Hit job on dual-mode. Business as usual.

[Dave Brough]

One of northern Utah’s popular ski destinations, a mountain village just east of Salt Lake City called Alta, is only reachable via a windy 8-mile canyon road that in addition to being narrow is subject to frequent closers due to avalanche.

UDOT's search for answers drew some 105-odd ideas, and after a couple of years of study, things have now boiled down to three proposals – two using bus, a third, aerial gondola.

The 124-page report was made public a couple of weeks ago.

Here’s how they blew off my suggestion of dual-mode (p 53).

“Dual-mode Advanced Vehicular Endeavor, or D.A.V.E. uses an ordinary automobile (or light truck) adapted so it can drive on the street network and then be picked up by a fixed guideway and travel above ground.

Based on an internet search and a review of transportation and transit resources, UDOT did not find any examples where a (dual-mode) concept has been implemented. UDOT determined that the D.A.V.E concept would require a technology that does not currently exist and is not commercially or institutionally available. 

Because a commercially available product is not available, designing a D.A.V.E. alternative for the S.R. 210 Project would require an extensive and costly research and development process. 

For these reasons, the D.A.V.E. concept does not meet the logistical, technological, or economic requirements for a reasonable or practicable Little Cottonwood Canyon alternative.”

I’m wondering what moron was tasked with responding because as anyone in this group knows, a 2-minute Google exploration would have turned up all kinds of dual-mode along with videos and animations. Clearly someone either missed it or, (IMO) more likely ignored it.

Thoughts? 

Dave Brough

PS If you want to contact the Project directly, here’s a link.

[Jerry Roane]

Dave

This is actually great that they are on paper (virtual) talking smack about what they know nothing about.  It gives us an opportunity to find this guy's boss and hammer him into the technological and legal ground.  Do you have names of this person and his boss also?  I would be glad to torch his future at the DOT.  If it has not been built it cannot be built.  Right?? The wheel had the same issue but there was no DOT to point it out.  

This is the Texas law that authorizes TxDot to be funded: 

Texas House Bill 2702 79th legislature is the first place he may want to read.

Tri-Track as defined by the US patents issued.  So it authorizes, by name, 180 mph travel on a dual mode vehicle. (Page 1 line 24 B.)  My lawyer told me that when the patent is issued that the legal term is "Reduced to Practice".  If this guy wants to get into the legalities of what that means I can pay Baker Botts LLP to instruct him.  This is the same Baker Botts of presidential fame during the Bush years.  

While I was writing this email we put the finishing touches on the animation of the Quick Coal version of my four patents describing dual mode and how it can move 20,000 tons of lignite coal from the Thar desert Block II coal mine to the existing coal power plant powering Karachi Pakistan.  This $160,000,000.00 project enables Pakistan to stop giving all their money to foreign interests buying imported coal and keeps the money inside their country.  This competes head to head with the Chinese railroad proposal across this same Thar desert landscape.  The problem is the sands are in dunes and old fashioned railroads will be covered in dunes everytime the wind shifts.  The ships bringing coal burn a lot of diesel and dual mode is energy efficient enough to run on the sun's radiation across this desert land high above the shifting sands. 

US Patents 6,923,124  7,127,999  7,334,524  Chinese patent ZL200710167087.1 All define Tri-Track that is listed by name in Texas law as dual mode.  

Let me know if you want me to go after this guy and his hierarchy.  

Jerry 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "transport-innovators" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to transport-innova...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/transport-innovators/4bb72d8c-2a7c-463e-93ae-81fad051ec18o%40googlegroups.com.

[Dave Brough]

Jerry,

Speaking of the devil, here’s the text of an email I received earlier today from the project manager inviting my response in the form of a ‘detailed proposal’. The more the merrier, as they say. Deadline is July 10^th (Friday).

Dave,Please allow me to introduce myself, my name is Josh Van Jura and I am the project manager for the Little Cottonwood EIS project.   The dual mode, D.A.V.E concept was considered by UDOT in the EIS process, please see  page 53 of the Screening Report for additional information on why it was screened out. 

Link to the screening report here

We would invite you to submit a detailed proposal with data or sources that UDOT could use for objective analysis against the same screening criteria as the other alternatives were compared against. This would include information such as:

Examples of an operational system
Costs related to construction, operation and maintenance
Manufacturers of this product

 I can be reached at the number below if you have any questions.  Please remember the comment period ends Friday July 10th.

Best Regards,

Joshua Van Jura

Utah Dept. of Transportation

Project Manager - Little Cottonwood EIS

(801) 231-8452

Josh van jura <jvan...@utah.gov>

Dave Brough

You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "transport-innovators" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/transport-innovators/VJWXQVUTtpc/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to transport-innova...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/transport-innovators/CAEsQt-eTxgKNk7C_o3rdsKoZcxrZDjmc%2BB%3DW%3DEogG9BytCFbqQ%40mail.gmail.com.