Vegas: Monorails v. Gridlock 478
TimeTrip writes "Vegas seems to be taking a little cue from Disney. 'Las Vegas, which never stops thinking big, has just embarked on its most ambitious, costly attempt to solve a problem that once seemed impossible to have in this sprawling desert valley: gridlock. It is building the nation's largest monorail system.'"
Or maybe they'll be taking their cue from Lyle Lanly. Frankly this sounds more
like a Shelbyville idea.
Obligatory (Score:5, Funny)
Monorail Lyle Lanley: Well, sir, there's nothing on earth Like a genuine, Bona fide, Electrified, Six-car Monorail! What'd I say? Ned Flanders: Monorail! Lyle Lanley: What's it called? Patty+Selma: Monorail! Lyle Lanley: That's right! Monorail! [crowd chants `Monorail' softly and rhythmically] Miss Hoover: I hear those things are awfully loud... Lyle Lanley: It glides as softly as a cloud. Apu: Is there a chance the track could bend? Lyle Lanley: Not on your life, my Hindu friend. Barney: What about us brain-dead slobs? Lyle Lanley: You'll be given cushy jobs. Abe: Were you sent here by the devil? Lyle Lanley: No, good sir, I'm on the level. Wiggum: The ring came off my pudding can. Lyle Lanley: Take my pen knife, my good man. I swear it's Springfield's only choice... Throw up your hands and raise your voice! All: Monorail! Lyle Lanley: What's it called? All: Monorail! Lyle Lanley: Once again... All: Monorail! Marge: But Main Street's still all cracked and broken... Bart: Sorry, Mom, the mob has spoken! All: Monorail! Monorail! Monorail! [big finish] Monorail! Homer: Mono... D'oh!
Re:Obligatory (Score:2)
Lyle Lanley: Mono means one and rail means rail, and so concludes our extensive three week course.
TV Voice: Actual institute may not match photo
Homer: Donuts, is there anything they can't do?
I could go on......
Re:Obligatory (Score:2)
Re:Obligatory (Score:3, Funny)
Marge: There's a man here and he wants to help you!
Homer: Is it Batman?
Marge: No, he's a scientist.
Homer: Batman is a scientist.
Re:Obligatory (Score:2)
Vegas Twist (Score:5, Insightful)
I love the vegas twist on mass transit. Instead of throwing your dollar into a meter, you get to toss it into a one armed bandit. I can see the lines of blue haired ladies lining up for their chance to play a role of the bus.
Re:Vegas Twist (Score:2, Troll)
Re:Vegas Twist (Score:2)
ET, snap on those rubber gloves, I'm coming to visit... in a few years, anyway, when it is finished!
The Gates Testimony - Why Microsoft Will Win [microsoft.com]
The glass protected stations (Score:4, Informative)
Re:The glass protected stations (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Yeah, but read that again and think about it... (Score:2)
This is Vegas son... (Score:2)
build your own backyard monorail (Score:2, Interesting)
Extending to the airport (Score:4, Insightful)
Personally though all I can think about is the Monorail Simpsons Episode...Doh!
Many European airports have light rail. (Score:2, Informative)
The airport, casinos, and some of the major hotels would be obvious nodes for the rail network. For those fixated on increasing economic growth through 'security' measures, some of the airlines could offer check-in at some of the more prestigious hotels or conference centers. This would be an obvious attraction for tourists and would allow the airlines extra time to scan the bags and back up their 'profiling' with hard data.
In Chicago, many rails came years before many of the buildings. I think there the rail companies did it the other way around and sold air rights to put buildings over the tracks. Monorail's a good option when you don't have the budget to bore tunnels or buy up surface real estate.
What's the geology like there? Maybe they could hire Norwegians to bore tunnels. ;)
(Subway / tube / underground sure, but how about "Casino Moria"?)
Re:Many European airports have light rail. (Score:2)
Caliche and other tough-as-nails crap that would be a royal PITA to punch holes through. Back when my parents lived here and they had a pool put in the backyard, lots of good-sized rocks also got pulled out of the ground. Up where I live now (in the northeast corner of town, up on Frenchman Mountain), one of the pools in this condo development was built shallower than planned because the builder hadn't done an adequate geological survey of the property (among many other problems, but that's drifting offtopic) and ran into caliche just two or three feet down.
no danger (Score:3, Funny)
Simpsons Wisecrack (Score:5, Funny)
SELECT *
FROM smartass_remarks
WHERE simpsons='t' AND
topic='monorail'
There.
