HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Transportation


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #81  
Old Posted Jul 15, 2011, 3:12 PM
twoNeurons twoNeurons is offline
loafing in lotusland
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Lotusland
Posts: 6,020
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cirrus View Post
Here is the updated requirements list:

Here is a list of things that partisan monorail boosters claim as benefits but that generally aren't:
  • Aesthetics. As the Vancouver SkyTrain example shows, traditional rail can be built that looks very similar to monorail (the reverse is not true). Monorail guideways can be somewhat narrower than light rail guideways, but that advantage is usually (not always) canceled out by monorail's requirement for bulkier stations. Overall, aesthetics is a wash except for in a capacity niche where low platform light rail isn't possible and thus light rail's less bulky station advantage doesn't apply, resulting in an aesthetic advantage for monorail.
  • As someone who lives in Vancouver, I should add a few points. Although having the SkyTrain elevated is great for riders, it simply can't be elevated everywhere, SkyTrain is only run elevated in areas that don't have a lot of density. It's underground downtown and run in a trench in some places. The shadow is casts would NEVER be allowed to run downtown and in fact, the fact that it casts a large shadow is one reason why the Canada Line is run predominantly underground along a boulevard until it gets to places like the airport and Richmond, where it can run in wider streets.

    The new extension along the Broadway corridor will most definitely be buried due to the shadow it casts... adding to the cost significantly.
    Quote:
  • Cost. Monorails are no less expensive than other comparable elevated options (more so than elevated low-floor light rail, since you can never cross the tracks), and their lack of flexibility means they are much more expensive if you want to try and run them at-grade or in a subway. Overall, cost is a negative for monorails.
  • Apart from perhaps less concrete, you're more or less right about them costing about the same as other elevated systems, though these things usually are done on a project by project basis. They will be no less expensive than other subway proposals, but are less often run in subways anyhow... due to a less imposing shadow and more positive public perception of the visual intrusion on the street.

    Generally, you only run at grade where there are no street crossings when you run grade separated transportation. The New Evergreen line, which will be ALRT (SkyTrain) will be run at grade along a railway corridor. I can see monorail costing more than track on ballast, simply because of materials cost but I'd imagine it's more or less a wash.
    Quote:
  • Capacity. Monorail capacity is comparable to elevated/grade-separated light rail with high platforms, slightly higher than elevated/grade-separated light rail with low platforms, but lower than heavy rail metro systems. Overall, monorail doesn't offer any capacity advantage over any other mode, resulting in a wash.
  • Capacity is purely a capacity of how long your trains are and how often you run them. That's it!

    Railway stations are super long but generally don't run as frequently unless grade separated like High Speed Rail.

    Light Rail with a moderate number of level crossings may have longer stations but runs less frequently (especially off-hours) to save money on manpower.
    Calgary's LRT is a great example. Fantastic system which carries a LOT of people. Platform lengths are 80-110m. Weekday Ridership:
    South - 110,300
    Northwest - 79,500
    Northeast - 64,000
    Downtown (free fare zone) - 22,800

    They runs trains interlined downtown every 5/6 minutes (interlined downtown it's about every 2/3 minutes) during the rush... however every 15 minutes in off-peak hours.

    They have a lot of grade separation, a lot of running beside highways. Downtown, they want to run 4-car trains, but need to bury the stations in order to do that... which costs a lot of money.

    Now look at Vancouver's Canada Line.
    Station lengths are 40m (less than half Calgary's average length)
    Trains run every 3-6 minutes most of the day (grade separated, automated).

    Quote:
  • Automation. Any grade-separated transitway can use automated vehicles. This is a wash.
This is totally true. However, you can't have both... automating Light Rail takes away many of the advantages it has... flexibility, cost, inobtrusiveness...

Quote:
Now here is a list of the things that MUST be true for monorail to be competitive with light rail. You need ALL the things on this list to be true for monorail simply to break even with light rail:
  • You have already decided that your line is going to be 100% elevated regardless of what type of train you ultimately choose.
  • Your capacity needs fall in the "medium-heavy" range, high enough to require 100% grade-separation but lower than heavy rail.
  • You must not care about interoperability with other existing or planned segments of your transit system, or freight.
Good points, however the order is a bit off. 100% grade-separation should be the first question. Do you want to automate the line? Do you want improved service in the off-peak at lower cost? Do you have an unacceptable level of level crossings?

The last point about interoperability is absolutely true. However, that being said, I'm not currently aware of any true mass transit system (commuter rail excluded... as that's a bit of a different scenario) in which interoperability with freight is important... In fact, many transit agencies run different systems on different lines. Vancouver, for one.

