Anderson's history of Aerospace Corp. PRT efforts

[Jerry Schneider]

http://faculty.washington.edu/jbs/itrans/history.htm

Use "find" to get to the section on the Aerospace Corporation

[Jay Andress]

  There are some important lessons here. One has to wonder why if there were all these favorable studies why it never succeeded. My guess is that the overriding problem was that there was no money to be had.... unless it came from the government in the form of huge grants. If there were profits then at some point private business would be motivated and PRT would have succeeded. With only money from government the projects were at the mercy of fickle politicians. 

  

On Mon, Aug 11, 2008 at 5:56 PM, Jerry Schneider <j...@peak.org> wrote:

http://faculty.washington.edu/jbs/itrans/history.htm

Use "find" to get to the section on the Aerospace Corporation

--
new contact info: jay.a...@monomobile.com

[Jerry Schneider]

At 06:47 PM 8/11/2008, you wrote:
> There are some important lessons here. One has to wonder why if
> there were all these favorable studies why it never succeeded. My
> guess is that the overriding problem was that there was no money to
> be had.... unless it came from the government in the form of huge
> grants. If there were profits then at some point private business
> would be motivated and PRT would have succeeded. With only money
> from government the projects were at the mercy of fickle politicians.

One did get built - it's called Morgantown. Ford actually had its
system running between a large hotel and a shopping center. Very few
riders showed up for the free ride and so, embarrassed, they took it down.

Politicians sometimes respond to their constituents. One would have
to know a lot to know if this is a major reason that the funding was
cut off. There are lots of other possibilities. Another factor is
favorable governmental regulations that assure the companies that
they can compete effectively in the marketplace (e.g. these systems
are approved by the feds for public use). Customers have to have
capital and operating subsidies in some cases before they get
interested (i.e. some free money). Government commitment over a
decade or more is also likely to be needed. And so on.

>
>
>On Mon, Aug 11, 2008 at 5:56 PM, Jerry Schneider

><<mailto:j...@peak.org>j...@peak.org> wrote:
>
><http://faculty.washington.edu/jbs/itrans/history.htm>http://faculty.washington.edu/jbs/itrans/history.htm

>
>Use "find" to get to the section on the Aerospace Corporation
>
>
>
>
>
>
>--
>new contact info:

><mailto:jay.a...@monomobile.com>jay.a...@monomobile.com
>
>

[gary]

>   There are some important lessons here. One has to wonder why if there were
> all these favorable studies why it never succeeded.

Cheap gas.

gary

[Jay Andress]

Jerry,

 

   I was amazed to see that Ford built a system. I had always thought it was just a paper system, that it never got built. It is interesting to read about how close this, PRT,came to happening. It also shows how far we have to go with our current efforts. I think that while government needs to play a role it also cannot assume the leadership...and it must realize that in the end it can only play the role of assistant.

   Several factors are different this time around. High price of gasoline, global warming, oil dependence and worsening traffic congestion. However if gasoline prices drop significantly the fickle public and the politicians will once again retreat...I am afraid. Personally I think McCain would be the kind of person who would stick to a plan (sometimes for the better and sometimes for the worse...lots of personal fortitude). I think Obama would stick to the plan too...perhaps for environmental reasons. The one group I see as inadequate for the future of DM/PRT is DOT. There just seems to be a total lack of long-term interest in technology. This seems to be true in the 1970's and even today. They just abdicated (perhaps they were forced to) all authority for R&D to the automobile companies. I hope it changes. Any thoughts that Volpe Center could take an interest in our efforts...without getting money upfront?

 

                                                          Jay

[Bruce Attah]

I like the Aerospace scale model. People don't build scale models much
any more. Maybe they should, because I rather think that more people
would be persuaded by the sight of a realistic working scale model
than by quoted statistics, or verbal argument, or even on-screen
simulations and walk-throughs.