Re:Simpsons Wisecrack (Score:5, Funny)
CmdrTaco: "Sorry Stephen, the trolls have spoken!"
Slashdites: Monorail!...MONORAIL!!...MONORAIL!!!
.
.
.
.
.
.
JonKatz: "Mono-D'OH!"
Monorail, shmonorail! (Score:3, Insightful)
Am I right? Eh?!?! Ever been there, you know of what I say.
Every fscking time I've been there I have to fork over ~$10 for a Bell taxi or something, which all smell like they last scrubbed inside with a dead cat! Seriously, every other major city I've been in the big hotels have shuttles, but not LV, I swear it's a labor thing of somesort or a major bribe has been paid.
In either case, I would certainly like to see how well the monorail plan gets around to the airport.
Re:Monorail, shmonorail! (Score:2)
I also had to wait for about 15min while it got there, and saw about 100 other shuttles.
Re:Monorail, shmonorail! (Score:2)
I can probably see why they dont have the monorail planned to go to the airport. The people going to, or leaving airports usually have about 4 or 5 bags with them, and have just arrived on a long flight. Not very fabulous sounding is it? =). Stick those folks in minivans and ship them off to a hotel where they can get fancy lookin and then let them ride the monorail.
When I stayed in Las Vegas, it was on work related buisness, and I was only 17 at the time, so I wasn't able to partake in the evilness of gambling heh.. The motel was on paradise, right across the street from the airport, and Id have to walk down Tropicana Blvd. and id be pretty amazed at how fast people drive there. The place is crazy though in my opinion, everyone's eyes seem to have dollar signs in them, and the air stinks of money. Maybe it'll be funner next time I go and I can actually gamble =)
"I call the big one 'Bitey'" (Score:5, Funny)
~Philly
Wish Seattle new how to start construction. (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Wish Seattle new how to start construction. (Score:2)
I also hear that they want to use people's property taxes to help pay for the crappy roads there, because they had used the Gas Taxes for something else, or because they are trying to find the cheapest contractor to pave the roads with gravel, that gets all messed up when the winter hits here, and all the water gets under the roads, freezes, and makes potholes.
Its quite a mess, im just glad I dont live there..
Re:Wish Seattle new how to start construction. (Score:3, Interesting)
Clearly we're a bunch of gawddamned Godless commies compared to the good, honest, business-uber-alles people of Seattle, aren't we?
Re:Wish Seattle new how to start construction. (Score:2)
> to the good, honest, business-uber-alles people of Seattle, aren't we?
Clearly.
You may have better mass transit in Portland than people in Seattle, but you're still stuck living in Portland.
*grin*
Links (Score:5, Informative)
http://www.monorails.org/tMspages/LasVegas.html [monorails.org]
http://www.lvnvmonorail.com/ [lvnvmonorail.com]
Will Spock be doing the grand opening? (Score:2, Funny)
Mr. Leonard Nimoy.
Nimoy: I'd say this vessel could do at least Warp Five.
[appreciative laughter from the crowd]
Quimby: And let me say, ``May the Force Be With You!''
Nimoy: [annoyed] Do you even know who I am?
Quimby: [indignant] I think I do. Weren't you one of the Little Rascals?
Built by Bombardier Transportation Systems (Score:3, Informative)
from the principal contractor, Bombardier.
This is the largest of three monorails they are building (although they say 4 miles, not 8). What's cool is that two of the three are for systems to get around downtown, not just for a system to get you to the airport parking lot.
Unfortunately, the careers page doesn't reveal any openings. Sigh, this is the sort of socially responsible project that so many aerospace companies were to turn to after the cold war ended.
Re:Built by Bombardier Transportation Systems (Score:2)
Re:Built by Bombardier Transportation Systems (Score:2)
Actually, Bombardier has been building subways and light rail systems for quite some time now -- they just didn't jump into it after the fall of communism.