Cirrus, I totally respect your view on monorail and for many installations, especially in the US which doesn't have dense downtowns and generally has wide boulevards in which to run LRT down.

I, personally, would like to see monorail be "considered" in more corridors, simply because ANY elevated systems are a joy for the rider and make transit a much more visible and enjoyable experience. When you're in a train whizzing by cars below, when you're in a car watching the train whiz by. These things have a visceral effect on people.

I think it has an opportunity to give cities that can't afford a fully grade-separated subway a relatively fair cost way into the mass-transit market. I also feel grade-separation attracts far more riders away from their cars... and since monorail is, by design, grade-separated... I like that.

I have nothing against Light Rail... but I think it still relegates transit to "the inferior route" and doesn't do enough for the image that "transit is slow" and "transit is for poor people and immigrants" that is all too common in the US.

The one advantage that I think Light Rail has the potential to do is it can be used to reshape streets, slow down (calm) traffic, and create a nicer streetscape. However, that really depends on the city's planning department.... and people generally don't like it when you say that the shiny new train will slow down their commute.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #82  
Old Posted Dec 9, 2016, 3:10 AM
M II A II R II K's Avatar
M II A II R II K M II A II R II K is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Toronto
Posts: 52,200
Why Monorails Are the Future (Really This Time)

Read More: https://www.bloomberg.com/view/artic...ally-this-time

Quote:
.....

Monorails may not have worked in sprawling, 20th-century Los Angeles. But for the dense, traffic-choked cities of the modern developing world -- where populations are growing, pollution is worsening and public funds are limited -- they're ideal. If they catch on, they could change urban landscapes around the world for the better.

- In China, they're already starting to. Although China has built some of the world's biggest and best metro systems, and plans to build more, subways come with plenty of problems. They're geographically constrained, disruptive to build and expensive to maintain, especially for the smaller cities driving much of China's local debt problem. Buses and cars are cheaper and more flexible, but contribute to air pollution and traffic jams.

- Monorails could help on all counts. They run solely on electricity, and so are usually better for the environment. They're built above ground, on relatively thin pylons that can be installed in road medians, and thus avoid the heavy costs of excavation and underground maintenance. BYD, a Chinese manufacturer backed by Warren Buffett, says its SkyTrain monorail costs one-sixth what a traditional metro would, and requires only one-third the time to install.

- More interestingly, monorails can navigate steep grades and sharp curves. This makes them ideally suited to downtowns, where they can easily be aligned with existing roads and landscapes. And it opens up new possibilities. The world's busiest monorail -- with nearly a million daily passengers -- is located in the hilly metropolis of Chongqing in Southwest China, where it negotiates curves and hills that would've required tunnels for heavier rail.

- Though few cities are as geographically challenging as Chongqing, there's plenty of demand for transit systems that can take people exactly where they want to go. Which suggests one more advantage: Monorails make ideal complements to other transit. China is building high-speed rail networks to link cities into massive clusters, but getting passengers the "last mile" from rail stations to home or work is proving to be a major challenge.

- For developers, all this adds up to a big opportunity. BYD recently received an $8.9 billion loan commitment from the China Development Bank to fund its monorail business, for a market estimated to be worth $450 billion. The company says it's in talks with 20 Chinese cities. CRRC, a state-owned railway manufacturer, announced its own monorail system earlier this year. Soon, its railways in places as far-flung as Kenya and Malaysia might be complemented by monorails.

.....
__________________
ASDFGHJK
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #83  
Old Posted Dec 9, 2016, 5:16 PM
emathias emathias is offline
Adoptive Chicagoan
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: River North, Chicago, Illinois
Posts: 5,157
Quote:
Originally Posted by twoNeurons View Post
...
Capacity is purely a capacity of how long your trains are and how often you run them. That's it!
...
That's not true. Also relevant are how *wide* the trains are (for example B-division trains in New York can carry more people than A-division trains of the same total length because they are wider), whether they are single level or multi-level (more relevant in commuter rail than metro-style, but a theoretical possibility), the seating arrangement, and whether the cars are completely intergrated together instead of being discrete cars.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #84  
Old Posted Dec 9, 2016, 5:43 PM
jg6544 jg6544 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 1,113
Two almost universal predictions for "the future" when I was a kid: Monorails and flying cars.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #85  
Old Posted Jun 9, 2019, 7:10 PM
M II A II R II K's Avatar
M II A II R II K M II A II R II K is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Toronto
Posts: 52,200
Monorail advocates say Maryland officials will consider it for I-270

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local...8fb_story.html

Quote:
.....

