i say yes, and leave the rails to the freights.
interesting.So far monorails have only been used for things like airport shuttles, at theme parks, amusement rides, interconnectors, a handful of urban commuter lines, that sort of thing. And then there is super weird stuff like the aerotrain. There is a good reason there aren't more of them, but maybe that's for another discussion. But even assuming these systems are actually value for money, there has never been a monorail for long distance or even inter city rail lines.
If you mean something like hyperloop or maglev, maybe that's different. But monorail? No.
Furthermore, each system is incompatible and protected by patents so you basically you are locked in with a single supplier forever, if ever you want to extend or upgrade the system later.
Like for any gadgetbahn, the claim is that this new technology provides more speed, more comfort at lower cost.
But in the real world, these three aspects are always intricately connected and subject to tradeoffs – due to simple geometry and physics.
Want faster transportation? Then you need very straight tracks. Don’t have straight tracks but still want high speed? Then your trip will become a barf-ride, so less comfort. Want to build cheaply in an already existing highway median? Well the highway curves are made for cars going at 100km/h (62 mph), so your choices are:
These problems will always come together. At the end of the day, you’re still pushing a metal can full of people at high speeds you can’t get out of issues of geometry and physics by changing where you put the wheels.
- slow down (less speed),
- run inside the existing geometry at higher speed (less comfort),
- straighten the curves (more expensive).
No, just, no.i say yes, and leave the rails to the freights.
Monorail would take up less space on the ground, and is cleaner. Huge upfront cost I admit but savings over decades.It is much cheaper to build on the ground where feasible. Conventional railroads can be built on the ground, or on elevated structures, or underground in tunnels with very few restrictions or alterations. Monorails have to be built up in the air.
Conventional railroads have the flexibility to handle freight or passengers. Outside of a few dense corridors, two or three trains a day is quite sufficient to handle passenger load in most of the United States (yes, one a day or less is NOT sufficient, IMHO). Can you picture investing in an elevated guideway between major metropolitan areas for only three trains a day (and no freight)?
The most heavily trafficked monorail system in the United States at present is at the Disney World resort. The six-car trains seat 20 passengers in each car (40 passengers can stand in the aisles), or 120 passengers total for the full train. A single Amfleet 1 car can seat 84 passengers, with superior comfort.
I'd much prefer to invest heavily in conventional rail. Actually, it's my (admittedly untested) opinion that if a per-seat equalization subsidy could be created to compensate for the heavy expenditures on behalf of highways and airlines then the rails could again become attractive to private investment and operation.
:"It is much cheaper to build on the ground where feasible. Conventional railroads can be built on the ground, or on elevated structures, or underground in tunnels with very few restrictions or alterations. Monorails have to be built up in the air.
Conventional railroads have the flexibility to handle freight or passengers. Outside of a few dense corridors, two or three trains a day is quite sufficient to handle passenger load in most of the United States (yes, one a day or less is NOT sufficient, IMHO). Can you picture investing in an elevated guideway between major metropolitan areas for only three trains a day (and no freight)?
The most heavily trafficked monorail system in the United States at present is at the Disney World resort. The six-car trains seat 20 passengers in each car (40 passengers can stand in the aisles), or 120 passengers total for the full train. A single Amfleet 1 car can seat 84 passengers, with superior comfort.
I'd much prefer to invest heavily in conventional rail. Actually, it's my (admittedly untested) opinion that if a per-seat equalization subsidy could be created to compensate for the heavy expenditures on behalf of highways and airlines then the rails could again become attractive to private investment and operation.
You think monorails never break down? There's a reason Disney has a diesel-powered monorail "tow motor" at its resorts...:"
✔@AmtrakAlerts
City of New Orleans Train 58 which departed New Orleans (NOL) on 5/12 will terminate in Carbondale (CDL) due to a disabled freight train blocking the tracks.
5h
"
a monorail would glide over the freight.
How is it "cleaner" than an electric powered train? And just because it runs on an elevated guideway, they still have to acquire the "space on the ground" for the right-of-way.Monorail would take up less space on the ground, and is cleaner. Huge upfront cost I admit but savings over decades.
Just curious, which type are you proposing, straddle or suspended?i say yes, and leave the rails to the freights.
It was an intelligent answer to a question that wasn't.any INTELLIGENT answers
Yeah. You mean troll question, troll response? I tend to agree.It was an intelligent answer to a question that wasn't.
@MIRAILFAN...why does that question amuse you? Do you understand what I am asking?Just curious, which type are you proposing, straddle or suspended?
it just does. I prefer the kind Vegas uses and Disney World.@MIRAILFAN...why does that question amuse you? Do you understand what I am asking?
You do realize that the Disney monorails are limited by design to a top speed of 55 mph, but by policy are not allowed to exceed 40 mph (speed limit), don't you? Conventional rail trains can make 79 mph over track in at least halfway decent condition as long as ABS signaling or better is in place, or much more (90/125/150+) with signal improvements and more attention paid to maintenance and grade crossing separations.it just does. I prefer the kind Vegas uses and Disney World.
Well, you specifically referenced Disney. But okay; let's take Japan. Wikipedia shows that they currently have ten monorail lines in service. And, as far as I can see, they are all commuter service or airport transfer; I don't see a single intercity passenger transport monorail in the bunch (admittedly, I haven't looked that hard). Yet Japan has possibly the world's finest network of conventional and high speed rail lines linking all corners of the nation.Japan and South Korea managed to build them. High speed onestoo.
Okay...those are the most common...known as "straddle type".it just does. I prefer the kind Vegas uses and Disney World.