Re:Built by Bombardier Transportation Systems (Score:2)
bombadier (Score:2)
By the way the aerospace companies probably wont turn to this kind of work, because cities cannot afford the fantastic overpayments that the fed govt gives them. they actually have to show a working model in return for their fees which may be a bit dissapointing for companies that are used to making missile defense systems.
Re:Built by Bombardier Transportation Systems (Score:2, Funny)
Here's an image [monorails.org] of a Bombardier engineer giving a similar monorail a quick test run. Note the prototype's innovative energy-efficient air conditioning. The prototype doesn't have quite as much seating capacity as they expect in the final vehicle, but you get the general idea.
Re:Built by Bombardier Transportation Systems (Score:2)
Bombardier is the family name of the company founder, it has nothing to do with bombs. The company started in the snowmobile (aka 'skidoo') business and later forked out into other forms of ground transportation. They only got into the aerospace industry when the aquired Canadair, in the mid 80's.
See their company history section [bombardier.com]
Mass Transit should be taken up more widely anyway (Score:2)
You pay for the Car, gas, parking, insurance, and maintenence. If your able to take advantage of a decent mass transit system, you will at most need to pay for the access pass. The costs of such passes are always cheaper then the costs of using and maintaining a vehicle.
The money you save as a result of using Mass Transit can be redirected to other, more fun costs. Like Videogames, new computer gear, and other electronic goodies.
END COMMUNICATION
Re:Mass Transit should be taken up more widely any (Score:2)
Cheaper because, at least around here, they're massively subsidized. I'm one of those who wished public transportation was viable, but it simply isn't for a lot of people. I far too often need to go somewhere when nothing's running but taxis (which are hideously expensive here). I need some way of bringing $200 of groceries home, which isn't going to happen on any public conveyance I've seen. There are also issues of efficiency. I have a tightly packed day already. I don't have the time to wait around or walk from the nearest stop. Given that, having a car is necessary for me. Having already incurred the expense, it's always cheaper and more convenient, for any given trip, to use it.
Public transportation will only be successful for people like me when it's on demand between any two points I choose, can carry lots of stuff when I need it, lots of people when I need it, and *still* be cheaper than owning a car. Good luck.
Coming along nicely (Score:2)
I was just in Vegas a few weeks ago. The monorail is in various states of completion along its route, but it is very impressive. I was initially confused, as some places looked as though they were already operational; alas, there was only the track. Other places just barely had formwork in place, not even the concrete poured yet. But the really interesting thing is that the monorail seems to be "integrated" into a few of the casinos along its route, passing under/over/through some of the casino eye-candy.
From a purely selfish point of view, it makes a lot of sense for the casinos to support the project. It took 30 minutes to drive the length of the Strip during rush hour... at 3am it was closer to 5 minutes, even including a few red lights. Now, casinos really don't want you leaving, but most realize that half the people in Vegas aren't there to gamble -- but they spend money anyway, be it in the buffet line or in the themed casino shopping malls. Allowing all those mobile customers to more easily patronize your establishments makes a lot of sense.
But the best thing Las Vegas could do would be to extend the line to McCarran Airport. It's not that I minded the $5 I paid for a van ride to my hotel, it's the hour I waited for said van and the additional 30 minute ride down the Strip. A monorail would solve that problem very nicely. It would also be a natural extension of the "light-rail" line that shuttles passengers between the old and new terminal buildings within the airport. (As an architectural aside, the new terminal building is a very nice example of "high-tech" design. The cable-truss window walls [photovault.com] are especially beautiful to behold...)
They already have one... (Score:2)
Too low tech (Score:2, Funny)
Or Segways [segway.com] . Close the strip to cars and fill the city with Segways. It'd be the perfect commercial for both the city and the Segway.
Or Trebuchets [trebuchet.com] . Boy, I'm full of helpful ideas tonight!
Seattle is working on this too... (Score:5, Informative)
Seattle suffers from the same problem: too many damn cars. With the 2nd worst rush hour traffic in the US (behind LA) I hope they can pull it off. There have been fights with light rail folks, but I think monorail is a much better option. Keep it above grade so there is little disruption of traffic. Many claim that monorail is Mickey Mouse transit. (no thanks to certain Simpson's parodies). Keep in mind that millions use monorail daily for transportation in Japan. When the people from Seattle went over to look at Japan's system they were blown away by its efficiency and capacity. After spending time abroad, I've become very disappointed with the mass transit systems in the US (or lack there of).
