How to board a train that does not stop?

[Jerry Schneider]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0DfDOlUXEBo&NR=1

In Chinese, different for sure.

[eph]

Interesting. Passengers move to/from the shuttles to exit/enter the
train? Trains would lose some aerodynamics and tunnels overpasses
etc... would have to be higher. The train would have to be
reinforced, heavier to carry the shuttle load. Power is transfered
from the overhead wires through the shuttle to the train? Wonder what
kind of securing mechanism would be used to connect the shuttle to the
train?

F.

[Ian Ford]

This is not the first time I've seen this general idea. A related
concept is a standard subway with doors permitting access between cars.
The last car on the train disconnects and stops at a station, then hooks
up with the head of the next train. The trains don't stop, but each car
stops every N stations where N is the number of cars in the train. So if
you are going 5 stops on a 4-car train, you board, then after the train
picks up a new car on the head, you advance one car, which will
eventually find its way to the tail of the train and stop at your stop.

> On Oct 13, 2:22 pm, Jerry Schneider <j...@peak.org> wrote:
>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0DfDOlUXEBo&NR=1
>>

--
Ian Ford i...@ianford.com 505.246.8490

[Walter Brewer]

The engineer speaks, and ponders!!

But how about the match with transportation needs aside from the design? The
extreme would be everything from purely loading a fast high seat capacity
train with a bus that has collected passengers & goods from a significant
corridor, to a low or near zero seat train that is principally a carrier for
a range of several size of payloads.-----2 to 4 seaters, to GRT size
vehicles with road capability.
And maybe perform with that mix on one line? How about multiple loading
lines to accommodate the mix?
Thinking California for example as discussed before the San Diego to LA
areas leg would probably like lots of the small personal vehicles because of
the wide variety of real origins and destinations in both areas.
But some would want a comfortable through seat, say Escondido to Fresno.
Thus the mix would require some vehicle able to facilitate transfers into
the main train.
How about mixes within the mix? Get on from a transfer bus, get off in a
small personal vehicle for example.
I suppose these mutterings are not new. But I can see advantage to some part
at least of these complicated mixes, to increase the utility of so called
HSR.
Traditional train types will probably say; too complicated.

Walt Brewer

[Walter Brewer]

OK. I was trying to blend some personal one vehicle no transfer capability
in.
I suppose variations on the Car-Bus system?

Walt Brewer

----- Original Message -----
From: "Ian Ford" <i...@ianford.com>
To: <transport-...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, October 13, 2009 4:24 PM
Subject: [t-i] Re: How to board a train that does not stop?


>

[eph]

If you're going only one stop, you have to traverse N cars (or so).
Not the end of the world I guess. It breaks the brick wall stop rule
though.

F.

[Jerry Schneider]

At 01:24 PM 10/13/2009, you wrote:

>This is not the first time I've seen this general idea. A related
>concept is a standard subway with doors permitting access between cars.
>The last car on the train disconnects and stops at a station, then hooks
>up with the head of the next train. The trains don't stop, but each car
>stops every N stations where N is the number of cars in the train. So if
>you are going 5 stops on a 4-car train, you board, then after the train
>picks up a new car on the head, you advance one car, which will
>eventually find its way to the tail of the train and stop at your stop.

And similar to the Lashley continuous train concept:
http://faculty.washington.edu/jbs/itrans/lashley.htm

- Jerry Schneider -
Innovative Transportation Technologies
http://faculty.washington.edu/jbs/itrans

[Bengt Gustafsson]

I wonder where they get their power from. Usually there is an overhead
power line.

Obvously the safety issues would be very stringent and hard to handle.
There is no way that the main train can stop if there is a mishap.

The aerodynamics of the main train is also destroyed.

The variant with last/first car is of course much better, but if train
is shorter than number of stations you would have to move to another
car maybe several times during the trip. Safety is a big issue with
this setup too.

In the back of my mind I have a memory that the Copenhagen driverless
metro does at-speed merges/diverges, but I have not seen this fact in
recent times, maybe it was only an idea that then got scrapped as it
was new and hence dangerous...