Queensland UTC +10
Terms of use Privacy About us Media Contact

Links

Author Topic: Article: Transportation Jetsons-style  (Read 5471 times)

colinw

  • Guest
Article: Transportation Jetsons-style
« on: April 15, 2012, 01:26:29 PM »
The Mercury -> click here

Quote


ELECTRIC driverless vehicles that seat two to six passengers are the answer to Hobart's transport woes, says Alderman Leo Foley.

Personal Rapid Transit vehicles, or podcars, run on tracks and are booked like a taxi.

The latest radical, automated transport idea for Hobart, akin to TV cartoon The Jetsons family vehicle, comes on top of proposals for ferries, a light rail and a monorail.

Ald Foley, who has been researching the podcars, said they were more efficient and flexible than traditional transport.

"Too much attention is being paid to old technology," he said.

"Trams and boats and second-hand monorails have all been tried and failed before. People need individual mobility. What we need is 21st-century technology and thinking."

Already the podcars have been rolled out at London's Heathrow airport, in the US and in the United Arab Emirates, but other cities are also working on their implementation.

Ald Foley said they worked on a grid system to carry people where and when they wanted, with privacy and security.

"They offer all the conveniences of a car and all the social advantages of public transport," he said.

"They are ready to go when you are, 24 hours a day, they take you where you want to go directly.

"They do not stop at all so there are no traffic hold-ups or stations."

He said the podcars were energy-efficient and virtually silent because of rubber tyres and linear induction motors.

"Podcars will reduce traffic, [solve] inner-city parking and free up our roads for commerce.

"It's the way of the future."

Ald Foley said he would be putting the proposal to the council for consideration.

"Having the monorail discussion has brought this forward but this is a better system, so if council's going to look at anything it should be looking at this."

Offline Gazza

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4669
Re: Article: Transportation Jetsons-style
« Reply #1 on: April 15, 2012, 01:48:45 PM »
Recyling a post I made on SCC about PRT


I think prt has little potential because the hourly capacity is too low, resulting in queuing for vehicles.

It's fine for say a Heathrow car park, because a car park in itself is a weak trip generator.

These prt systems can send out a pod for 4 or so people, from a station every 5 seconds or so.

To me, that sounds near identical from an operational standpoint to many amusement rides, which utilise conveyor belt loading and multiple vehicles departing in quick succession.

Check out the very start of this video (literally first 10 secs) for instance of the loading process on the Harry Potter ride at Islands of Adventure:


There are 4 person benches moving non stop, and the dispatch interval is around 5 seconds, giving a touch under 3000 passengers per hour.
Despite this, the ride is known for getting 1-2 hour queues in the summmer months.

Now imagine one of these in the context of a busy cbd with many more times the passenger demand...eek!

And 3000 per hour is still less than say a heavily used bus coridoor.

A ski lift with quad chairs is perhaps another example of something that operates with similar capacity to prt.

My view is that if you are going to use the concrete to build a prt system, just build skytrain esque system instead!

Offline #Metro

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 19352
  • DON'T SIGN! DON'T RENEW!!
Re: Article: Transportation Jetsons-style
« Reply #2 on: April 15, 2012, 01:50:02 PM »
OMG, no wonder Hobart has cr*p public transport - worst bus system I have ever had the torture of using.
How about decent network planning, decent frequency, major simplification and then when they've got that, a busway?!
Negative people... have a problem for every solution.
Posts are commentary and are not necessarily endorsed by RAIL Back on Track or its members. Not affiliated with, paid by or in conspiracy with MTR/Metro.

somebody

  • Guest
Re: Article: Transportation Jetsons-style
« Reply #3 on: April 16, 2012, 02:57:32 PM »
I can't see that Hobart needs rail anywhere.

Offline #Metro

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 19352
  • DON'T SIGN! DON'T RENEW!!
Re: Article: Transportation Jetsons-style
« Reply #4 on: April 16, 2012, 03:07:26 PM »
I'd like to write a MR on this, but would that be out of scope for us? I'm just wondering.
The experience on Hobart's system was not good at all and something I will remember for a long time.  :o
Negative people... have a problem for every solution.
Posts are commentary and are not necessarily endorsed by RAIL Back on Track or its members. Not affiliated with, paid by or in conspiracy with MTR/Metro.