We love our cars way too much.
Re:Seattle is working on this too... (Score:2)
Steel-on-steel (dual rail) is more efficient and doesn't require any additional pylon space on the ground if it is elevated. Seattle's existing monorail cars are just circa-1960s subway cars (it was built in the 60s, do you expect circa-2000 subway cars?)
Still
This, actually, is probably one of the appeals of monorail. New infrastructure needs to be built, which means you can't be held hostage as some might argue BNSF does to the Sounder project.
Re:Seattle is working on this too... (Score:2)
I really wish Vegas luck. Maybe once theirs is running, we can get the politicians who are willing to do what the people keep telling them - get it the h*ll off the streets!
Mass transit is best for tourists (Score:5, Informative)
A typical European major city is built around a more or less ancient center, where all roads and transit system originate, with important extensions to the airport and rail stations. As I hope you can see, the mass transit system is working at it's very best for the typical travel patterns of a tourist, going between the main transit centers and all the tourist attractions in the center.
Now, if you were to live in a regular home and commute to a regular job in that same city, things would be very different. You'd be going from one suburb to another, probably having to change train or bus at the center. It would take at least twice as long as going by car, quite likely more. You could and would probably make arrangements so you lived where mass transit was favorable for your commute, but whenever you were going to some friend or some other random place, you'd have quite a logistical task on your hands.
And that's in a city that's always had it's transportation system built for mass transit. In an american city, built from the ground up for cars, it would work quite a bit worse.
I think I know since I moved to San Francisco from Stockholm 7 years ago. And while Stockholm has a quite decent mass transit system, and SF traffic is painfully congested, going by car here just can't compare to going by mass transit there. It's one of my bigger reasons for not moving back.
Re:Mass transit is best for tourists (Score:4, Interesting)
Probably the biggest of mass transit's problems is that there is already so much invested in infrastructure that's optimised for cars, that it's nearly impossible to compete. This even extends to on-going maintenance, as maintenance for the car/truck infrastructure is generally not considered as part of the cost, where in transit it gets included at the time of ticket purchase.
Both sides always have heavy hidden subsidies, and supporters of each side always point out that the other side is subsidized. But the only part of the payment that is counted for the car is the part included in the cost of the gas, where for transit you are reminded each time you ride.
Add to this that mass transit inherently takes longer. With a car, you can assume that it is immediately available at need, and that you will go to your destination directly via the most direct route. With transit you must get to the stop before the scheduled time. Wait. Get on. Pay. Travel an indirect route (which translates into more time delay). Walk from the destination stop to the true destination.
This assumes that the car will be able to park. But even counting that, the car is almost guaranteed to be faster. Also, during the trip the driver has his attention engaged, so is less likely to be bored. And doesn't need to associate with strangers of unknown disposition.
It's not really surprising that people prefer cars. At all. But the social costs of cars are much higher than those of mass transit. And the energy efficiency is much lower. So people keep trying to come up with some way that will work. Areas that have strong transportation corridors have more success than those that don't, for the reasons that you indicated. Thus in San Francisco, the Bay, and the congestion that the bridges causes during the commute have combined to make BART (and before that AC Transit and the Key System) reasonably successful. But the real thing that makes it successful is that San Francisco has essentially no parking. There are literally more cars in San Francisco than there are parking spaces. And that's at night.
And even with those advantages, BART has troubles. The basic problem is that which one should expect from a monopoly: It's relatively unresponsive to the patrons. Escalators are frequently down for months while being repaired, e.g. It's not that the people don't try to do their job. It's just that when they evaluate the relative costs and rewards for any particular action, the costs of upsetting patrons are considered less important than something else (e.g., finishing that report that the head office wants to send to the federal government). In their position, it's a quite reasonable assessment. But it does lead to patrons that are
E.g.: AC Transit looses money when it runs busses late at night, as there are few patrons. So it cuts late service. This means that people who need to depend on transportation in the late hours find some other way to travel. Usually this means that they get a car, pay insurance, etc. Now that all of these costs are sunk, they frequently decide that they don't need AC during the day either. So these riders are lost. But this doesn't happen immediately. Now the next time a bond for transit vote comes up, will these peopel vote for it? Not likely! They will likely be quite angry. So the budget shrinks. And shrinks more, since the local funds can no longer be used to meet "matching funds" programs from the feds. So the service gets worse. To improve things, they reorganize the routes. This means that for some people, lines that had been marginally acceptable are now unacceptable. So they switch away.
