Buenas Dias,

Mike Jensvold idea for changing taxi regulations is interesting.  A friend
in town from DC was surprised that grabbin' a taxi downtown yesterday would
cost us more than a couple bucks for the mile or so trip.  But then again
he's used to grabbin' a cab because you can't count on the buses showing up
on time or at all.

As for PRT demonstration, I've given this some thought.  As I posted @ 4
weeks ago, PRT is essentially the same type of system as the new fancy pants
baggage system installed at Denver International (DIA) in the mid 90s.  The
difference is the safety issue is that much more acute.

The systems are essentially the same because they both involve a single car
/ cart that can start at any point on the system and can have a destination
anywhere on the system.  It's just that one carries a piece of luggage and
the other carries a person.

I'm not sold that a demonstration system will prove anything.  As simple as
the concept of PRT is to explain, the size of it makes it very complex.  The
baggage system at DIA has been a complete flop.  This despite a mini system
having been built for United's use at SFO and a larger version of SFO's
built at the "new" airport in Munich.  The issue for a system like that is
that something that is 10 times bigger is NOT ten times more complex.  It's
likely thousands of times more complex.  

If I've got the concept right, the complexity can be seen by the number of
stops on the system.  The number of possible routes that can be taken from
stop A to stop B, stop C to Stop A, et al. So the number of possible routes
is (n-1) + (n-2) + (n-3) + ... (n-(n-1)) where n is the number of stops on a
system.  So 7 stops gives 28 possible routes for the computer to handle FOR
EACH CAR.  Note that since a system is going to be running more than one
car.  A system with 17 stops gives 153 route possibilities for each car.  40
stops gives 820 routes; 100 stops yields, 5,050 routes; 250 stops gives
31,375 route possibilities.  I think you can see how quickly the complexity
of the system grows.  And as the system adds more stops, one would assume
they're adding more cars.  

I don't know the number of nodes on the system at DIA.  That baggage system
had to serve 89 gates.  Surely there were origination points in the terminal
for every couple of ticket counters so I'll assume 25.  There are 24
curbside baggage stations.  I would assume another 27.  That ultra crude
estimate would make for 165 nodes.  At peak usage, it had 3,550 cars in use
on that system.  So each of the 3,550 cars has @14,000 route possibilities.


In comparison, if the city of Minneapolis were to implement PRT for the city
with a stop every 1/3 mile, it would take about 350 stops to serve the
entire city.  Or to put it another way, it have about twice the number of
nodes as DIA (keep in mind my estimates were crude for DIA).  But that
yields nearly 62,000 route possibility for each car.  And how many PRT cars
would be running on the system at any one time?  It took 3,500 for DIA's
system which had half the nodes and would be considerably than half in terms
of track milage to cover.  

Keep in mind another element of complexity, the speed of the cars.  DIA's
system had a peak speed of 19MPH.  Surely a larger system such as MPLS's
would require a higher speed than that to compete with cars.  

You may say that's unfair to assume that the entire city would be covered.
They're likely to role it out in smaller portions.  But to not cover the
entire city would defeat the purpose of PRT.  It's advantage over
traditional mass transit is that it can deliver people nearly doorstop to
doorstop without a transfer.  To do this, a PRT system has to quickly cover
major parts of the city.  It looses effectiveness once it becomes merely
another cog in the transportation machine.

I hope this helps to give some sort of ball park idea on how truly complex
building a PRT system would be.  And the thing is, DIA's baggage system is a
flop.  It failed.  United Airlines is on the verge of abandoning it.  DIA
had to sell it to United because other airlines refused to use it.  And the
city of Denver to this date, 8 years after the airport opening, still owes
$300 million just for the cost of the baggage systems at DIA.  And here we
are talking about building a system that is going to be longer, have more
stops, have higher safety standards (the occasional squished bag is a
different issue than having an occasional squished person.  It's not an easy
task at all.  And I do not feel that a demonstration system proves that as a
whole it can work and work well.

Why should the taxpayers take on such a risk?  If telecommuting becomes
socially acceptable we could see a huge drop in traffic.  And at that other
congestion issues could be solved in the next 10 - 20 years if cars can
"drive themselves".  The latter is just starting with some vehicles already
able to avoid crashes while cruise control is set.  And the former,
telecommuting, nearly has the technology in place to make it cheap and
practical.  Throw in emission reductions via hybrid vehicles and, further
off, fuel cells and it's likely that we're nearly at the peak of the
personal transportation problem.  When we have a city that still needs to
pay down it's existing debts that consume something like 12% of the annual
budget, why take on this huge risk?

Allen Graetz
Lowry Hill




-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
Of Barbara Lickness
Sent: Wednesday, January 05, 2005 8:48 AM
To: David Shove
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Mpls] To PRT or not PRT 

The "demonstration" system you speak of has been
proposed. The cost a year ago was proposed at $24
million for a 6 block stretch if I remember correctly.
That's a lot of money for an unknown quantity. 

If the city or state would be foolish enough to
endorse such an idea of a demonstration project I say
do it around the chain of lakes. It would connect
everyone with all the lakes and there could be an
opportunity for the park board to place an ice cream
stand at every station. You could put hooks on the
outside to hang the bicycles on. Tracks could run down
Minnehaha Creek and people could connect with bus
lines all along the way. Why, I think the people
living around the lakes would just love seeing a giant
iron snake winding it's way past bedroom windows in
the name of new technology. Or, how about Roseville?

Barb Lickness
Whittier 




=====
"Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change
the world.  Indeed, it's the only thing that ever has." -- Margaret Mead
REMINDERS:
1. Think a member has violated the rules? Email the list manager at
[EMAIL PROTECTED] before continuing it on the list. 
2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait.

For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html
For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract
________________________________

Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy
Post messages to: mailto:[email protected]
Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls

REMINDERS:
1. Think a member has violated the rules? Email the list manager at [EMAIL 
PROTECTED] before continuing it on the list. 
2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait.

For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html
For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract
________________________________

Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy
Post messages to: mailto:[email protected]
Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls

Reply via email to