Offline #Metro

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 19352
  • DON'T SIGN! DON'T RENEW!!
Re: Article: Transportation Jetsons-style
« Reply #5 on: April 16, 2012, 03:12:13 PM »
Does anyone know if the rail line they have their is still used/well used. Seems to be a freight terminal there?
Negative people... have a problem for every solution.
Posts are commentary and are not necessarily endorsed by RAIL Back on Track or its members. Not affiliated with, paid by or in conspiracy with MTR/Metro.

somebody

  • Guest
Re: Article: Transportation Jetsons-style
« Reply #6 on: April 16, 2012, 03:28:25 PM »
Does anyone know if the rail line they have their is still used/well used. Seems to be a freight terminal there?
Freight only.

They used to have a long distance passenger rail service, but no more.

colinw

  • Guest
Re: Article: Transportation Jetsons-style
« Reply #7 on: April 16, 2012, 04:49:58 PM »
Until around 1974, Hobart had suburban rail system operated by rail motors and some loco hauled trains. It consisted of a main line with some double track through the suburbs as far as Claremont, plus a couple of secondary branch line services. Suburban trains ran to Austins Ferry, Bridgewater & Brighton on the main line, to New Norfolk on the Derwent Valley branch, to Cadburys (on a short spur from Claremont) and to Risdon (on a short branch line from Derwent Park), the rail terminus at Risdon being on the opposite side of the Derwent from Risdon proper.

The long distance "Tasman Limited" service between Hobart & Devonport via Launceston hung on somewhat longer, until 1978. The site of the former passenger station is now occupied by the ABC headquarters.

In the early '70s there were still 70 or so passenger trains a day at Hobart station.

The double track from Hobart to Claremont has been singled, with the space for the former 2nd track now used by a bikeway.

An intermodal yard is being developed at Brighton, which will see the main line section from Brighton to Hobart become very lightly used or even totally redundant.  There are proposals to use this corridor either for a light rail service to Bridgewater, or for a busway.

This map, linked off Railpage, provides some context as it shows both the former tram system and part of the TGR suburban system.

« Last Edit: April 16, 2012, 05:16:10 PM by colinw »

Offline #Metro

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 19352
  • DON'T SIGN! DON'T RENEW!!
Re: Article: Transportation Jetsons-style
« Reply #8 on: April 16, 2012, 04:59:09 PM »
In that case the Hobart Freight Terminal should become a Bus Depot! :bu
Negative people... have a problem for every solution.
Posts are commentary and are not necessarily endorsed by RAIL Back on Track or its members. Not affiliated with, paid by or in conspiracy with MTR/Metro.

colinw

  • Guest
Re: Article: Transportation Jetsons-style
« Reply #9 on: April 16, 2012, 05:19:44 PM »
I'm inclined to agree. While there is a push for light rail to Bridgewater, and a study underway, it is hard to see anything more than a decent frequent bus system being necessary in Hobart for decades to come.

The best thing to do with the Bridgewater to Hobart rail corridor is probably to "bank it" as a bikeway for now.

Brighton to Bridgewater will remain open, as some freight trains still use the bottom end of the Derwent Valley branch as far as Boyer.

Offline #Metro

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 19352
  • DON'T SIGN! DON'T RENEW!!
Re: Article: Transportation Jetsons-style
« Reply #10 on: April 16, 2012, 11:25:12 PM »
Rip it all up and put a busway in. Massive bus depot at where the current freight terminal is to store all the buses.
Buses can run off the busway and up into the hilly parts, no problem, no transfer and you can get express patterns for
the really far away areas. Light Rail would also work, but you'd need to transfer, no express pattern possible, plus due to the larger vehicle size, lower frequency.

