Worldbuilding Realism Consultation Thread Mk. 4

[Lompa]

I am playing as a Central American nation. I noticed that all the Central American nations except for Mexico, Belize, and Panama all are divided into departments.

Why is that? Why does Panama have provinces instead of departments?

[Bears Armed]

I am playing as a Central American nation. I noticed that all the Central American nations except for Mexico, Belize, and Panama all are divided into departments.

Why is that? Why does Panama have provinces instead of departments?

Maybe because all of the others were linked to each other as a confederation for a while, whereas Panama was originally a part of Colombia instead?

[Ainin]

I am playing as a Central American nation. I noticed that all the Central American nations except for Mexico, Belize, and Panama all are divided into departments.

Why is that? Why does Panama have provinces instead of departments?

Panama has never politically been part of Central America.

As a Spanish colony, it was part of the Viceroyalty of New Grenada (Colombia).
When it got independence, it joined Bolivar's Gran Colombia and when that dissolved, joined the Republic of New Grenada, which turned into the Grenadine Confederation, then the United States of Colombia and then the Republic of Colombia.

The Republic of Colombia has departments.
Gran Colombia and New Grenada had provinces.
The US Colombia and the Confederation had states.

Why it picked provinces over states, I don't know, but it probably didn't want to use the term department because it hated the Republic of Colombia and seceded from it.

[Lompa]

I am playing as a Central American nation. I noticed that all the Central American nations except for Mexico, Belize, and Panama all are divided into departments.

Why is that? Why does Panama have provinces instead of departments?

Panama has never politically been part of Central America.

As a Spanish colony, it was part of the Viceroyalty of New Grenada (Colombia).
When it got independence, it joined Bolivar's Gran Colombia and when that dissolved, joined the Republic of New Grenada, which turned into the Grenadine Confederation, then the United States of Colombia and then the Republic of Colombia.

The Republic of Colombia has departments.
Gran Colombia and New Grenada had provinces.
The US Colombia and the Confederation had states.

Why it picked provinces over states, I don't know, but it probably didn't want to use the term department because it hated the Republic of Colombia and seceded from it.

This is helpful, thanks!

My country was never part of Colombia or the Central American confederation, though. I am going for a Central American feel to it without being too similar or too different.

I have read that whether a country chooses states or provinces depends on the government.
In nations where the central government can first, there tend to be provinces while nations with states generally mean that the states were first or were there own country at one time and then became a part of a larger nation or central government

[Costa Fierro]

This is helpful, thanks!

My country was never part of Colombia or the Central American confederation, though. I am going for a Central American feel to it without being too similar or too different.

I have read that whether a country chooses states or provinces depends on the government.
In nations where the central government can first, there tend to be provinces while nations with states generally mean that the states were first or were there own country at one time and then became a part of a larger nation or central government

I RP a South American nation and there really isn't one country that is a carbon copy of one another, even countries that used to be part of the same country. For example, Colombia has departments, municipalities and corregimientos/communes whereas neighboring Ecuador has provinces, cantons and parishes. I have provinces, departments and municipalities.

So it really depends on what you want to do with your internal governance. I'd say make departments at least one component of internal governance.

[Ainin]

Panama has never politically been part of Central America.

As a Spanish colony, it was part of the Viceroyalty of New Grenada (Colombia).
When it got independence, it joined Bolivar's Gran Colombia and when that dissolved, joined the Republic of New Grenada, which turned into the Grenadine Confederation, then the United States of Colombia and then the Republic of Colombia.

The Republic of Colombia has departments.
Gran Colombia and New Grenada had provinces.
The US Colombia and the Confederation had states.

Why it picked provinces over states, I don't know, but it probably didn't want to use the term department because it hated the Republic of Colombia and seceded from it.

This is helpful, thanks!

My country was never part of Colombia or the Central American confederation, though. I am going for a Central American feel to it without being too similar or too different.