Do people ever switch back? Well, if their car is in the shop, they may try the bus. But it is (as mentioned above) almost guaranteed to be more inconvenient than their car. So they don't stay.
Who uses transit? People who don't have cars, for one reason or another (I don't drive). People who can't afford to own a car. People who are headed for an area where you really can't park. Any others? Probably, as this is just off the top of my head. Some commuters find transit as convenient as sitting parked on the freeway. It depends on where they live, where the transit lines are, and where they are headed. (But these are people who can easily be lost if transit lines shift -- as they do.)
I don't see a general answer. But in the special case of Los Vegas
Re:Mass transit is best for tourists (Score:3, Informative)
Why it's hard to put in US cities (Score:3, Interesting)
(1) is because everyone has a car, and their "active range" is much bigger. I was pretty happy going by bike and mass transit in Stockholm. But if my average trip there was 5 km it's perhaps 15km here. I get there equally fast. It seems everyone likes to live 30-60 minutes from their work, that means that Americans in general live much more spread out.
Anyway, regardless of why, the population density difference is a fact. And this is a problem for mass transit since with 1/3 the population density, you'd need 9 times as much mass transit, at 9 times the cost to serve the same population. That's a lot of empty busses and trains.
(2) US cities don't have much of a center, especially the younger ones. LA, Dallas & Phoenix are mostly huge spread out built areas with little distinction. Trips people make tend to be from fairly random points A to equally random points B.
In short, mass transit is hard in these cities because there is little mass movement. All travel is individual. There are no huge streams of movements that a mass transit system could serve really well.
European cities have grown and developed over centuries together with their transportation systems. Those systems serve their needs, and the habits of their population have been formed by the available services.
Older US cities like New York, Boston and Chicago have evolved in a more European way, and do have pretty respectable and well used mass transit systems.
I'm sure you're right about transportation in London. But consider why that is so. And it sure doesn't make me want to move to London!
Re:Seattle is working on this too... (Score:2)
-Blocks access to businesses in some cases.
-Adds to the traffic problem by blocking intersections.
-Rail is slower because it will have to wait for traffic in some cases.
-Danger of a car-train accident or even worse a person-train accident
Monorail deals with all of these well. If you do any reading on the subject you will find that the safety record for monorail is second to none. Don't forget that it looks bloody cool!
Odd about the west. (Score:2)
I live in Boston, and there is no doubt in my mind that today, tomorrow, and next week I'll be taking the train to work. It's about 10x cheaper than driving & parking in the city. And lots easier too.
I drive into work about once a month. That's plenty.
But I guess each to his own. If you love to be seen in your car, well, then I guess then that settles the issue!
Not just a Disney idea. (Score:2, Interesting)
Disney replaced the Mk.IVs with Bombardier built Mk.VIs (The Mk.Vs are at DisneyLand). The new trains are inferior according to the drivers, but the trains had been aquired already. They are, in all fairness, more roomy to the passengers. Disney then sold the old Mk.IVs, still in perfect condition, to the city of Las Vegas.
So, when you are riding on a train between hotels, you are most likely riding the same train you might have riden 10 years ago at Walt Disney World.
Oh, lord. (Score:2)
Sheesh. If monorails were really so good, they would be all over the place. But 200 years (okay, 198) years after Richard Trevithick [schoolnet.co.uk] invented the steam locomotive [google.com] (btw, the , birail systems are quite prevalent throughout the known universe [google.com]).
Must be their inherent simplicity and stability, no? If you really look around [monorails.org], there aren't really much monorails...
they need laterals (Score:2)
they need more lateral action off the strip, maybe with some cheep buses or something, so guys like me can get to the strip from our cheap hotels...