The SE busway carries 44 million passengers per year, more than any stretch of rail line in Australia, more than Mandurah and Joondalup lines combined. So I don't buy the 'people were put off because only trains can'. They were put off because the PT system was shut down progressively and cars became king. And it's Hobart - what they need is high frequency and simplicity.
Negative people... have a problem for every solution.
Posts are commentary and are not necessarily endorsed by RAIL Back on Track or its members. Not affiliated with, paid by or in conspiracy with MTR/Metro.

Offline ozbob

  • Administrator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 76444
    • RAIL Back On Track
Re: Article: Transportation Jetsons-style
« Reply #11 on: April 17, 2012, 03:41:44 AM »
Quote
The SE busway carries 44 million passengers per year, more than any stretch of rail line in Australia

Melbourne loop, Parra to Sydney, even Roma St to Bowen Hills would exceed that.  The SEB is a conglomeration of multiple routes, it is near capacity.
Half baked projects, have long term consequences ...
  Bob's Blog

colinw

  • Guest
Re: Article: Transportation Jetsons-style
« Reply #12 on: April 17, 2012, 08:09:08 AM »
Giving up the only rail corridor available into a State capital would be an act of unbelievable stupidity, and I am frankly appalled that anyone on this board would even suggest it.

By all means mothball it, even bank it as a bikeway, but emphatically DO NOT give it up to a road mode of transport (even a busway), because we all know that once that is done it is gone forever.

If the SEB is taken as the 'state of the art' of PT in Australia, with its rough riding, confusing routing and shambolic stations & congestion then no wonder the vast majority of people choose to drive. I find it hard to express just how much I detest that thing, and resent it as an incredibly poor choice of direction for public transport investment in Brisbane. The fact that the SEB can manage such an outcome can occur just shows how truly bad and under-invested rail is in this country. I'd hate to see the same mistakes occur elsewhere. One ride on even an ancient Metro like the metre gauge part of the Barcelona system, or the 950mm gauge "Ferrovia TransVesuviano" part of the Naples Metro, shows just how behind even out 'world class' busway really is. (Those ancient 950mm gauge trains in Naples manage 50 million a year easily).

Frankly, as a high quality PT right of way the rail route into Hobart from Bridgewater is in the wrong place. It is a legacy routing that misses most of the development and dodges the inner suburbs before contacting suburbia somewhat further out. It is also somewhat windy & indirect. Just as you wouldn't put the Cleveland or Beenleigh lines where they are if you built them today, the line into Hobart isn't where you would want to put a high quality public transport spine. Best to leave it alone to preserve the possibility of a rail route into Hobart for freight & longer distance pax (eg. trains to Bridgewater, Brighton & New Norfolk, along with intercity to Launceston/Devponport), because there is no other feasible rail route into Hobart from the North.

Run your high frequency buses elsewhere!  Bus lanes & bus priority measures straight up Brooker Ave & Argyle St/New Town Road to start with. At least that gets the buses near the population!

The rail is best left alone for future use to the OUTER suburbs.

Offline #Metro

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 19352
  • DON'T SIGN! DON'T RENEW!!
Re: Article: Transportation Jetsons-style
« Reply #13 on: April 17, 2012, 08:15:50 AM »
No sympathy from me! CUT!!

Quote
If the SEB is taken as the 'state of the art' of PT in Australia, with its rough riding, confusing routing and shambolic stations & congestion then no wonder the vast majority of people choose to drive. I find it hard to express just how much I detest that thing, and resent it as an incredibly poor choice of direction for public transport investment in Brisbane.

Gee whiz, can't agree with you there, I moved house to be next to it and it is the best thing since sliced bread!! Didn't get that level of service when I lived next to train stations! No signal, track or accident faults - EVER.
Negative people... have a problem for every solution.
Posts are commentary and are not necessarily endorsed by RAIL Back on Track or its members. Not affiliated with, paid by or in conspiracy with MTR/Metro.

colinw

  • Guest
Re: Article: Transportation Jetsons-style
« Reply #14 on: April 17, 2012, 08:21:32 AM »
No sympathy from me! CUT!!

Quote
If the SEB is taken as the 'state of the art' of PT in Australia, with its rough riding, confusing routing and shambolic stations & congestion then no wonder the vast majority of people choose to drive. I find it hard to express just how much I detest that thing, and resent it as an incredibly poor choice of direction for public transport investment in Brisbane.