I have read that whether a country chooses states or provinces depends on the government.
In nations where the central government can first, there tend to be provinces while nations with states generally mean that the states were first or were there own country at one time and then became a part of a larger nation or central government

Oh, I wrote this post at 11pm yesterday and wasn't thinking straight. I just realised that it's obvious why it picked provinces; Panama is a unitary state and states imply federalism or some other type of autonomy. As for Belize, it's likely because it was a British colony unlike the rest of Central America.

Mexico probably just c+p'd the US system or something.

[Lompa]

This is helpful, thanks!

My country was never part of Colombia or the Central American confederation, though. I am going for a Central American feel to it without being too similar or too different.

I have read that whether a country chooses states or provinces depends on the government.
In nations where the central government can first, there tend to be provinces while nations with states generally mean that the states were first or were there own country at one time and then became a part of a larger nation or central government

Oh, I wrote this post at 11pm yesterday and wasn't thinking straight. I just realised that it's obvious why it picked provinces; Panama is a unitary state and states imply federalism or some other type of autonomy. As for Belize, it's likely because it was a British colony unlike the rest of Central America.

Mexico probably just c+p'd the US system or something.

Well, my nation was settled by the Spanish but became a British colony and the mestizos converted to Protestantism.

Despite the British rule, Lompa is quite different from Belize since Belize is Catholic, also Lompa has a Presidential system like the US while Belize has a prime minister.

[Ainin]

Oh, I wrote this post at 11pm yesterday and wasn't thinking straight. I just realised that it's obvious why it picked provinces; Panama is a unitary state and states imply federalism or some other type of autonomy. As for Belize, it's likely because it was a British colony unlike the rest of Central America.

Mexico probably just c+p'd the US system or something.

Well, my nation was settled by the Spanish but became a British colony and the mestizos converted to Protestantism.

Despite the British rule, Lompa is quite different from Belize since Belize is Catholic, also Lompa has a Presidential system like the US while Belize has a prime minister.

Unitary state, I presume?

The departments/provinces choice tends to be more on how much the national government emphasises on unity. One that doesn't condone local identity (i.e. France) will tend to use department, while one that does (i.e. Most federal states) might use province instead. This isn't an absolute rule, but it's a good place to start.

[DnalweN acilbupeR]

Like the US, RN is a "national" federation (as in, the striking majority of its citizens identify with the same nation, as opposed to it being something like e.g. Yugoslavia, Czechoslovakia where multiple nation-states are united under a federation) .

We have cities/towns , counties, states and of course the federation under which they are united. However, when compared to the US, political decisions are not necessarily more centralized (well, that too come to think about it) , but the lower you go down the legislative ladder the decisions that can be made are narrower in their scope. Unlike the US attitude "go ahead and DIY for shit not covered here" , the lower you go the more restrictions there are on what laws you can have.

[DnalweN acilbupeR]

OK, so I've got a problem. I think I'll forego any type of gendarmerie and ban my armed forces from operating on home soil unless in the case of a symmetrical warfare invasion.

I'd also like to not have dedicated internal agencies like the US and other countries have (FBI, DEA, etc.) but rather integrate these in the police at various levels. The police is to also include border and customs and the coast guard. The one problem that arises is that essentially you're putting too much power in the hands of a few.

The solution I've been thinking about was to eliminate the military-style hierarchy for the "top brass" , and instead have a council or board actually run shit. So instead of having a chief of the national police for example, you have a council staffed by chiefs of the underlying state police agencies and border&customs. And, state police chiefs could as well be but mere representatives, and have state councils tell them what to do.

[Ainin]

Like the US, RN is a "national" federation (as in, the striking majority of its citizens identify with the same nation, as opposed to it being something like e.g. Yugoslavia, Czechoslovakia where multiple nation-states are united under a federation) .

We have cities/towns , counties, states and of course the federation under which they are united. However, when compared to the US, political decisions are not necessarily more centralized (well, that too come to think about it) , but the lower you go down the legislative ladder the decisions that can be made are narrower in their scope. Unlike the US attitude "go ahead and DIY for shit not covered here" , the lower you go the more restrictions there are on what laws you can have.

