technologies best for HSR feeders?

[Lee S. Walker]

I am thinking of a campaign to promote IT for local systems to connect
with the planned CA HSR route, to make it more accessible to local
communities without needing parking garages.

I would like to promote all the emerging technologies that would be
competitive for routes 3-5 miles, with most passengers traveling the
complete line but also several stations in between. It calls for
speed and low operating/construction costs.

Once there is a concise list of the best possible technologies, HSR
advocates will hopefully start pushing IT funding to make HSR more
likely to succeed. The probem with the UW list is that it is too
broad and includes too many unrealistic or too inefficient
technologies. I am accused of advocating monorail by publicizing that
list.
(I am heavily biased against rubber tires unless it is very fast)
-Lee

[Jerry Roane]

Lee

TriTrack guideway can be built to feed a high speed rail line.  We have proposed this very concept to the city of Wuxi China.  We have an animation of that rail station on DVD.  In the video the passenger uses his cell phone to find his way through the station.  The high speed train goes down one side and the TriTrack guideways go down the opposite side.  This would link a 400 mph high speed train to a 180 mph feeder.  The combination would be able to replace domestic flights for when jet fuel gets too expensive or scarce.  I was at the high speed rail conference and each city was there trying to talk the planners into putting the rail line through their community.  By adding TriTrack hundreds of communities can be a part rather than just a few as it currently is planned.  To keep the high speed train high speed feeders make much more sense.  If the train has to stop at every town rather than every tenth town it won't be high speed any more.

Our patent allows for one traction tire or linear motors instead of the traction tire.  The most energy efficient version will win in practice.  It remains to be seen if there is a need to eliminate the traction tire at 180 mph.  Obviously slower speeds are fine with a traction tire rolling on aluminum extrusion.  Linear motors that use the extrusion as the reaction plate are not usually as efficient as a regular round motor but technology marches forward constantly so we leave it open whether to use rubber traction or magnetic traction at our speed.  Parking garages that are not attached to your home do not make any sense to me. 

We need to be funded and jumping on the HSR bandwagon may be necessary in today's political climate.  Whatever it takes to get one built is fine because once high speed feeders are built the value of the high speed rail is the next thing to question.  Cost, energy and pollution of high speed rail is worse than the feeder system and the feeder system parallels the HSR network duplicating the connectivity.  If passengers pay for the usage the high speed rail portion may atrophy.  If the economics are tweaked by government then who knows what will evolve? 

Jerry Roane

[Walter Brewer]

As noted many times I'm agaist PRT emphasis on the feeder funtion for mass
transit. Simply it prolongs use or worse expansion of the mode we should be
working to replace.
Notice the word "emphasis". I agree there may be opportunities to initiate
PRT development in this fashion, or better for access to or within office
parks, industrial or education campuses, etc.
Particularly for airports as a means for personal transportion from many
regional origins directly to terminals, or better to gate areas.
As for HSR, with perhaps a couple limited USA applications, hopefully it
will fade away.

Walt Brewer

[Lee S. Walker]

I agree that HSR is not good enough. But the campaign for IT feeders
can be jump-started from the support for HSR. When the advantages of
the feeder systems are publicized, we have a better chance that IT
will be built instead, hopefully sooner rather than later.

There is nothing to lose but effort, because the U.S. is quickly
being economically destroyed if it does not step on the gas for IT.

I think that the #1 advantage of IT systems will be construction
cost, such as less than $50m/mile. It should be faster than autos,
like at least 25 mph. (Some international cities could go with slow,
but that much slower than an auto would be a hindrance.

Thank-you all for the nominations so far.

-Lee

[Dennis Manning]

Lee,

What do you mean by IT. What systems would that include? PRT (DM and or SM)
, GRT, BRT ?

Dennis

----- Original Message -----
From: "Lee S. Walker" <b4p...@yahoo.com>
To: "transport-innovators" <transport-...@googlegroups.com>

[Jerry Schneider]

At 10:36 AM 5/23/2009, you wrote:

>I agree that HSR is not good enough. But the campaign for IT feeders
>can be jump-started from the support for HSR. When the advantages of
>the feeder systems are publicized, we have a better chance that IT
>will be built instead, hopefully sooner rather than later.

Or, you could just focus on the Oakland Airport/BART connector for starters.
It's an almost perfect PRT project - but so far as I know, PRT is not
even a candidate -,
perhaps because it doesn't cost enough? I do think that a feeder-only
application
isn't sufficient, economically, and that it has to be enhanced to
provide circulator
and goods movement functions to be successful. Sell the concept first, then
worry about which technology could do the best job.

[Kirston Henderson]

on 5/23/09 12:15 PM, Jerry Schneider at j...@peak.org wrote:

> Or, you could just focus on the Oakland Airport/BART connector for starters.
> It's an almost perfect PRT project - but so far as I know, PRT is not
> even a candidate -,
> perhaps because it doesn't cost enough? I do think that a feeder-only
> application
> isn't sufficient, economically, and that it has to be enhanced to
> provide circulator
> and goods movement functions to be successful. Sell the concept first, then
> worry about which technology could do the best job.

Unfortunately, the BART request for submittals for companies has a very
near-term deadline and is open only to companies currently licensed to do
business in California. That really restricts the possible field.

Kirston Henderson
MegaRail®

[Dennis Manning]

IMHO opinion this latest push for the $500m BART/Airport connector is
obscene in light of how it could be done far far less expensively with other
systems. Lets hope it bombs.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Kirston Henderson" <kirston....@megarail.com>
To: <transport-...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, May 23, 2009 12:41 PM
Subject: [t-i] Re: technologies best for HSR feeders?

[gary13]

Wouldn't you think that the bay area of ALL places would be on the
leading edge of transportation technology? How embarassing is that.

gary
"Silicon Valley"
(so they say)


On May 23, 12:53 pm, "Dennis Manning" <john.manni...@comcast.net>
wrote:

> MegaRail®- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

[Lee S. Walker]

This letter published Saturday calls for PRT or Cybertran for the
Oakland Airport connector. It was presumably printed in the Oakland
Tribune, Contra Costa Times and some papers.
http://www.insidebayarea.com/search/ci_12424159?IADID=Search-www.insidebayarea.com-www.insidebayarea.com&IADID=Search-www.insidebayarea.com-www.insidebayarea.com
text:
Wrong technology

A COST of $500 million is too high for the Oakland Airport Connector
(OAC). And a $6 per trip would cost even more than sharing a cab. BART
should make sure we are choosing the absolute best technology instead
of being rushed.

There are more advanced, faster, lighter and more efficient
technologies like Personal Rapid Transit or Oakland's own U.S.
designed "Cybertran" can be installed for a fraction the cost.
Ultralight rail can also be affordably extended in the future to more
neighborhoods unserved by BART like east into the Oakland hills for
carbon-free transit.

Until we can have the best technology, more buses, fare-free, are the
best alternative, but without paving extra bus lanes.

Casey Loufek (a friend of mine)

Berkeley

[Gérard Massip]

Hi

 

If you read french, see http://mobilitedurable.forumdediscussions.com/modes-de-dplacements-f1/petits-flux-minibus-automatiques-minitrams-etc-t109.htm and http://trains-de-jardin.fr/forum2/viewtopic.php?f=31&t=543

 

Cheers

Gerard Massip