Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Elevated roads would be hideous.

I think tunneling could be a better alternative?

Tunnelling would be the other way. Whether it's above or below, either way we need to start using all three dimensions pretty soon. Or massively improve public transport.

Personally I think tunnels everywhere would be hideous because you'd spend all your time driving under artificial lighting in the dark. I like being able to see the sky, being stuck in traffic in the M5 East is boring enough to nearly put me to sleep. At least with elevated roads only the arterial highways and main roads would be thrown into shadows, and most people would be using the elevated one anyway since it's for transit. Like, you'd have Hume Highway down below for people who need to go to businesses or whatever there, and you'd have the elevated Hume Highway for people who're just passing through the neighbourhood to get somewhere else.

Edited by Wordsmith
Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/463700-m4-toll/page/2/#findComment-7702273
Share on other sites

Used the M4 to get to the airport today, seems like my usual route of jumping on from Silverwater Rd will still hit me with a toll charge.

Massive changes going on though, it's been a long time since I've been through there.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/463700-m4-toll/page/2/#findComment-7703508
Share on other sites

If you're going to release tens of thousands of homes, you need the infrastructure to allow people to move about.

Or... Nuke the place and start fresh.

this is what really needs to happen or give businesses incentives to move west. There are places like parramatta and maquarie park but everyone seems to be staying in the cbd at the moment
Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/463700-m4-toll/page/2/#findComment-7703623
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Anyone going to bypass Church St to Homebush M4?

Is $4 (one way) fair?

Is the increase on the M5-East justified?

Do you think there'll be a traffic jam at Church St offramp in the mornings? And will it be only temporary?

If there's a traffic jam at Church St, will the offramp at Cumberland Hwy get congested?

Might the M4/M5 Toll cause you to switch to public transport?

People already get off at Church Street because after Church Street is where the worst congestion is already. Depends where you're going, though. Parramatta road will become more clogged if that's even possible.

The M4 is always riddle with accidents at the Homebush bay drive off ramp and the M4 stinks in general. Now we're going to have to pay for the pleasure of driving on it? For just 1 more lane? To me it's a lose lose.

I work and tend to travel outside of peak hour times so this does not benefit me at all.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/463700-m4-toll/page/2/#findComment-7717135
Share on other sites

M5 original plans had 6 lanes, once contract was signed company cried poor and weak gov said OK to 4 lanes.

The only civil works in NSW with a eye to the future was the harbour bridge, from then on its been a joke.

I would vote for that car driver party but sadly they also support the gun happy people party who like killing furry animals with big guns so my kids are safe from kangaroos, rabbits and deer when we go camping.

Also need to fix freight rail to get trucks off the motorways, the trucks coming out from port botany are a joke, they have enlarged the port but not the infrastructure that supports it.

Bring on the Intermodal.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/463700-m4-toll/page/2/#findComment-7718112
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • For once a good news  It needed to be adjusted by that one nut and it is ok  At least something was easy But thank you very much for help. But a small issue is now(gearbox) that when the car is stationary you can hear "clinking" from gearbox so some of the bearing is 100% not that happy... It goes away once you push clutch so it is 100% gearbox. Just if you know...what that bearing could be? It sounding like "spun bearing" but it is louder.
    • Yeah, that's fine**. But the numbers you came up with are just wrong. Try it for yourself. Put in any voltage from the possible range and see what result you get. You get nonsense. ** When I say "fine", I mean, it's still shit. The very simple linear formula (slope & intercept) is shit for a sensor with a non-linear response. This is the curve, from your data above. Look at the CURVE! It's only really linear between about 30 and 90 °C. And if you used only that range to define a curve, it would be great. But you would go more and more wrong as you went to higher temps. And that is why the slope & intercept found when you use 50 and 150 as the end points is so bad halfway between those points. The real curve is a long way below the linear curve which just zips straight between the end points, like this one. You could probably use the same slope and a lower intercept, to move that straight line down, and spread the error out. But you would 5-10°C off in a lot of places. You'd need to say what temperature range you really wanted to be most right - say, 100 to 130, and plop the line closest to teh real curve in that region, which would make it quite wrong down at the lower temperatures. Let me just say that HPTuners are not being realistic in only allowing for a simple linear curve. 
    • I feel I should re-iterate. The above picture is the only option available in the software and the blurb from HP Tuners I quoted earlier is the only way to add data to it and that's the description they offer as to how to figure it out. The only fields available is the blank box after (Input/ ) and the box right before = Output. Those are the only numbers that can be entered.
    • No, your formula is arse backwards. Mine is totally different to yours, and is the one I said was bang on at 50 and 150. I'll put your data into Excel (actually it already is, chart it and fit a linear fit to it, aiming to make it evenly wrong across the whole span. But not now. Other things to do first.
    • God damnit. The only option I actually have in the software is the one that is screenshotted. I am glad that I at least got it right... for those two points. Would it actually change anything if I chose/used 80C and 120C as the two points instead? My brain wants to imagine the formula put into HPtuners would be the same equation, otherwise none of this makes sense to me, unless: 1) The formula you put into VCM Scanner/HPTuners is always linear 2) The two points/input pairs are only arbitrary to choose (as the documentation implies) IF the actual scaling of the sensor is linear. then 3) If the scaling is not linear, the two points you choose matter a great deal, because the formula will draw a line between those two points only.
×
×
  • Create New...