It's like talking about replacing C++ with Javascript. 26' box trucks already exist and could be used, but aren't for a reason. The novel part is really just the visibility and lower noise, which is irrelevant to a 53' trailer ban.
I think you're missing the point of the conversation up-thread. OP is pointing out that 53' trailers are actually already banned, but the ban is not enforced. GP suggested that enforcing the ban would bring the city to a halt. The OP provides a discussion of an alternative that could be used if the 53' trailer ban was enforced.
> 26' box trucks already exist and could be used, but aren't for a reason.
Right, at least partly because the ban on 53' trailers is not enforced. Nobody is claiming that these smaller trucks are strictly better in the current market environment (including the assumption that the ban is not enforced). This thread is discussing what would happen if the 53' truck ban was enforced.
Your analogy doesn't make sense in this context. Neither C++ nor Javascript are banned. To fix your analogy, try this: If you banned C++ (and enforced the ban) in NYC, then you'd expect to see an increase in use of JS and other languages. Programming would not grind to a halt, if you gave enough notice then the pieces currently implemented in C++ would be re-implemented in another language.
They fill different roles. It's talking about replacing something suited for long distance, including intermodal, relays, etc with a short distance truck that has distinct characteristics. If you absolutely can't use 53' trailers, the best alternative is probably 48' trailers.