- Advocates said Tuesday that Maryland’s transportation chief has agreed to make a monorail on Interstate 270 part of a traffic relief study examining the potential environmental impacts of adding toll lanes to the highway. --- Charlie Maier said Maryland Transportation Secretary Pete K. Rahn told him and other monorail advocates at a meeting Tuesday that their idea of building a 27-mile monorail between Frederick and the Shady Grove Metro station is “worth additional exploration.” Rahn said it “makes sense” to include monorail as an option in an upcoming study of adding toll lanes to I-270 north of Interstate 370 in Gaithersburg, according to Maier.

- Robert Eisinger, a Montgomery County developer, is promoting the idea of an elevated monorail adjacent to I-270 amid debate over Maryland Gov. Larry Hogan’s proposal to add toll lanes to I-270 and the Capital Beltway. Eisinger has touted a monorail as a fast, reliable and cost-effective way to relieve traffic congestion by taking thousands of motorists off the highway. --- According to Eisinger, a privately funded consultant’s study estimated that the line could be built for $3.4 billion within the highway’s right of way, so no homes or private property would be affected. Eisinger’s idea has attracted interest among some Montgomery officials, particularly those who have said the Republican governor’s plan to relieve traffic by adding toll lanes needs to include more transit options.

.....



__________________
ASDFGHJK
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #86  
Old Posted Mar 5, 2021, 7:48 PM
M II A II R II K's Avatar
M II A II R II K M II A II R II K is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Toronto
Posts: 52,200
Monorail is a ‘viable’ transit option for I-270 but wouldn’t reduce traffic, study says

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local...873_story.html

Quote:
.....

- A monorail line between Frederick and the Shady Grove Metro station in Montgomery County could be built for $4.4 billion and allow passengers to reliably make the 28-mile trip in 42 to 46 minutes, according to a study by the Maryland Department of Transportation. While the agency found a monorail to be a “viable” public transportation option for the Interstate 270 corridor, it also cited a “concern” that it would draw passengers from other transit systems and barely reduce traffic on Interstate 270. — Of the 34,800 to 47,800 people expected to ride a monorail daily, based on its speed and frequency, nearly 10,000 would come from other transit systems, including MARC commuter rail and express commuter buses. A monorail would attract about 10,300 new transit trips daily, which would take that many vehicles off I-270 and other roads in the corridor, a less than 1 percent reduction in future traffic, the study found. The remaining riders would come from anticipated population and job growth.

- Monorail advocates say they question some of the findings, particularly the assumptions underlying the ridership calculations. However, the overall conclusion that a monorail would be feasible, they say, shows it deserves serious consideration as a way to expand mass transit. — “They’ve confirmed that this is a viable transit mode,” said Montgomery County developer Robert O. Eisinger, the proposal’s primary champion, who has funded his own monorail consultant studies via his High Road Foundation. “This is not Disneyland. This is not Mickey Mouse. If nothing else, this says when you’re looking at traffic congestion solutions, this has to be considered.” — The study found that an “aggressive” schedule would allow a monorail to be built in about five years. It would have six stations: the Frederick MARC station, Urbana, Clarksburg, Germantown, Metropolitan Grove and the Shady Grove Metro station in Rockville. The biggest hurdle: No one has identified a way to pay for it, including its ongoing operating costs, considering transit lines typically require government subsidies.

.....



__________________
ASDFGHJK
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #87  
Old Posted Apr 1, 2021, 7:31 PM
M II A II R II K's Avatar
M II A II R II K M II A II R II K is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Toronto
Posts: 52,200
The ‘People Mover’ transit system’s twin portals welcome travellers to Bologna, Italy

https://www.stirworld.com/see-featur...-bologna-italy

Quote:
.....

- The Marconi Express mass rapid transit system - dubbed the 'People Mover' - is a 5084m long above-ground monorail designed by Iosa Ghini Associati for the city of Bologna in Northern Italy. Conceived as a means of linking the Guglielmo Marconi Airport to the city centre and nearby Bologna Centrale railway station, the project aims to facilitate comfortable and convenient transit experiences for locals and tourists in the area, while also easing transfer between means of rail and air terminals. Operating in tandem with technological innovations in the field of automotive design and industrial design, the transport system's infrastructure is designed to connect with nearby urban areas expected to go through significant redevelopment, but also integrate into stretches of the rural countryside.

.....


















__________________
ASDFGHJK
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #88  
Old Posted May 18, 2021, 6:44 PM
M II A II R II K's Avatar
M II A II R II K M II A II R II K is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Toronto
Posts: 52,200
__________________
ASDFGHJK
Reply With Quote
     
     
End
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Transportation
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 10:24 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.