Gee whiz, can't agree with you there, I moved house to be next to it and it is the best thing since sliced bread!! Didn't get that level of service when I lived next to train stations! No signal, track or accident faults - EVER.

I can't agree with you about that.  All that proves is our rail system is cr%p & underinvested seriously, the SEB is in no way representative of a decent mass transit system, and doesn't come even vaguely close to most of the overseas systems I have used.  It is an unnavigable, confusing shambles. I found it easier to get around several European systems without knowing the local language than to figure out what bus to catch where in Brisbane. Heck, my local busway station can't even manage to display electronic information - just a lame-o message saying "please read the paper timetable" (the paper timetable that actually forgets to list two of the buses departing to my suburb, including the 7:20PM LAST SERVICE OF THE DAY).

A 3rd rate "metro wannabe" which is the best performer in a 4th rate system. Don't let its relative success blind you to just how poor it really is. And FFS please don't build any more of the damn things.

A randomly chosen legacy metro in any random European city does better, even the tiny gauge ones in places like Stockholm, Naples & Barcelona.

Mind you, some of my antipathy toward buses is probably a result of getting motion sickness on them if I attempt to read. Something that does not affect me on buses or planes. Can't read in a bus, or in a car - must be something specific to the way road vehicles sway or ride.
« Last Edit: April 17, 2012, 08:49:59 AM by colinw »

Offline Stillwater

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5860
Re: Article: Transportation Jetsons-style
« Reply #15 on: April 17, 2012, 08:52:43 AM »
Hobart is getting a state of the art intermodal transport hub.  The city gains, not loses, by not having freight trains run all the way to the Hobart waterfront.  Once contamination of the site is overcome, it is ripe for redevelopment.  The point is that Hobart does not lose its rail-road freight transfer functions/operations, it is merely relocated to a more appropriate place.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brighton_Transport_Hub

colinw

  • Guest
Re: Article: Transportation Jetsons-style
« Reply #16 on: April 17, 2012, 08:59:17 AM »
The old site in Hobart is an awful place for a freight yard, and suffers from many of the same disadvantages that the former Roma St yard did in Brisbane.

I just don't think the former rail corridor would be a particularly useful route for a mass transit service other than to the outer suburbs, as it misses most of the useful inner destinations. However I do not think it is sensible to give up the only viable rail route into a major city. For the same reasons I vehemently oppose the proposed Broadmeadows to Newcastle closure in NSW, and still consider the Beenleigh to Southport closure in 1964 to be the height of stupidity (as shown by the knots were tying ourselves in trying to get any kind of rail back to Southport area).  By all means close & even remove rail, just don't give up the darn corridor like we did to Southport & Tweed heads back in the '60s.

Another useful lesson from QLD's idiocy of the 1960s. Lota to Cleveland and Nerang to Tweed Heads both closed around 1960/61, followed by Beenleigh to Southport & Nerang in 1964. We got rid of the corridors on the Gold Coast, but the Redland Shire Council vigorously defended & retained the Cleveland corridor. Gold Coast reinstatement remains an ongoing and incredibly expensive processes, but thanks to the foresight of RSC the Cleveland rebuild of 1983-87 was relatively inexpensive & rapid.

For Hobart My expectation is that the former rail corridor will become a cycleway/rail trail, possibly with a heritage tram component as it is quite scenic and offers access to some nice parkland.

For rapid transit buses, straight up the major roads like Brooker with bus lanes & traffic light priority is the way to go.  The best rapid bus routes can be inferred from the former tram system, which was actually quite logical in its routings. The rail corridor in Hobart is really only useful if you want to go to the outer suburbs - it neatly avoids the useful inner areas and only re-contacts suburbia at about Moonah.
« Last Edit: April 17, 2012, 09:06:04 AM by colinw »

Offline #Metro

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 19352
  • DON'T SIGN! DON'T RENEW!!
Re: Article: Transportation Jetsons-style
« Reply #17 on: April 17, 2012, 09:40:13 AM »
^^ Yeah, you build QR CityTrain on the Busway alignment and it would be carrying just 18 million per year and 2 tph, 4tph at best. And this is not considering that you would have had to build CRR on top of that as well or connect it as a spur line to the existing train system.

