Talk:Transportation engineering

message: Is "transport engineering" more commonly used outside the U.S.?  I'm an EIT from the U.S., and I've only ever heard it called "transportation engineering".  'Transport' always struck me as a term for fluids, that environmental and chemical engineers use.  Anyway, if there is a geographic correlation to which name gets used more frequently, it seems to me that ought to be included in the article. The Literate Engineer 20:23, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes.  "Transport Engineering" is used elsewhere, but we Americans prefer our Transportation Engineering.  Any changes to the title would be simply catering to regional preferences though, so a mention in the article would seem more appropriate to me (which is already done). Skabat169 14:46, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

text: Not only Americans, Indians also prefer Transportation Engineering, as we have studied it as Highway and Transportation. And if you all know English 'transport' is primarily used as a verb but "Transportation" is primarily used as a noun and as we all know this article is in English. In conclusion, according to many Civil Engineers and Technocrats this field is known as Transportation Engineering. Hence the article should be rename as Transportation Engineering. Prymshbmg (talk) 17:50, 4 January 2015 (UTC)

text: We should rename it as all the references presented in this article recognizes this field of civil engineering as "Transportation Engineering". This is the proof that this field is called as Transportation Engineering.Prymshbmg (talk) 17:55, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Name: Transport or Transportation

message: I just added a short paragraph pointing out that transportation engineering includes all modes, not just automobiles, but the article's still uninformatively highway-centric.  So, which would make more sense for the layout: a) divide it into sections according to activity, such as a "Planning" section and a "Design" section and an "Operating" section, then with each section explaining that design for a road means horizontal and vertical alignments, typical section design, drainage, and pavement mixture whereas design for an airport means terminal layout and using a wind rose and figuring out the runway length and how to label five parallel runways at a mega-airport like Hartsfield-Jackson or O'Hare, or b)divide it into sections like "Highway", "Shipping", "Airport", "Mass Transit", etc., and then subdivide each mode into the process? The Literate Engineer 20:23, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Different Modes

message: If my work ethic lasts through the weekend or unless someone beats me to it, I intend to reorganise this information into categories such as History, Design (road/rail/pavement/etc.), Planning, Operations/Logistics, and possibly Maintenance.  I encourage people to add in any and all information that you can think up.  I am especially interested in more-developed descriptions of the assorted transportation acts within America, such as ISTEA, TEA-21, and SAFETEA-LU.  Of course any information on programs in other English-speaking countries (or notable programs in non-English-speaking countries) are welcomed.  Just for purposes of preservation until I (or someone else) reorganises this article, here is something I have cut from the civil engineering article: Since the passage of the 1991 Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act there has been a large focus on intermodal transportation in an attempt to improve efficiency, safety, and productivity with the existing infrastructure.  Such a transportation system is called an Intelligent Transportation System (ITS). --Thisisbossi 03:04, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I am pleased someone is interested in working on this article, however, is there a danger that if you focus on legislation you will write an article which is only of relevance to the US?  --Richard Clegg 16:53, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  That's why I'm hoping we can get people familiar with legislation in other nations, specifically what focus the legislation sets forth. For example, America's change from the design era of the Interstate System's birth up to ISTEA's emphasis on operations and ITS; and now SAFETEA-LU's gradual leaning toward planning and community development.  If no one responds, I'll keep it pretty general so that the entire article isn't about American legislation (besides, the laws have their own pages, anyway).  Looks like I'll hold off on any major edits until at least next week -- this weekend was a bit busier than expected. --Thisisbossi 02:41, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  OK, thanks.  Don't want to discourage you at all from editing, I was just offering food for thought.  Good luck with the editing.  --Richard Clegg 17:11, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thanks, Skabat169, for taking the initiative on this one (I've been busy on other pages).  I like this separation: first by mode, and then perhaps further separating within each mode by Planning, Design, Operations, Maintenance? --Thisisbossi 03:24, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Rewrite

message: I just reverted blanking of the Highways Section.  If this is not vandalism and 61.1.126.112 has good reasons for this, please discuss here first.  Thanks.  Skabat169 17:41, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Highways Blanking

message: Transportation For America » Dangerous by Design 2011
t4america.org/resources/dangerousbydesign2011/ 
(also the left hand side of the equation is not always zero)  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.243.114.246 (talk) 16:05, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  transportation engineering still failing in the U.S.