http://www.daytondailynews.com/n/content/oh/story/news/local/2008/06/30/42318164_Picture_1.html
http://www.monomobile.com
This electric car would clip onto an overhead rail for the long part of the trip, then go the last few miles on internal battery power. During the "cruise" portion of the trip (on the monorail), the cars are computer controlled and would travel in tight groups of 4 or 5, with 100 feet between groups, at a speed of 100 MPH. The internal batteries of the cars charge up while they are on the rail.
This idea solves a lot of problems (from the web site):
-- 400% more fuel efficient than a conventional car
-- Lower vehicle costs than an electric car (much smaller battery needed)
-- Much cheaper to add new capacity than our present roads (add capacity at 1/14th the cost of highways)
-- Lots of capacity in little real estate: 4 tracks (two each way) would be 32 feet wide, and would have the same capacity as a 20 lane highway. -- Most of the advantages of mass transit (low cost, read a book on the way to work, etc) without the inconvenience (waiting for the bus, walking the last mile, etc).
-- Higher speeds are no problem: Because the cars are aerodynamic and the track has extremely low friction, the small motors in these cars could get them up to 200 mph for long stretches of inter-city travel. That would take some of the pressure off our air transport system as well (time-wise, anything within 600 miles would be faster to reach via Monomobile than airplane once all the time wasted at the airport is factored in).
There are several of these dual-mode transportation schemes around. Given the way US cities are spread out, I think these ideas have a lot more potential than either continuing to increase the number of cars on the road (hybrid, electric, or conventional) or trying to make buses/light rail work for everyone.
One other advantage the web site doesn't mention: There's no reason that the same track couldn't be used for a light rail system (trolley cars of 20 passengers). They would get the advantages rapid transportation (above the highway congestion), the trolley/bus could make a few stops at various drop-off points, and then get back on the rail to pick up more passengers. This would help relieve parking congestion, and be even more efficient.
I do see one technical issue: Breakdowns. If these are privately maintained vehicles, then a few will be in ill repair. I'm not sure what the plan is when a car crumps out on the tack--there's no shoulder. I can see a LOT of mad commuters backed up while waiting for the broken-down vehicle to be pushed along/lifted off the track.
Okay, Hometown Harry and other experts--what's wrong with this--or why don't these projects ever take off? Is it the chicken/egg problem? (no one wants to buy the car until the rails are in, and no city wants to fund the rails if no constituents own cars to ride them). Are we finaly ready for something like this?
http://www.monomobile.com
This electric car would clip onto an overhead rail for the long part of the trip, then go the last few miles on internal battery power. During the "cruise" portion of the trip (on the monorail), the cars are computer controlled and would travel in tight groups of 4 or 5, with 100 feet between groups, at a speed of 100 MPH. The internal batteries of the cars charge up while they are on the rail.
This idea solves a lot of problems (from the web site):
-- 400% more fuel efficient than a conventional car
-- Lower vehicle costs than an electric car (much smaller battery needed)
-- Much cheaper to add new capacity than our present roads (add capacity at 1/14th the cost of highways)
-- Lots of capacity in little real estate: 4 tracks (two each way) would be 32 feet wide, and would have the same capacity as a 20 lane highway. -- Most of the advantages of mass transit (low cost, read a book on the way to work, etc) without the inconvenience (waiting for the bus, walking the last mile, etc).
-- Higher speeds are no problem: Because the cars are aerodynamic and the track has extremely low friction, the small motors in these cars could get them up to 200 mph for long stretches of inter-city travel. That would take some of the pressure off our air transport system as well (time-wise, anything within 600 miles would be faster to reach via Monomobile than airplane once all the time wasted at the airport is factored in).
There are several of these dual-mode transportation schemes around. Given the way US cities are spread out, I think these ideas have a lot more potential than either continuing to increase the number of cars on the road (hybrid, electric, or conventional) or trying to make buses/light rail work for everyone.
One other advantage the web site doesn't mention: There's no reason that the same track couldn't be used for a light rail system (trolley cars of 20 passengers). They would get the advantages rapid transportation (above the highway congestion), the trolley/bus could make a few stops at various drop-off points, and then get back on the rail to pick up more passengers. This would help relieve parking congestion, and be even more efficient.
I do see one technical issue: Breakdowns. If these are privately maintained vehicles, then a few will be in ill repair. I'm not sure what the plan is when a car crumps out on the tack--there's no shoulder. I can see a LOT of mad commuters backed up while waiting for the broken-down vehicle to be pushed along/lifted off the track.
Okay, Hometown Harry and other experts--what's wrong with this--or why don't these projects ever take off? Is it the chicken/egg problem? (no one wants to buy the car until the rails are in, and no city wants to fund the rails if no constituents own cars to ride them). Are we finaly ready for something like this?