SkyTran offers Detroit new idea for mass transit

[begingri]

BY RON DZWONKOWSKI

DETROIT FREE PRESS COLUMNIST


Detroit was once a place where people with new ideas came to make them happen, especially ideas that involved transportation.
Not anymore, it seems, based on the lack of response to overtures to the city from Jerry Sanders, chairman and CEO of SkyTran.

SkyTran would love to make Detroit the site for its first large-scale project, an overhead mass-transit system that no less an outfit than NASA has said can "revolutionize personal transportation."

Before the city starts tearing up streets for the $520-million light-rail line up Woodward, which will inevitably cost more and be used less than projected, maybe someone should get back in touch with Sanders and at least invite him to make a presentation. Especially considering that he doesn't want any taxpayer money to build his new system, just rights-of-way, and would consider manufacturing its components here for export to other cities that SkyTran is sure will want what they see working cheaply and cleanly in Detroit.

"We're not coming with a hand out; we're a privately held company," Sanders said in a telephone interview last week. "We're simply saying, 'Give us a chance.' If we can be accommodated, we can install an exceptionally low-cost, low-maintenance, high-profit system. Unlike other public transportation, we won't need a subsidy."


Continued at: http://www.freep.com/article/2011041...a-mass-transit

[Hermod]

I can see one downer. With any kind of a systm failure, on a line with several thousand passengers per day, there are going to be an awful lot of four passenger cars for the fire department to rescue people from.

Touch screen controls for destination? How will that stand up to the onslaught of Detroit's orcs?

[Douglas]

Remember the People Mover saga. As desperately as we need a mass transportation system in place I doubt we will ever see one that is built at a reasonable cost to the taxpayers with the type of leadership we have in place today. Before we initiate these types of large scale projects we need to have the right people in place to oversee the planning and construction of these types of projects. Unfortunately all we have at the moment are a bunch of career politicians with sticky fingers which leaves me doubtful that we can get this done any time soon.

[Wesley Mouch]

Hermod's concerns are legitimate, but addressable. If you're spending 5% of the cost of light rail, you'll have 95% of the cost to spend on redundancy, repair/rescue vehicles, security staffing, as well as monitoring of the 'touch screen controls'.

There are problems. And there are benefits. I think the time for some new thinking on public transportation is now.

[Detroitnerd]

Oh, jesus. This PRT shit again? PRT is a hoax. The people behind it bilk various communities and there has never been a functioning PRT system built in any city. And the joke that they will not need public subsidies is just that -- a joke.

They have a great PR team, good packaging, excellent everything -- except no functioning system has ever been built for a city, and never will. You get the feeling these people are brought in to monkeywrench real transit plans with their high-tech horseshit.

[Wesley Mouch]

Oh, jesus. This PRT shit again? PRT is a hoax. ...

Why is this a hoax?

Seems perfect for a less dense city, although I see the argument for high traffic corridors [[Woodward)

[Detroitnerd]

Why is this a hoax?

Seems perfect for a less dense city, although I see the argument for high traffic corridors [[Woodward)

You know that old saw about how when somebody promises something that sounds too good to be true, that it probably isn't true? Well, that's PRT in a nutshell: An all-PR package that ranges between wishful thinking, fuzzy statistics, junk science and outright denial.

This system has never been applied to any American city.

Serious transit analysts have looked at it and said it is impractical.

The salespeople behind it are, essentially, lying.

What they do is they go to towns that have not had a functioning light rail system and they trot out their dog-and-pony show. Then they essentially distract the city [["monorail! monorail! monorial!) from building a REAL, FUNCTIONING mass transit system that works elsewhere. Notice how they never try to sell these systems to places that have working mass transit in the first place? It's a shell game.

[laphoque]

What they do is they go to towns that have not had a functioning light rail system and they trot out their dog-and-pony show. Then they essentially distract the city [["monorail! monorail! monorial!) from building a REAL, FUNCTIONING mass transit system that works elsewhere. Notice how they never try to sell these systems to places that have working mass transit in the first place? It's a shell game.

If that is the worry why not preclude any public funding from being used on the system? These types of systems usually have some time limited charter that would allow us to include any provisions we wish. Let them build up Gratiot & Grand River [[or on the freeways) while we build up Woodward. The systems could provide different yet complimentary service.

Or we could do as we probably will and let someone else take the risk and watch what happens.

[laphoque]

I think we should give them the right of way for fifteen years or so much like was done back in the day with the several different streetcar companies. We should still build the light rail, but I'd never object to somebody actually building this: even though I have great doubts as to the real funding and capability of this dude to build this.

[Detroitnerd]

Yeah, let's give them the rights to build a system that has never been built, and I'm sure that they won't come running back again and again for subsidies, thereby compromising our ability to fund a PROVEN SYSTEM THAT WORKED HERE BEFORE AND CAN WORK AGAIN. Jesus. What nonsense ...

