Las Vegas Monorail Finally Ready To Open 469
doormat writes "The Las Vegas monorail is finally set to open to the public on July 15th! The project has had some problems - it was originally scheduled to open in March. The first part of the monorail, which uses Bombardier M-VI train vehicles, 'a derivative of the famous Walt Disney World Mark VI trains', is 4 miles long and connects several casinos on the east side of the Las Vegas Strip (see map, QT video), as well as the Las Vegas Convention Center (Home to CES, NAB, Networld+Interop and what was Comdex). Future phases seek to expand the monorail to downtown to the North, the west side of the strip, and eventually the University and the airport (which the taxicab and limo groups fight tooth and nail). I swear it's the strip's only choice... throw up your hands and raise your voice! Monorail, Monorail, Monorail! Mono... D'oh!"
$$$ according to Zagat (Score:5, Informative)
In other news, new trains in Minnesota (Score:5, Informative)
I took some pictures of the opening here [ringworld.org].
96,000 people tried out the line last weekend during its debut!
Re:i've always wondered... (Score:3, Informative)
Other countries also lack the outstanding Interstate Highway System.
Re:i've always wondered... (Score:5, Informative)
And we do have some long lines, but as you say, they are pretty shitty. But those other countries are much more densely populated and smaller. In the Northeast Amtrak, the commuter railroads and subways make a pretty good approximation of what exists in Europe.
Re:$$$ according to Zagat (Score:5, Informative)
It's clearly marketed to the weekend tourists, rather than the local commuters. Tourists, many of whom fly in for the weekend, like to travel around town (no point in giving all your money to one casino when there are so many needy casino's in town). Now you've got a choice of a quick $3 monorail ride, a $8 cab fare through grid-locked streets, or hoofing it in the 100+ degree sun. It's a no-brainer.
Once they do get it to the airport (around 2007 or so), it'll be the best thing to hit Vegas since the machine-gun shooting range.
High-speed rail (Score:2, Informative)
The full text of this article from The Economist [economist.com] follows. The original content is subscriber-only; it is reproduced here in the hope and expectation that you will find it useful.
----
High-speed rail
Trop peu, trop tard, trop Amtrak
Aug 9th 2001 | CHICAGO
From The Economist print edition
Fast trains may be coming to the mid-west--and stopping too often
THE roads are clogged. The airports are worse. Might fast trains provide relief for America's frustrated travellers? A coalition of nine mid-western states has plans for a rail system that would whisk travellers between the region's big cities at high speeds and connect them to points beyond with a network of slower trains and buses. Strangely enough, Congress, which would have to pay much of the cost, is warming to the idea.
The Midwest Regional Rail Initiative (MWRRI) is a joint venture between nine state transport agencies, the Amtrak rail system and the Federal Railroad Administration. The coalition has unveiled detailed plans and cost estimates for a 3,000-mile rail system with Chicago as its hub that would connect cities such as Detroit, Milwaukee, St Louis and Minneapolis at speeds of up to 110 miles per hour (some 50-75mph slower than French or Japanese trains, but enough to wow the mid-west).
[Image] [economist.com]
Randy Wade at Wisconsin's Department of Transportation claims that the region is ideally suited for high-speed rail. Over distances of several hundred miles, such as the 280-mile trip from Chicago to Detroit, rail is potentially faster, more comfortable and more productive than car travel. It should be cheaper than flying and delivers passengers into the city centre, rather than to distant airports. And cities in the mid-west are already connected by freight rail lines that can be upgraded to accommodate faster trains. MWRRI thinks that a well-run system could attract nearly 10m riders a year by 2010.
Such transport visions are two a penny and often worth as much (ask any Eurotunnel shareholder). The General Accounting Office recently estimated the cost of a national high-speed system to be $50 billion-70 billion. But both the Senate and the House are considering bills that would enable Amtrak, America's quasi-public passenger rail agency, to issue up to $12 billion in bonds to pay for capital improvements in 11 designated high-speed rail corridors. The bonds would not pay interest; bondholders would receive federal income-tax credits instead.
Such stealth subsidies are unlikely to irritate voters, impatient with traffic jams and cancelled flights. "You can't imagine congestion getting better anywhere--ever," says Mr Wade. Tom Daschle and Trent Lott, the Democratic and Republican leaders, are among the bill's 51 co-sponsors in the Senate. The White House has not taken a position yet; but, while he was governor of Texas, George Bush cut the ribbon when Amtrak began running the Texas Eagle from San Antonio to Chicago.
The bill making its way through Congress would provide a down-payment on the MWRRI plan, which can be built step by step. The full system will need lots more money, to pay among other things for the trains and improved infrastructure. Even supporters concede that high-speed rail would do well to cover its operating costs, never mind the capital investment. Politicians will have to be sold on the social benefits of getting Americans off the highways and runways.