Interesting. I haven't given much thought to subnational divisions yet, but Ainin is nominally a unitary state but it's devolved so many powers down the chain that it's practically a federation.

The top government is the national government that has the power to overrule all subnational decisions, the second tier is the country's 7 provinces, which are then divided into prefectures in all but two of the provinces, because the province of Linack uses the term county (same thing, different name) and the city-province of Forestia has none.

All the small cities and countryside are part of prefectures, but the largest metropolitan areas are prefecture-level municipalities. Prefectures and prefecture-level municipalities coordinate regional development and have municipalities and boroughs underneath them, respectively. The former has local administrative power, and the latter is basically just used to draw city council constituencies.

The provinces have legislative initiative on infrastructure, health, welfare, education and environmental issues as long as the national government doesn't have a conflicting statute or order-in-council enacted.

[DnalweN acilbupeR]

So I was thinking, for small cities or towns where a full-fledged BRT / guided bus system with grade separation and/or physically separated dedicated lanes isn't justifiable because of cost/low ridership, but one that still has "BUS ONLY" marked lanes, how about enforcing this by mounting ANPR cameras to buses and creating an algorithm which figures out whether or not the lane was misused (for example, recording the amount of time that the vehicle in front stayed on the lane) and automatically fining people who do not comply?

[Costa Fierro]

So I was thinking, for small cities or towns where a full-fledged BRT / guided bus system with grade separation and/or physically separated dedicated lanes isn't justifiable because of cost/low ridership, but one that still has "BUS ONLY" marked lanes, how about enforcing this by mounting ANPR cameras to buses and creating an algorithm which figures out whether or not the lane was misused (for example, recording the amount of time that the vehicle in front stayed on the lane) and automatically fining people who do not comply?

Or, how about you don't use BRT systems in small cities simply because BRT systems are designed for large cities with lots of (moderately) poor people i.e all of Latin America.

If your smaller cities have bus only lanes, simply put a raised kerb between the regular traffic lanes and the bus lane so that idiot drivers know which is which without having to resort to a huge amount of expensive CCTV cameras. Plus, why are you talking about rapid transit for cities whose populations are likely sufficient for regular bus services anyway?

[DnalweN acilbupeR]

So I was thinking, for small cities or towns where a full-fledged BRT / guided bus system with grade separation and/or physically separated dedicated lanes isn't justifiable because of cost/low ridership, but one that still has "BUS ONLY" marked lanes, how about enforcing this by mounting ANPR cameras to buses and creating an algorithm which figures out whether or not the lane was misused (for example, recording the amount of time that the vehicle in front stayed on the lane) and automatically fining people who do not comply?

Or, how about you don't use BRT systems in small cities simply because BRT systems are designed for large cities with lots of (moderately) poor people i.e all of Latin America.

If your smaller cities have bus only lanes, simply put a raised kerb between the regular traffic lanes and the bus lane so that idiot drivers know which is which without having to resort to a huge amount of expensive CCTV cameras. Plus, why are you talking about rapid transit for cities whose populations are likely sufficient for regular bus services anyway?

Idk. It just seemed like a good idea to me. The problem with physical borders isn't really cost but rather flexibility. This system would still allow emergency vehicles to use the lane easily, motorists to make turns or switch lanes across, etc.

And the idea isn't to mount stationary CCTV cameras but rather ANPR cameras on the buses themselves. So if you use such a lane without actually impeding bus traffic, then no harm no foul.

[Costa Fierro]

Idk. It just seemed like a good idea to me. The problem with physical borders isn't really cost but rather flexibility. This system would still allow emergency vehicles to use the lane easily, motorists to make turns or switch lanes across, etc.

You do realize the kerbs are only separating the lanes between intersections, right?

