[sustran] Re: Yellow Brick Road, maybe, but what was behind the Wizard's screen ?

[Alan P Howes]

I quite agree that PRT has nothing at all to do with social justice,
and contributes little to sustainable development - assuming that by
referring to the latter, we are talking about "developing countries".
I can't really think of any developing countries where PRT would be
appropriate, so perhaps it's off-topic here - Singapore or KL could
perhaps be candidates, but from what I know of those places the
densities are probably not appropriate.

And Brendan has the advantage on me in having ridden the Cardiff test
track for ULTra - my turn may come!

But while not wishing to be polemical, and notwithstanding any current
failings in ULTra, I still think PRT potentially has something to
contribute to reducing local emissions, global energy use and land
take in transport.  The application we are working on at present - I
can't really name the location without clearance from various people,
but have a guess! - is a rich city in the Middle East, where PRT would
substitute for short car trips - no more than 3-5 km.  People will not
walk such distances there for reasons of climate.  PRT can go into
buildings in a way that PT cannot.  And car use will be limited by
lack of space for parking - in fact, one use of PRT (as well as
feeding into a rail system) would be to link to car parks.

IMO the function of feeding into a line-haul rail transit system in
low-density areas is a key role for PRT - we may not like it, but
there are lots of people out there who will use rail - and probably
PRT - but will not use bus.  (After tonight's trip home I'm not too
struck on rail either, but that's a different story ...)

Cheers, Alan

On Thu, 6 Jan 2005 10:47:47 -0000, "Brendan Finn" <etts at indigo.ie>
wrote to "Asia and the Pacific sustainable transport"
<sustran-discuss at list.jca.apc.org>:

>Alan,
>
>I visited the ULTra test track in Cardiff in late-2003, listened to the
>presentation with an open mind, and had a ride in the cars. I wasn't
>impressed by either the seating or ride comfort, or by the general speed.
>
>For the life of me, I cannot understand why any driver would prefer to use
>one of these rather than to drive their own car, unless conditions for car
>use were made either intolerable or unaffordable. (Perhaps as a short
>shuttle within a closed complex, but not for "real" trips).
>
>For passengers, the comfort of GOOD bus services is far superior. (Of
>course, if the real objective is insulation from other human beings, well I
>just don't have an answer for that). Modest investments in bus services and
>priority within traffic would do infinitely more for mobility and market
>share than any investment in PRT. The huge strides made in Demand Responsive
>/ Flexible Transport show that it can provide the complementary mobility for
>both irregular trips and for special needs users.
>
>Also, I find far too many gaps in their logic, especially when they tout it
>as an "anywhere to anywhere" system. Has anyone seriously thought just how
>much system is needed to connect "everywhere" to "every other where" ?
>
>We currently have a road system that offers that total level of
>connectivity - a common infrastructure that can be used by freight vehicles,
>buses, cars, cyclists, pedestrians and animal traffic. As so many people on
>this site keep on saying, our road system is failing because of the
>unrestricted growth of a single mode - the private car - without regard for
>the other users or more efficient means of providing mobility.
>
>We need to revitalise and reposition the system that actually exists in our
>cities and villages, and which impacts all 6 billion plus of us in our daily
>lives. Many people on Sustrans and elsewhere, including Eric Britton, are
>trying to map out this complex web, understand the linkages, and find the
>equally complex set of solutions to this.
>
>Until this most recent debate, I have remained somewhere between
>uninterested and apathetic about PRT, I guess on the grounds that only a
>city with more money than sense would invest in it. That rules out just
>about everywhere that I live and work (on the lack of money grounds, rather
>than sense!). However, if I thought it was going to divert a single cent or
>a minute of attention from the struggle for better mobility, then I would
>rapidly take a position. A campaigning one. Very strongly. Against.
>
>With best wishes,
>
>
>Brendan Finn,
>ETTS Ltd., Ireland.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: sustran-discuss-bounces+etts=indigo.ie at list.jca.apc.org
>[mailto:sustran-discuss-bounces+etts=indigo.ie at list.jca.apc.org]On Behalf Of
>Alan Howes
>Sent: 06 January 2005 09:36
>To: >
>Subject: [sustran] Re: Following the Yellow Brick Road to PRT
>
>I'm not familiar with this Rotterdam example - but my suspicion is that it
>is not a "true" PRT.  The PRT system I am most familiar with is ULTra (see
>http://www.atsltd.co.uk/); the key characteristics of this system are that
>it is a "spider web" network  , not a single line, and that users are
>offered a direct, non-stop transit from any stop on the network to any other
>stop - in theory with no wait time.  ULTra uses battery-powered,
>rubber-tyred and electronically guided vehicles carrying up to 4 people on a
>(probably) elevated guideway.
>
>NB - neither I nor my employer has a financial stake in ULTra, nor any other
>PRT system! :-)    But I do believe it's a concept whose time will come.
>
>Alan

-- 
Alan P Howes, Perthshire, Scotland
alan at ourpeagreenboat.co.uk
http://www.users.zetnet.co.uk/alanhowes/  [Needs Updating!]