Which they might be, except for the most potent enemy of passenger rail in America: Amtrak itself. Critics of federal spending for high-speed rail do not oppose the idea in principle; they just think that giving Amtrak control over something like $12 billion in capital spending is insane.
America's passenger rail system, which was deregulated in 1997, is supposed to cover its operating costs by December
Don't like the LVMonorail? Build your own! (Score:4, Informative)
Cool!
Bart Driverless ? (Score:3, Informative)
The trains are computer-controlled and arrive on-time with regular accuracy. Drivers are present in case of unforeseen difficulties.
If you have other information, please correct the wikipedia entry.
-molo
Re:i've always wondered... (Score:4, Informative)
Visit NYC sometime. Trains 24/7 that are faster and cheaper than a car or taxi.
Tim
Re:i've always wondered... (Score:2, Informative)
Re:$$$ according to Zagat (Score:4, Informative)
There's another one, its more of a gun store, and it's in N. Las Vegas. The folks there are a bit, ah... conspiracy fan-ish, but they've got some good gear.
Re:Several Responses (Score:3, Informative)
First off, Disneyland's choice regarding the Disneyland Monorail had nothing to do with cost, or efficiency. It has more to do with Disney's internal pricing policies regarding the two Anaheim parks than anything else. We are actually now hearing that there WILL be extensions to the Disneyland Monorail at some point in the future, but not to the parking structure.. likely to a theoretical "third" park that is still in development.
Secondly, please provide some proof to the claim that Monorail is more expensive than an elevated, grade seperate light rail.
Thirdly, evacuating a monorail is no different than any other elevated train. If you have no catwalk (like the Disneyland monorails, or even the Chicago "El"), you just don't. However, only TWICE (that I was able to find) in the entire 40 year operating history of the Disneyland Monorail has an evacuation been required. In both cases, City of Anaheim ladder trucks were used, one of which is stationed ON DISNEYLAND PROPERTY anyway. The simple fact of the matter is it is much easier for ANY transit vehicle to proceed to the nearest station than to stop dead on the tracks and evacuate mid-span. I don't care who you are, monorail, light rail, or even busway.. a mid-span evacuation is dangerous and not routinely done by any of these transit modes.
A couple of years ago, SF-MUNI (the light rail system in San Francisco) experienced a complete failure of the automation system that runs the subway. Trains were stopped, dead, inside underground tunnels. No effort was made by SF-MUNI to evacuate passengers, even though the SF-MUNI subways are equipped with catwalks and emergency exits. Some passengers were stuck in trains for 2 or more hours.
The fact of the matter is, very few rail systems routinely evacuate passengers to the catwalks, even when they have them, unless their life is in immediate danger. There are more dangers present outside the train: high voltage, potential passing trains, etc.
Re:$$$ according to Zagat (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Not that uncommon (Score:3, Informative)
Cheers.
a correction to one of your statements (Score:1, Informative)
Texas: 695,622 sq km
Half of Texas: 347,811 sq km
Germany: 356,970 sq km
Japan: 377,837 sq km
Germany and Japan's combined land area is also larger than all of Texas.
Germany + Japan: 734,807 sq km
Now Germany and Japan are smaller than Alaska. They're smaller than half of Alaska. Put together.
Alaska: 1,717,854 sq km
Half of Alaska: 858,927 sq km
Re:Why? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:i've always wondered... (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Not that uncommon (Score:3, Informative)
This was for the buses trolleys, and BART trains.
I remember the adult version costing somewhere around $80-$100, and provided unlimited BART in the greater Bay Area.
Aren't these still available?
Re:Why? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:i've always wondered... (Score:2, Informative)
Trip 3: Walk to bus stop, 1 minute. Wait for bus, 2 minutes. Bus Journey, 10 minutes. Walk straight to platform (with season ticket for train), 1 minute. Wait for train, 5 minutes. Train Journey, 22 minutes. Walk to office, 2 minutes. Total Journey 43 minutes. Total cost, 13 UKP
Trip 4: Walk to car, get in car, 1 minute. Drive, sit in traffic jam, drive, sit in traffic jam, drive, sit in traffic jam, drive, 60 minutes. Queue to park, 5 minutes. Walk to office, 5 minutes. Total Journey 81 minutes. Total cost, 10 UKP to park, 3 UKP petrol, plus car maintenance, tax, insurance, etc.
Public transport can work.
Re:$$$ according to Zagat (Score:3, Informative)
Of course there are two extremely unfashionable modes of transport that would also get you from one end of the strip to the other. The first is your legs, although in Vegas that might be a non-starter. I'm not exagerating when I say I have never seen so many grotesquely obese people as on my trips to Vegas.