[DnalweN acilbupeR]

Idk. It just seemed like a good idea to me. The problem with physical borders isn't really cost but rather flexibility. This system would still allow emergency vehicles to use the lane easily, motorists to make turns or switch lanes across, etc.

You do realize the kerbs are only separating the lanes between intersections, right?

Yes . . . access would still be easier without them. If they'rethe bus lane is on the right hand rightmost running lane of the road (assuming you drive on the right) how is one going to access a parking lane / lot ? Remember to enter the bus lane at the previous intersection?

[Ainin]

Is that really needed? Just put up a big sign threatening a $5,000 fine or something and put a few traffic constables there once every few weeks.

That seems to work for most of Canada.

[DnalweN acilbupeR]

Is that really needed? Just put up a big sign threatening a $5,000 fine or something and put a few traffic constables there once every few weeks.

That seems to work for most of Canada.

Really?

Wikipedia says that

Bus lanes can become ineffective if weak enforcement allows use by unauthorized vehicles[9] or illegal parking on them (for example in shopping areas).

Evidence from the operation of urban arterials in Brisbane, Australia shows that a properly enforced Bus or Transit lane, operating as designed, can increase person throughput. In 2009 and 2010 traffic surveys showed that in Brisbane on a number of urban arterials with Bus and Transit lanes non-compliance rates were approaching 90 per cent. Following enhanced enforcement of the lanes, non-compliance rates dropped and overall efficiency of the Bus and Transit lanes improved with an up to 12 per cent increase in total person throughput in the lane. Average bus journeys times dropped, in some cases, by up to 19 per cent.[10]

In London, UK, bus lanes may also be used by motorcycles, taxis and bicycles. Any other vehicles using bus lanes during the hours of operation will be fined £130 if caught by CCTV cameras installed specifically to monitor this kind of behavior.

whatever the "non-compliance rate" means, I can't think of how it could be calculated... perhaps 90% of the time they were being occupied by private vehicles not buses? Idk.

Regardless, ANPR cameras are not at all that expensive, in general and especially relative to the cost of a bus or a fine. There isn't really anything special about them, they are regular cameras that just happen to need to meet certain performance standards so they provide clear and reliable images to feed into ANPR software. The more complicated bit is the ANPR software itself (but this shouldn't really be uber-expensive either as ANPR is pretty much glorified OCR which has to work with shittier source data that needs to be normalized to be readable) , and having to link to the vehicle database (which obviously requires a mobile data connection) . An added complexity (and incidentally, cost) factor, assuming you do want to allow private vehicles on bus lanes in limited circumstances (e.g. turning) would be creating an algorithm which figures out whether the lane is used correctly or the vehicle is "loitering" . This would imply tracking vehicle movement among other stuff (e.g. period of time in the camera's line of sight, identifying turn signals etc.) .

In any case depending on how large you want the fines to be the system should pay for itself per each bus for at most a single digit number of instances where it gives out a fine, methinks. And assuming you want the lanes to be partly available to private vehicles, once a few drivers get fined and word goes around the instances of them being used incorrectly should be few enough that managing contested fines should be doable by reviewing the actual video so there isn't the slightest doubt.

Instead of seeing them as an "expenditure" they should be seen as an investment because after they pay for themselves (through fines alone not even taking in account improved bus service) they essentially start bringing in profit, which is an added bonus to the improved service.

[DnalweN acilbupeR]

Is that really needed? Just put up a big sign threatening a $5,000 fine or something and put a few traffic constables there once every few weeks.

That seems to work for most of Canada.

You'll end up with very clear bus lanes.. once very few weeks

EDIT: Meanwhile, in China:



3D Express Coach

Pretty fucking brilliant.

EDIT 2: A major disadvantage of low-floor buses that people probably do not realize is poorer safety. I've recently witnessed an accident involving a traditional, non-low-floor bus with a rear mounted engine getting rear ended by an E36 3-Series. The front of the BMW was completely totaled and the engine was probably kaput whilst the bus seemingly had but a scratch. The rear of the bus (the visible part as I didn't get a look under) where the engine sits was completely untouched as the BMW had basically plunged under the bus.