It would be really cool to have a model set in a landscape with
buildings, and a big screen adjacent reporting trip times and number
of passengers carried. It would be even cooler if people were allowed
to obstruct a vehicle arbitrarily, and see what happened.

[Jerry Roane]

Bruce

You are absolutely right about scale models.  I have been in the design business for thirty years and nothing beats an object you can place in a potential customer's hand.  What engineers like me tend to forget is that not everyone has a spacial mind.  We see a napkin sketch and we visualize the entire device but for most people they have a hard time converting from sketch to drawing to CAD model to real parts machine cut from those CAD models.  I get good traction with my 1/8th scale model with a $300 showcar paint job.  It is the five layered pearl paint job that gets the attention.  Our video footage I think shows the TriTrack in operation like it would be in a city but somehow that does not translate for a big portion of the population.  I used to think that the hand built architect models were a waste of time now that we have CAD and virtual fly-throughs but I agree with you that nothing is better other than the real thing than a physical model.  Of course the real thing is better and we are working feverishly on the second real one but until it has a $3000 paint job on it I can't show it to the public.  The first car built was for durability testing and it was built for testing strength so I put the good side in, on the skin to better simulate a production molded part but when I show it without the shine it has less of an impact.  If I walk around town with my showcar painted model everyone stops to put their greasy fingerprints on it.  I have learned to pull back just before they smear the wax job.  It is an art form.  I have observed car show participants to see their response to other concept cars and most people are compelled to touch the paint unless there is a barrier.  Part of internalizing the design may be to touch the object.  It is just part of the way humans are wired.

Jerry Roane

[Bruce Attah]

I guess your system would be more expensive to model, but say someone
wanted to model a PRT network with track guidance and synchronous
control, they could buy a bunch of cheap radio-controlled cars, and
hack the control boxes, and the whole thing could be very cheap to do.
Even as a one-person hobby project, it would be doable for someone
with the right kind of background.

> On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 2:21 PM, Bruce Attah <bruce.at...@googlemail.com>wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > I like the Aerospace scale model. People don't build scale models much
> > any more. Maybe they should, because I rather think that more people
> > would be persuaded by the sight of a realistic working scale model
> > than by quoted statistics, or verbal argument, or even on-screen
> > simulations and walk-throughs.
>
> > It would be really cool to have a model set in a landscape with
> > buildings, and a big screen adjacent reporting trip times and number
> > of passengers carried. It would be even cooler if people were allowed
> > to obstruct a vehicle arbitrarily, and see what happened.
>
> > On Aug 11, 10:56 pm, Jerry Schneider <j...@peak.org> wrote:
> > >http://faculty.washington.edu/jbs/itrans/history.htm
>

> > > Use "find" to get to the section on the Aerospace Corporation- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

[Jerry Roane]

Bruce

I have that project half implemented.  The bag of RC car parts is over in the corner but I don't have time to build the RC version because I am working on the full sized model right now and I have to do two consulting gigs to pay for the tooling and cast parts from China.

Some day I intend to finish the RC model of the system.  The 1/8th scale model is fully modeled in ProEngineer software.

Jerry Roane

[Kirston Henderson]

on 8/14/08 7:38 AM, Jerry Roane at jerry...@gmail.com wrote:

> Bruce
>
> I have that project half implemented. The bag of RC car parts is over in
> the corner but I don't have time to build the RC version because I am
> working on the full sized model right now and I have to do two consulting
> gigs to pay for the tooling and cast parts from China.
>
> Some day I intend to finish the RC model of the system. The 1/8th scale
> model is fully modeled in ProEngineer software.

Early in our development process, we did actually build and test a small
RC dualmode working model and some limited guideway that we used for proof
of concept testing of the MegaRail® family of systems. It was a pretty
involved project and the vehicle was nearly as complex as the full sized
vehicle. That project accomplished it's purpose and we still have that
small vehicle on display in our visitor reception center conference room.

Kirston Henderson
MegaRail®