The other is the public buses that run up and down the strip and to/from downtown for something like $1.25 - i.e. $20 extra in your pocket to see a show, buy a meal, gamble or whatever. After being fleeced in the cab to downtown we caught the bus and were jolly glad of it. It takes 45 mins to get back, but most of that is gridlock which you'd be paying for in a taxi anyway.
Re:Why? (Score:3, Informative)
I dont like the LV monorail (Score:4, Informative)
Second, the cost. I usually go with a group of friends, and if the 5 of us split a cab, it always cost $10 or less total, AND takes us door to door instead of only a few stations WAY at the back of the casinos. This is also 24 hrs a day. The monorail closes at midnight!! Who the hell heads back to their room at midnight in vegas?!
The only advantage the monorail has is a direct route to the convention center. Large conventions could make good use of this, but otherwise, I'd suggest tourists stay away.
Re:i've always wondered... (Score:2, Informative)
Population of the USA: 293,027,500
Also note that most of the US population is on the coastlines. In the midwest, you can easily drive for 50 miles without running across another town, and even when you do it's rarely more than 10,000 people. Running track to all of those little towns would cost train companies more than they'd ever hope to make from the few additional customers they'd gain.
It's not the love of cars so much as the sheer cost that prevents huge, European-style public transportation systems from taking hold in the US, with the exceptions of the largest cities. Everywhere that's dense enough to run public transportation already has some form of it, and everywhere else is just too spread out for anything but cars to be effective.
Have any of you been to vegas? (Score:5, Informative)
But for the most part vegas gets most of its income now adays from CONVENTION TRAVELERS. Which means that making it easier to get back and fourth to the convention center is always a plus. The stations they have built for this system are really nice and will also help the business traveller
Re:i've always wondered... (Score:5, Informative)
In the late 1800s and early 1900s, the US had far and away the largest amount of public transit, larger than any country in europe. In the 19-teens more miles of streetcar track existed in the United States than in the entire rest of the world combined. Inter-city rail was commonly used, and relatively affordable and dependable as compared to many of the nations we currently associate with rail such as Germany or France.
It's hard to identify true root causes, but certainly between the 1920s and the 1950s, american culture and spending patterns had fallen so heavily into the pattern of the automobile, that much of this was lost. Some might point to the american habit of so strongly valuing the new (cf. electricity, plumbing, etc.), while others might talk about our devaluing of the collectivist, thus valuing individual transportation. Still another point of consideration is the ugly side of capitalism, when private industry and infrustructure can sometimes poorly interact. Recent examples include Enron and the California power disaster, historically one can look to rail companies and their self destructive rail non-maintenance habits.
In any event, public transit thrived despite our lack of physical density for a good 60 years, and then died. Perhaps the point could be made that it could no longer successfully compete against private transit in our relatively non-dense environment, but even the bostonwash DC corridor has very poor transit now as compared to history and yet remains rather dense.
The problem is a good deal more complex than you suggest.
Re:Bart Driverless ? (Score:5, Informative)
The basic problem was that BART trains were designed so as to be able to detect the presence of another train relatively near ahead on the tracks. I'm not sure what the method used was, whether it was designed to simply detect objects (radar or something similar) or whether trains produced signals that the other trains picked up. Certainly detecting large objects seems insufficient for trains designed to travel at large speeds which must also operate inside tunnels etc. In any event, during hot weather outside, the sensors would have false-positive problems, detecting trains that did not exist, and would refuse to continue. To limp past this problem, drivers were necessary to take over the role of choosing when it was no longer safe to advance. By default the trains still operated autonomously in most other ways.
Casual observation indicates a number of issues with the trains are apparently mildly driver-operated. Trains which are less than full length seem to have their stop position adjusted by the 'driver' (sometimes very ineptly). The 'driver' sometimes adjusts stop times, which is quite useful for rush hour or event-related crowds, although I sometimes wish it was pre-set so people would board more efficiently. Also it seems the 'driver' has some possibility to affect train speed, as there have definitely been cases where a change of driver just north of Union City resulted in a much changed rate of progress for the duration of the trip, although I suspect this input is optional, and infrequently used.
Certainly the BART train console is relatively elaborate, but after the manner of a point-of-sale terminal, with several print-insert buttons and no visible analog inputs of any sort. When I have watched bart train 'drivers', I have certainly seen entire station-to-station journeys made with no input at all.
Re:Several Responses (Score:3, Informative)
In the case of Walt Disney World in Orlando, FL, Disney hasn't built any new track as there's nowhere else to extend the scenic monorail line. MGM Studios, Wild Animal Kingdom, and Blizzard Beach are located adjacent to the two main attractions (the Magic Kingdom and EPCOT), hidden from view only by some trees. The monorail ride to one of these newer attractions would be very short and would kill the whole experience.