[Costa Fierro]

You do realize the kerbs are only separating the lanes between intersections, right?

Yes . . . access would still be easier without them. If they'rethe bus lane is on the right hand rightmost running lane of the road (assuming you drive on the right) how is one going to access a parking lane / lot ? Remember to enter the bus lane at the previous intersection?

They work in France.

[Ainin]

Yes . . . access would still be easier without them. If they'rethe bus lane is on the right hand rightmost running lane of the road (assuming you drive on the right) how is one going to access a parking lane / lot ? Remember to enter the bus lane at the previous intersection?

You could always simply put them in the centre of the road. If you have people going out of a parking lot that want to turn left while there's a bus line in the centre, just legalise U-turns at intersections. Lots of cities do that for the reason you mentioned.

You'll end up with very clear bus lanes.. once very few weeks

After a few months, the message gets through.

EDIT: Meanwhile, in China:

(Image)

3D Express Coach

Pretty fucking brilliant.

As a person living in Beijing, I can definitely tell you that that thing has no use whatsoever and will not help traffic jams or increase network capacity. The exorbitant price for this thing and its infrastructure just isn't worth it, considering that a standard-sized transit bus, even those with WiFi and A/C, cost less than RMB 100 000, IIRC. For the price of a 3D Express Coach line, you could probably build bus rights-of-way on every single artery road in the district they want to put this train in and cover the entirety of the district with LTE internet.

And knowing the skill of the peas-for-brains drivers here, that thing would be totalled in a crash in less than a year.

EDIT 2: A major disadvantage of low-floor buses that people probably do not realize is poorer safety. I've recently witnessed an accident involving a traditional, non-low-floor bus with a rear mounted engine getting rear ended by an E36 3-Series. The front of the BMW was completely totaled and the engine was probably kaput whilst the bus seemingly had but a scratch. The rear of the bus (the visible part as I didn't get a look under) where the engine sits was completely untouched as the BMW had basically plunged under the bus.

This is the same thing with a low-floor bus. No injuries or fatalities onboard the bus, all they did was replace some of the fibreglass side panels and it was quickly back in service. Ok, granted, the LFS isn't completely low-floor, the back one-third of the bus is slightly elevated, since they needed to put the engine somewhere.

[Vitaphone Racing]

EDIT 2: A major disadvantage of low-floor buses that people probably do not realize is poorer safety. I've recently witnessed an accident involving a traditional, non-low-floor bus with a rear mounted engine getting rear ended by an E36 3-Series. The front of the BMW was completely totaled and the engine was probably kaput whilst the bus seemingly had but a scratch. The rear of the bus (the visible part as I didn't get a look under) where the engine sits was completely untouched as the BMW had basically plunged under the bus.

This is much more dangerous for the occupants of the BMW.

[DnalweN acilbupeR]

EDIT 2: A major disadvantage of low-floor buses that people probably do not realize is poorer safety. I've recently witnessed an accident involving a traditional, non-low-floor bus with a rear mounted engine getting rear ended by an E36 3-Series. The front of the BMW was completely totaled and the engine was probably kaput whilst the bus seemingly had but a scratch. The rear of the bus (the visible part as I didn't get a look under) where the engine sits was completely untouched as the BMW had basically plunged under the bus.

This is much more dangerous for the occupants of the BMW.

Nah, they were fine seeing how they got out and fled the scene in a fraction of a second. The safety of bus occupants should be more important than the safety of private motorists IMO.

[Allanea]

Is there any research (collision tests, etc.) confirming this assertion regarding low-floor buses?

[DnalweN acilbupeR]

Is there any research (collision tests, etc.) confirming this assertion regarding low-floor buses?

. . . it is common sense that repairs are cheaper and bus rider safety is improved when a car crashes under, not in, the bus.