[ghettopalmetto]

Sure! Why build something that has only worked everywhere on earth for well over a hundred years? Let's reinvent the wheel yet again!

[downtownguy]

Yeah, let's give them the rights to build a system that has never been built, and I'm sure that they won't come running back again and again for subsidies, thereby compromising our ability to fund a PROVEN SYSTEM THAT WORKED HERE BEFORE AND CAN WORK AGAIN. Jesus. What nonsense ...

After looking at their website, I'm impressed. Perhaps we do need to think outside the bus... er, box. Detroitnerd, using your argument, we'd still be riding in buggies. I admit, I'm buying into their hyperbole, so why not educate us on why you think this isn't a viable system? Please give some specifics as to why you think this system doesn't work.

[Detroitnerd]

After looking at their website, I'm impressed. Perhaps we do need to think outside the bus... er, box. Detroitnerd, using your argument, we'd still be riding in buggies. I admit, I'm buying into their hyperbole, so why not educate us on why you think this isn't a viable system? Please give some specifics as to why you think this system doesn't work.

You are trying to design a resource-intensive system for low ridership. We already have a system like that: It's called the personal vehicle.

Nowhere do you get the gains in efficiency of an intelligent mass transit system, especially during peak hours.

No system like this has ever been applied to an American city, but debates over PRT have effectively derailed other systems [[light rail, etc.) that have proven track records.

You are talking about a system of four-people cars. To move 12,000 people along Gratiot at peak hour, this will require 3,000 vehicles. What happens when one breaks down? You have to get up on the guideway, fix the car, and let it go on again. This is an intensive operation that can take an hour. What happens to the other 10,000 people waiting in the pods? How can they escape in case of disaster? There are a lot of very important unanswered questions here.

What's more, we HAD a system that transported more than 100 million riders per year. It was called a network of streetcars. The modern version, light rail, is working in hundreds of cities across the world. We are preparing to implement it right now. Naturally, these hornswogglers want to step in and make their pitch now, before we see what light rail can do. They never pitch it to cities that have already begun building light rail because light rail networks bring a certain transit sophistication to a city, and enough knowledgable people get into positions of authority to laugh down PRT.

But if you want to listen to these flim-flam men, at least watch this first:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jF_yLodI1CQ

[davewindsor]

You are trying to design a resource-intensive system for low ridership. We already have a system like that: It's called the personal vehicle.

Nowhere do you get the gains in efficiency of an intelligent mass transit system, especially during peak hours.

No system like this has ever been applied to an American city, but debates over PRT have effectively derailed other systems [[light rail, etc.) that have proven track records.

You are talking about a system of four-people cars. To move 12,000 people along Gratiot at peak hour, this will require 3,000 vehicles. What happens when one breaks down? You have to get up on the guideway, fix the car, and let it go on again. This is an intensive operation that can take an hour. What happens to the other 10,000 people waiting in the pods? How can they escape in case of disaster? There are a lot of very important unanswered questions here.

What's more, we HAD a system that transported more than 100 million riders per year. It was called a network of streetcars. The modern version, light rail, is working in hundreds of cities across the world. We are preparing to implement it right now. Naturally, these hornswogglers want to step in and make their pitch now, before we see what light rail can do. They never pitch it to cities that have already begun building light rail because light rail networks bring a certain transit sophistication to a city, and enough knowledgable people get into positions of authority to laugh down PRT.

But if you want to listen to these flim-flam men, at least watch this first:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jF_yLodI1CQ

Did you actually bother to google some of your questions? They have an FAQ website http://www.skytran.net/15Faq/faq01.htm

The skytran is moving at 100-150mph non-stop and then they separate on an offramp to their destination stop. They are not hindered by cross traffic. It can brake from 100mph to 0 within 55 feet. How fast is your light rail transit going to go? Light rail is constantly losing time at intersections if there's a red light, they are at a stop loading/unloading, or if a vehicle is blocking the rail lines. And what happens if a light rail vehicle breaks down? Then the whole system is jammed. It's top speed is no where close to what the skytran can do. So, even though each car cannot carry the amount a light rail car can. The sheer speed wouldn't require 3,000 vehicles to move that many people that light rail would require. In fact, the website says that they can move 14,000 people per hour during peak hours with a grid of 100 vehicles in a major city, not 3,000 vehicles. Did you make up your number?

If you bothered to watch the some of the other videos, the cars can join with one another if they are going on the same route. If one breaks down then another car can push it to the nearest off ramp. It's on a magnetically levitated grid, so it requires little power to move. Plus they have emergency wheels that kick in if the magnetic grid malfunctions.

In addition, it costs a fraction of what light rail does and they'll build it on their own dime. It's a reputable company that signed a partnership with NASA. I think this would be great for a city that wants to show its leading the way as a hub for technology and innovation like it had in its glorious past.