Why this is an amazing idea (Score:4, Interesting)
A bunch of posters here have wondered "why build such a thing?" Having just had the misfortune of visiting Vegas, let me say why the city is uniquely suited to benefit from a monorail.
Like no other city, Las Vegas is made up a tremendously high percentage of people who visit just for a the weekend. Tens of thousands of people fly into Vegas every week, all of whom go directly to the casinos, where they sleep in the upstairs hotel rooms. Right now, they essentially have two viable choices: cab or rental car.
Nobody wants to go through the hassle of figuring out a bus system just after flying into town. And walking that mile or so to the casinos, with luggage, in the dessert heat won't work either. A monorail dedicated to connect the airport with the strip is an incredible idea, as much as I may personally detest gambling.
Re:Why this is an amazing idea (Score:2)
It doesn't seem to me that these people are travelling around that much!
Re:Why this is an amazing idea (Score:2)
It doesn't seem to me that these people are travelling around that much!
Half the fun of Vegas is visiting all the hotels with the various themes. If you've never been there, there's really no place like it.
Re:Why this is an amazing idea (Score:2)
For instance, I-15 (you can see it in the graphic) is the major North-South traffic artery through town, it currently has rougly 4 lanes in each direction in the area that parallels the monorail project and the strip casinos. I attended a presentation a few years back that estimated a need for over 10 lanes in each direction in less than 20 years. For some large metropolitan areas that is nothing, but for a backward gambling town that isn't so recently out of the mob era (some say we're still there with Oscar Goodman as mayor) that is quite an increase in traffic.
Some more #s off the top of my head:
35,000,000 visitors a year (6 million by car, the rest by air
125,000 hotel rooms
1,600 taxicabs
Comdex is usually one of the largest events (this year's was under the shadow of the events of 9/11/01), with reported attendance of over 200,000, this fills up the city and allows the sleaziest dumps to charge over $200 a night. So we can get an extra 13% of our population into town over a week or a long weekend? We can use some help in the transit department.
i lived there many years... (Score:2)
i must say that most towns wouldnt be well suited to this type of project, there are just too many directions people travel in the typical city. But Las Vegas is very different, there is the "strip", almost all big casinos sit right on this street (Las Vegas Blvd). The traffic on this street is absolutely ridiculous, and it can take quite a while to get from one end of the strip to the other.
This kind of project would probably be far less economical in the average town where traffic heads in many different directions, but Las Vegas is especially well suited for this project. I would guess that over 50% of the traffic in the town heads up and down a very specific corridor and that not only is this feasible in Vegas, it is one of the few places it could be a preffered solution
Too bad (Score:4, Informative)
That will never work in vegas (Score:2)
Not crime-proof (Score:2)
The only technological solution I can see is remote monitoring combined with an override system that could let a security guard send any capsule straight to the police station. But constant monitoring of every capsule is pretty expensive.
Catching up to Detroit (Score:2)
RIP Phil (Score:5, Funny)
i miss him too (Score:2)
Let's get ready to RUMMBBBLEEE! (Score:2)
"In the Red Corner, weighing in at 23.5 tons of 200mph, solar-powered fury, introducing the Challenger: The Monorail!"
"In the Blue Corner, 1,235,294,573 cataclysmically stupid people who can't figure out how to merge, what a green light means, or even how to use their fucking turn signals, the reining champeen which has sucked the IQ of every challenger dry: Gridlock!"
E.L.V.I.S. (Score:5, Funny)
E.L.V.I.S. - Elevated Las Vegas Interconnect System
I haven't heard back yet, but it seems like a winner to me!!
Actually Disney Is Involved (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Actually Disney Is Involved (Score:3, Funny)
two good trains in japan (Score:3, Informative)
- The monorail from Shimbashi (in Tokyo near the Ginza) to Ariake (manmade peninsula with convention and amusement facilities).
This is an unmanned, beautiful monorail which loops out over the sea. Has some good handholds and soft parts you can lean on because it seems on a narrow train with lots of windows you get pushed strongly to the side when you don't expect it. Beautiful glass car in front is a great panorama.