Granted, the alternative (the smelly, slow busses) is no better...
With all the land Disney owns in the Reddy Creek area, I don't understand why they built all of their newer parks so close together, especially when they started out with a nice distance between the Magic Kingdom, EPCOT, and the parking complex.
Re:Why? (Score:3, Informative)
Monorail beamway has a significantly smaller footprint and blocks less sky than traditional elevated two-rail guideway. See pages 14/15 and 38/39 of this PDF [monorails.org] for some pictures. Sorry, a quick google search did not return any web pages with pics.
If you compare it with at-grade two-rail, then the advantage is that an elevated monorail has no road crossings. Of course, this is true of any elevated transit system.
Note that the small beam makes monorail evacuations more difficult than elevated light-rail evacuation. For light rail, people can just walk to one end of the train and step out onto the guideway. The Las Vegas monorail system installed emergency walkways between the beams. Riders step out of the side train doors onto the walkway. Disney World does not have emergency walkways and evacuates to the roof of the train. You then walk across the top of the train to one end and shimmy down the windscreen to the beam, and then walk the beam. (The beam is 26 or 28 inches wide). No WDW monorail has ever been evacuated, although there was a train fire years ago in an old Mark IV train.
Re:i've always wondered... (Score:5, Informative)
That statement is misleading as it includes part of Russia.
The European Union, for example, is about 1/3 the size of the continental US, and it has about 150 million more people (1.5 times as many).
That's approximately 4.5 times more people per square-km as the US.
Go to Wyoming some time and tell me that a nationwide mass-transit system is feasable. It's not.
That said, we could do much better. Amtrak is a disaster, and we need more "short-haul" solutions. I can take the bus from my city (Fort Collins, ~100km north of Denver) to Denver, but there is no rail. There should be.
Now, the truth is that it's simply more convenient to drive. Everyone goes ~130kph on the Interstate, and there is rarely any traffic north of Denver, so it only takes about 45 minutes to get to Denver. Compare that to a rail service which would have to be much faster to even compete (to compensate for the time spent getting to the station).
Re:what? (Score:1, Informative)
There are three other monorails that run in Las Vegas on the west side of the strip:
Mandalay Bay -> Luxor -> Excalibur
Bellagio -> Monte Carlo
Mirage -> Treasure Island
The longest of these three probably runs a bit more than a half mile.
Re:I dont like the LV monorail (Score:1, Informative)
The new monorail is only open from 8 AM to midnight now, but those hours are expected to be extended to 6 AM to 2 AM once it has been in operation for a few months.
Finally, nobody is making you ride the damn thing. If you want to take a cab, take a cab.
Re:It's meant for tourists on the Strip. (Score:3, Informative)
I've just spent a huge amount of time working in Vegas, and I am really annoyed to learn that the monorail will soon open now that I'm gone. I'd have *loved* to had an easy/free way to hop a significant distance up the strip and start exploring again there, as I enjoyed just wandering thru the places exploring.
Similarly, when someone would visit, I'd tell them something like: See Sirens of TI, go inside of the pyramid at Luxor (the balconies and grand lobby are architecturally striking), the 4d Trekkie thing, the 'piazza at twilight' in the Venetian, the new LED dome on Fremont (I didn't get there... that's even worse than missing the Monorail opening, in my book!) and ride the 'Speed' roller-coaster ride. Problem is, unless you've got a chauffeur, that'll take 3 cab rides or more to do and can't be done in a day, since walking those distances isn't reasonable. So, to most folks I would end up saying 'pick just one thing', or downgrading my suggestions until they were riding a 2nd-rate ride, settling on show quality, or otherwise making deep compromises to fit the plans into their brief schedule.
Monorail good. Good for tourists. Good for tourism. Good for the environment. Anyone that works in Las Vegas should understand that their daily commute doesn't lend itself to railways. And it just doesn't compare to the consolidated need of half a million people or more on a peak weekend being squeezed into properties bordering 3 miles of one road. Even then, the rail's not a bad thing, since a strong rail system decreases parking/driving pressure and that's indirectly good for the workers.
Last of all: everyone in america needs a few good public-transit experiences. Otherwise, we'll never learn from our wiser european counterparts on the value of a public transit system. What better place to expose zillions of people to it than a tourist destination like Vegas?! Again, Monorail Good. Detractors idiots.
Re:i've always wondered... (Score:3, Informative)
Europe is also fairly populated throughout, meaning that complete coverage is cost-efficient. The US has areas of moderate-to-heavy population surrounded by nothing but miles and miles and miles of farm fields.
Who'd want to take a train to the middle of North Dakota?