> From: Michael Weidler <pstransit@...> Reply-To:
> friendsofthemonorail@egroups.com Date: Thu, 7 Dec 2000 16:12:33 -0800 (PST)
> To: Jerry Schneider <jbs@...> Cc: FOM Group List
> <friendsofthemonorail@eGroups.com>, "PS Transit" <pstransit@egroups.com>,
> Seatransit <seatransit@egroups.com> Subject: [friendsofthemonorail] Re:
> [pstransit] Solutions?
>
> I agree that a monorail spine is no better than a light rail spine. While I am
> a monorail supporter, I have said for quite some time that monorail is nothing
> more than faster cheaper light rail. Either technology will do wonders for
> congestion - if people would use it.
>
> I think RUF would make a wonderful BRT system, which can even compete with
> PRT. I do not like the idea of dual mode RUF in the sense of individual cars.
> It seems to me this is just moving the current problem to a rail. Unless the
> cars are public cars (you do not own the vehicle), you still have the
> considerable problems of parking and CBD ingess and egress.
>
> --- Jerry Schneider <jbs@...> wrote: Michael,
>
>> It seems clear to me that a monorail "spine" suffers from the same problems
>> as a light rail "spine" (i.e. along the I-5 corridor) in that one has to
>>
>> get to and from the stations using a cross-town (E-W) route, then make one,
>> perhaps two transfers, to get to the desired destination. Even if the
>> stations are off-line (a la CyberTran) you still have this access problem
>> unless you have rather large park-ride lots adjacent to the stations which is
>> impossible in many cases. RUF offers a workable solution IMO that is superior
>> to PRT in that one has door-door travel possibilities, many fewer miles of
>> elevated guideway are required and that it has the ability to carry group
>> vehicles as well as individual vehicles. One or more RUF N-S
>>
>> routes with fairly widely spaced stations would do and area-wide (including
>> the suburbs) job very nicely.
>>
>> One starts the transition with elements of a regional network using mostly
>> MaxiRUFs and some public personal RUFs. Then as the network is extended,
>>
>> more and more private personal RUFs would begin to use the system. I think
>> that one could make a substantial dent in conventional auto use with a fairly
>> modest RUF network that could be region-wide at a much smaller cost and much
>> more quickly than any other kind of system I know about.
>>
>> One of my freshman classes at the UW (ENGR 1000) was assigned the job of
>>
>> designing and evaluating a simplified RUF network for the entire Puget Sound
>> Region a few years ago. The results are posted at my ITT website on the
>> "planning, deployment, ..." index page.
>>
>> How does one get people to take a look at what RUF has to offer????
>>
>>
>>
>> At 10:24 AM 12/7/00 -0800, you wrote: Frankly, mass transit is not a good
>> idea, IMO. Rail mass transit (LRT, standard monorail) is the worst. They are
>> concentrator technologies. This means people need to be transported to the
>> rail system in order for it to be effective (unless you have REALLY high
>> density).
>>
>>> Buses and busways are a much better soultion because the buses can stop
>>> every couple of blocks to load passengers before getting on the busway.
>>> Unfortunately, buses have an image problem. Being a bus rider, I can say
>>> that the image problem is not totally undeserved. An interesting combination
>>> of a monorail and a bus is a technology from Denmark called RUF
>>> <http://www.ruf.dk/>.
>>>
>>> IMO, personal rapid transit (PRT) is what we need in most cases. PRT is
>>> flexible and fast enough (almost as flexible as and definitely faster than
>>> cars) to have an actual shot at getting a substantial portion of people out
>>> of their cars. Combine PRT with buses and park & rides in out lying areas
>>> and I believe a substantial dent can be made in our congestion problem.
>>>
>>> --- Ruth Korkowski <skidal@...> wrote: Would this make sense? A
>>> freeway monorail system with widely spaced stations served by busways east
>>> and west past the gridlock areas, say about one mile. Most of the busways
>>> would need to be in tunnels, but after all, we now believe we can't live
>>> without the one downtown. Over Harbor Island, for example, elevated might be
>>> possible. If the stations were in buildings with childcare and retail,
>>> mainly for fresh food (satisfying the Europhiles), the transfer could be a
>>> useful transition, saving other trips.
>>>
>>>> Ruth Korkowski
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>>>> pstransit-unsubscribe@egroups.com
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>> - Jerry Schneider - Innovative Transportation Technologies
>> http://faculty.washington.edu/jbs/itrans Transit-Focused Development
>> http://www.peak.org/~jbs
>>
>
> __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo!
> Shopping - Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products.
> http://shopping.yahoo.com/
>
>
> To Post a message, send it to: friendsofthemonorail@eGroups.com To
> Unsubscribe, send a blank message to:
> friendsofthemonorail-unsubscribe@eGroups.com
>