- The newest subway built in Tokyo, opened last year: Namboku Line which runs from northern Tokyo down to fashionable Azabu. (Like the above monorail I believe) the platform is enclosed on either side by glass walls interrupted by sliding glass doors which only open when the train stops right in front of it. There are metal posts with electric eyes on them just inside where the doors retract, so that they won't try to close while someone is entering. No room also because of those posts for someone to slide outside the glass wall.
Cabbies fought this for the longest time (Score:2)
Indy getting a mini-version of this... (Score:3, Informative)
Clarian Health, who owns most of these hospitals is foot the 34 million dollar bill for this, and the city will get monthly payments from them for taking land away I guess. I just have to find out if I can catch a ride to class on the thing, or if it will be limited to medical personel only.
to clarify Denver's transportation situation... (Score:4, Informative)
However, the next expansion (which will be completed in a few years, IIRC) is a link between Denver and a large suburb to the south. A benefit to commuters, but also greatly welcomed by shoppers.
Also the proposed monorail [highspeedmonorail.com] is meant to connect Denver with the ski resorts-- it isn't meant to be a "downtown monorail" as the article implies.
Great, slashdotted again. (Score:3, Funny)
What is it with geeks and monorails anyway?
And the Simpsons song just isn't funny anymore.
A question (Score:2)
Also, from the article: The first four miles of the rail project are being funded entirely with private money raised through tax-free bonds.
And who do they expect to eventually pay off those bonds, the tooth fairy? Sounds like the whole thing is publicly funded to me...
i think (Score:2)
What the heck are they thinking? (Score:3, Informative)
Then I saw the route map.
1/2 the strip is not accessed by it. It starts at the MGM grand. And, most problematic, it does'nt go to the airport.
If I was designing this, it would run up the strip to the Sahara, turn right to the convention center, then head north to downtown.
I can't help to think that those cab drivers I hate so much had something to do with this assinine design.
Hell (Score:2)
Why monorails? (Score:2, Interesting)
Seriously, though, I'd be interesting to know why it is that everybody in the States automatically thinks of monorails whenever non-bus public transit is discussed. Could it be that you're all becoming just a little bit too Disnified? I'm surprised there is little mention of the old San Fransisco cablecars. Maybe you'd prefer something along the lines of Alfred Ely Beach's pneumatic subway!
If you make the trip over to Europe, you will see that just about every town or city has some sort of public transit involving surface light rail, usually trams/streetcars. Every one of these systems is efficient and well run. I see no reason why the same cannot be done over here. If it's a question of space, remember that all of these European towns are strapped for any space, and efforts are made to preserve as much green space or living space as possible. Still they install the tramways. They go down the centre of multi-lane boulevards, down disused railways, purpose built elevated track, pedestrian malls, and, because they can be built to accommodate regular tired vehicles--cars, no pun intended--straight down any city streets. In short, a tram can be built to go just about anywhere that efficient public transit is needed. It's also handy that nobody would need to re-invent the wheel, as excellent, KISS technology exists. For those concerned about costs and subsidies, keep in mind that places like Zagreb and Sarajevo, both capitals of war-torn countries, don't exactly have much money to throw around, but rebuilding their own tram lines has been a priority. For the NIMBY types, these systems are quiet and often quite picturesque, especially compared to buses. (Postcards of trams are everywhere! Besides a red London Double Decker, ever see a picture postcard featuring a diesel bus?)
North America was filled with streetcar systems right up to the '50's. Ottawa, for instance, had an excellent streetcar system that ran all over what was then the city. It was even powered by its own hydroelectric power dam on the Ottawa River! Killing it off is now considered one of the stupidest things that City Hall ever did! Toronto still has much of theirs, and has been expanding it in recent years. There are certainly no plans to build any more lines like the crappy Scarborough RT line, a monorail, that hasn't been the best of systems.
Have all the plans and designs for these practical and efficient systems been thrown out in favour of all these amusement park monorail rides? If monorails as public transit are so efficient, so quiet, so inexpensive and so simple, I fail to see why they aren't all over Europe, where space saving and efficiency is all-important.
*****
Re:Why monorails? (Score:2)
These are cities designed nearly from day one to revolve around the car. We made it cheap, easy, and nearly impossible to put the sort of transit system you have in Europian cities into practice. Everything is too spread out, and too congested with traffic because we have to travle longer distances.