[Magnatomicflux]

The skytran is moving at 100-150mph non-stop and then they separate on an offramp to their destination stop. .............. In fact, the website says that they can move 14,000 people per hour during peak hours with a grid of 100 vehicles in a major city, not 3,000 vehicles. Did you make up your number?
If one breaks down then another car can push it to the nearest off ramp. .............

Where the hell is anyone going here anywhere close to downtown at 150 mph? Is this purly interurban?

If they had 100 pods, which according to the website only carry 2 people, leaving at 1 minute intervals.....don't they only carry 12,000 people p/hour? I'm no good at math so you'll have to figure out how they do it. Every 40 seconds? Are we missing an equation here? Like distance travelled?

If mine breaks I get shoved to a siding? Then what? I just hang there until someone gets around to me??? No thanks.

[ghettopalmetto]

Did you actually bother to google some of your questions? They have an FAQ website http://www.skytran.net/15Faq/faq01.htm

The skytran is moving at 100-150mph non-stop and then they separate on an offramp to their destination stop. They are not hindered by cross traffic. It can brake from 100mph to 0 within 55 feet.

And they know this from the prototype they've constructed, yes?

I don't know about you, but I don't want to be on ANY vehicle that decelerates from 100mph to 0mph in only 55 feet.

[Detroitnerd]

Did you actually bother to google some of your questions? They have an FAQ website http://www.skytran.net/15Faq/faq01.htm

Dave, we've been over this several times already on this board. The pod people's science is ... junk science. They simply pull numbers out of thin air. They promise, essentially, the impossible: That you can build a resource intensive network for a low-ridership system and that it will all be done without subsidies. Does this sound too good to be true? That's because it is. And I hate the lying-ass people who put this system out there precisely because it takes normally sensible people such as yourself and gets them credulous and excited about a system that's nonsense.

Where is the peer-reviewed literature on PRT?

Where has a PRT system been built for a city so we can examine:

1) Financials?
2) Empirical operating information?
3) Breakdown statistics?

We can't, because the system has never been built.

So all those "videos" and "FAQs" are just a bunch of made-up fantasizing about super-high tech concept vehicles that were already starting to look outdated and silly by the 1980s.

And, as profscott pointed out, "Antitransit people love things like Sky Tran because they move the discussion away from proven transit technologies and onto unicorns."

[Detroitnerd]

Yay! Another People Mover! Look at how great the first one worked out!

[Gsgeorge]

Yay! Another People Mover! Look at how great the first one worked out!

I'm not saying this idea is gonna work, because its not, but keep in mind the DPM is only the central loop of what was planned as a much larger city-wide system with linear track going up the radial roads. So what we have is comparable to the Chicago Loop without the rest of the L system. If Chicago just had tracks in the loop, with no linear lines extending out into the city, it too would have been a failure.

[detroitbob]

Yay! Another People Mover! Look at how great the first one worked out!

In defense [[again) of the Downtown People Mover, it does what it was designed to do...move people around downtown Detroit. Period. It is not rapid transit. It was not designed to be rapid ransit. It does it's job well...downtown suffers from lack of people to move, but you can't blame this transit circulator. On days/nights when there are multiple events happening, the PM is busy. It has been maintained, is clean and runs on schedule.

[Detroitnerd]

In defense [[again) of the Downtown People Mover, it does what it was designed to do...move people around downtown Detroit. Period. It is not rapid transit. It was not designed to be rapid ransit. It does it's job well...downtown suffers from lack of people to move, but you can't blame this transit circulator. On days/nights when there are multiple events happening, the PM is busy. It has been maintained, is clean and runs on schedule.

You're right, it's the hub system. But, in general, I am opposed to these boutique systems and would like to see ... oh geez ... a system that seems to work in 99 percent of other cities? I'll take the PM, but no PRT, please.

[Magnatomicflux]

I gotta say, I don't think it would be very attractive having these pipe cleaners strung all over a streetscape with pods doing 100mph. It's not like a maglev is some sound free mode of transportation. It would drive people up walls listening to hundreds of these little turds whipping around 10 feet over their heads every-other-second.

I know this is a train...but I think it illustrates my point.

http://youtu.be/aqAJemM6xYs


Anyways.....I don't want to be on the first one that hits a bird.

[maxx]

Yay! Another People Mover! Look at how great the first one worked out!

And all that track overhead is sooo nice to look at. "Low cost, low maintenance" should make Detroiters pause.

[Jason]

You'd think that journalists would be able to sift through this kind of garbage and not write articles about it. Next there's going to be an article about those toxin removing foot pads, or those energy boosting bracelets.

[Jason]

Yeah, the people mover ultimately didn't work as planned, but it was a legit system at least.