on it later.
5. Yes, the obstacles of an urban environment really calls for a mortar vs. cannon design that could be better engineered to accomaodate things like people in wheel chairs, blind folk with their dogs, and most importantly the morbidly obese (submits plans for nuclear powered version).
6. Then take the subway scaredy cat. The driver is drunk and hooked on crack, the train has no brakes, and the fidgety guy standing next to you has a 9mm. Good luck!

1. Public transport isn't meant to be fun, it's meant to be effective
2. Your single biggest expense with anything is labour. PERIOD. Using 2 people to move hundreds back and forth is significantly more cost effective than using one to move 10
3. More unnecassery expense
5. Suddenly, you become a sort of ghost who can transport himself through bricks and morter
6. It's still safer than a f$$king cannon
Now onto:
7. If an east-west cannon lauches at the same time as a north-south cannon, and they crash into eachother, God help you
8. If your city is anywhere near an airport, God help everyone

[Minivanistan]

~snippity doo dah~

Look.
I was being a smart ass. For the laughs mind you, not to annoy.
And you are obviously not familiar with the OPs author, or you would know this thread was not meant to be a serious technical discussion of mass transit.
But thank you for your input, I will not dismiss it out of hand.

[Risottia]

5. How can you attack a human cannonball rider?

You don't need to attack them as they're already dead and turned into a pulp before they leave the muzzle, as per your specifications and as per calculations above.

Anyway, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Close-in_weapon_system

Or assuming the passenger isn't pulp already, just sabotage the nets.

Or place a nail in the barrel.

[Indira]

Ok, I thought of a new way of public transit thats

1.Free to ride
2.Is impervious to terrorist attacks
3.Green
4.Awesome
5.Is safer then driving a car

I did this in my NS nation and most people thought it was a good idea.

The idea is:

Big air powered cannons that will blast you from place to place via cannons and safety nets. Safety nets get replaced daily.

What do you guys think about this actually being a real world?

I assume this is a joke. Most amusing OP.

Completely unworkable of course as a public transport system, but as a theme park ride...might be worth a bit of thought.

[Pope Joan]

A vactrain would be just as much fun, with a soupcon of danger thrown in for excitement.
Travel in a vacuum tube at high speed! Whee!
They used to use these at major department stores, to transfer messages, money and documents. They had a complex system that was quick, efficient, and entertaining.
http://www.et3.com/
https://www.rt.com/usa/313071-hyperloop ... ic-spacex/

[Minivanistan]

A vactrain would be just as much fun, with a soupcon of danger thrown in for excitement.
Travel in a vacuum tube at high speed! Whee!
They used to use these at major department stores, to transfer messages, money and documents. They had a complex system that was quick, efficient, and entertaining.
http://www.et3.com/
https://www.rt.com/usa/313071-hyperloop ... ic-spacex/

Just bubble wrap the passengers, and you should be all right.
Sounds fun to me.

[The Derpy Democratic Republic Of Herp]

Ok, I thought of a new way of public transit thats

1.Free to ride
2.Is impervious to terrorist attacks
3.Green
4.Awesome
5.Is safer then driving a car

I did this in my NS nation and most people thought it was a good idea.

The idea is:

Big air powered cannons that will blast you from place to place via cannons and safety nets. Safety nets get replaced daily.

What do you guys think about this actually being a real world?

I assume this is a joke. Most amusing OP.

Completely unworkable of course as a public transport system, but as a theme park ride...might be worth a bit of thought.

Yeah, a theme park ride could work!

It would be like the catapult rides but actually shooting you someplace instead of up and down.

I would totally ride that!

[Dytarma]

Just straight up dangerous.

[The Derpy Democratic Republic Of Herp]

Just straight up dangerous.

So is driving a car. At least this is more fun.

[Petrolheadia]

Just straight up dangerous.

So is driving a car. At least this is more fun.

I would object.

[Petrolheadia]

Just straight up dangerous.

So is driving a car. At least this is more fun.

I disagree on both.

If you are a good driver, driving is not dangerous. Maybe if it is dangerous for you, then it's time to get a bus pass?

And being shot would be always scary, while driving is either dreary or fun.