I don't believe that rail is the only answer and that all other options should be looked down upon. It's HOBART people! Catch the bus!!
Negative people... have a problem for every solution.
Posts are commentary and are not necessarily endorsed by RAIL Back on Track or its members. Not affiliated with, paid by or in conspiracy with MTR/Metro.

Offline #Metro

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 19352
  • DON'T SIGN! DON'T RENEW!!
Re: Article: Transportation Jetsons-style
« Reply #18 on: April 17, 2012, 11:21:36 PM »
AHEM!!

This thread has gone waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay off topic!

HOBART!!
Negative people... have a problem for every solution.
Posts are commentary and are not necessarily endorsed by RAIL Back on Track or its members. Not affiliated with, paid by or in conspiracy with MTR/Metro.

colinw

  • Guest
Re: Article: Transportation Jetsons-style
« Reply #19 on: April 18, 2012, 09:34:40 AM »
AHEM!!

This thread has gone waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay off topic!

HOBART!!

Agreed. It is a very interesting discussion, but should be continued in the appropriate place.

Getting back on (original) topic, my thoughts are:

1. Personal Rapid Transit for Hobart: DON'T BE DAFT!!!!
2. Busway using the former rail corridor.  Don't think so, it doesn't really go anywhere useful until Moonah
3. High frequency bus routes & bus priority measures on main roads - EMPHATICALLY YES.
4. Heritage tramway to Cornelian bay (current proposal). Good tourist attraction & saves a potentially useful corridor.
5. LRT or railcar service to Bridgewater, Brighton & New Norfolk. Preserve corridor, but not yet. Might be viable one day.

For now, buses, fast & frequent, are all that Hobart needs. But it would be kind of cool to see a heritage tramway, and HCC does own some very nice preserved trams from the old 3'6" system which deserve to see the light of day.  A heritage tram on the old railway as far as Cornelian Bay would be a nice way to use them, and quite scenic.

Just don't confuse a tourist tram on the old railway with public transport. It will be more of a Christchurch or Bendigo tram sort of thing. The Hobart trams were unique in Australia, the only double deck units in the country, similar to an old London tram or a Hong Kong tram. It would be nice to see something like that running.

The former tramway was 3'6", so no gauge problems with using the old railway. Just string up some 600 volt overhead with wooden poles and go, although possibly some attention to wheel/rail profile might be needed?

Offline #Metro

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 19352
  • DON'T SIGN! DON'T RENEW!!
Re: Article: Transportation Jetsons-style
« Reply #20 on: April 18, 2012, 09:47:35 AM »
A heritage tram would be quaint and would be nice linking Salamanca Place with the CBD and the Royal Botanic Gardens.
But NOT as Rapid Transit  :-t
Negative people... have a problem for every solution.
Posts are commentary and are not necessarily endorsed by RAIL Back on Track or its members. Not affiliated with, paid by or in conspiracy with MTR/Metro.

Offline Golliwog

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4988
Re: Article: Transportation Jetsons-style
« Reply #21 on: April 18, 2012, 03:29:03 PM »
Simon/Colinw, in htat case would you be able to take the comments from this thread into a more appropriate one, or just start a new one? (then probably just delete this comment)
There is no silver bullet… but there is silver buckshot.
Never argue with an idiot. They'll drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.

colinw

  • Guest
Re: Article: Transportation Jetsons-style
« Reply #22 on: April 18, 2012, 03:45:38 PM »
Will do when I get time.

somebody

  • Guest
Re: Article: Transportation Jetsons-style
« Reply #23 on: April 18, 2012, 04:17:59 PM »
Predominantly QLD posts split to here: http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=8150.0
Predominantly NSW posts split to here: http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=8149.0

 

Sitemap 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 


“You can't understand a city without using its public transportation system.” -- Erol Ozan