In the case of Las Vegas, a monorail is simply the best fit for the situation along a corridor mostly travled by tourists. Your European transit solutions simply would'nt work in this situation.
Incidently, there are moterized trollies (not on rails) you can take up and down the strip for $1.50. I've used them. But you could triple the number of these, and you'd still have the same amount of congestion we see today.
Dual-rail elevated is more sensible (Score:2)
A moment's thought about the forces involved will also reveal that a single-rail design is much more difficult to get right. In fact, every "monorail" system I've ever seen has a very wide track, and the trains have wheels on both sides. They are really very narrow-gauge dual-rail systems in which the two rails are connected by a web of excess material that contributes a lot of weight and very little structural integrity.
So why are we so enamored of monorail? Simple: in the 1950's, Walt Disney was looking for a way to make part of his park "futuristic". He was so successful that the entire country has bought into the idea that monorails are clever technology. Not.
As a Vegas ride, this project makes perfect sense. For any other city, we should stick with promoting above- or below-grade transportation systems, and let the engineers decide on the rail count.
*cough*hypocrite*cough* (Score:3, Funny)
If you really wanted to make an impact, you'd really need to get together way more users to boycott slashdot than what is going on now.
Re:*cough*hypocrite*cough* (Score:3, Troll)
Sigh... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Sigh... (Score:2)
The residents won't benefit from less traffic and smog when all those tourists no longer need to drive, taxi, or bus from casino to casino.
And we all know that none of the maids, dealers, cashiers, plumbers, sysadmins, network engineers, programmers, waiters, entertainers, cooks, shopkeepers, bookkeepers, bookies, ticket takers, ushers, security guards, hairdressers, bankers, rental car agents, travel agents, or whomever that work in the casinos, restaurants, shops, stores, banks, or any of the businesses near the monorail are going to be using the monorail.
Re:Sigh... (Score:2)
You don't think that the residents of Las Vegas already know what a traffic hassle Las Vegas Blvd and the rest of the strip is? They go around it anyways.
none of the maids, dealers, cashiers, plumbers, sysadmins, network engineers, programmers, waiters, entertainers, cooks, shopkeepers, bookkeepers, bookies, ticket takers, ushers, security guards, hairdressers, bankers, rental car agents, travel agents, or whomever that work in the casinos, restaurants, shops, stores, banks, or any of the businesses near the monorail are going to be using the monorail.
Look at the route, smart guy. The monorail doesn't actually go to where any of these people live. So, unless the people cleaning the convention center live at the MGM Grand or the Bellagio, this isn't going to be much use for them, is it?
Re:Let me be the first to ask... (Score:2)
Re:Let me be the first to ask... (Score:2)
Quite a view. Much less obtrusive than paving right of ways for new highways or widening the existing roads. I don't think you would find too much objections from business owners having supports for the system mounted next to their billboards and such. It doesn't cast much of a shadow, and they are very quiet with their electric motors.
They are not very fast due to the mechanical aspect of gripping the structure. It wouldn't be efficient on maintenence to have them flying at 150mph or anything. Too much wear and tear on the tires and concrete structure for something that has to grip at such high tolerances.
Its more the scenerey, I guess. Economical. Quiet. Relaxing.
Re:Let me be the first to ask... (Score:2)
"We want them to think it's like a ride at Disneyland," said Bob Broadbent, who leads the project, "not public transportation."
DisneyVegas (or is it VegasWorld?) can afford mass transit of this type, it certainly doesn't fit the real world any more than its extravagent use of water in a desert that gets less than 10" a year (the definition of a desert!) could be supported without its financial underpinnings as a destination resort.
Monorails are innefficient which is one of the main reasons why they've not been adopted. As this poster says, they have tires and tires on concrete, whether they grip the road or grip a concrete i-beam, are inherently less efficient and require more frequent replacement than good old steel-on-steel rail.
Elevating saves money, but steel-on-steel rail can be elevated, too.
So ... the motivation here is not only to reduce congestion but to do so via 1960s technology which, not having been adopted mainstream for very good reasons, is still exotic and therefore fitting for a tourist destination.
I'm not knocking it ... it seems ideal for Las Vegas (just as buses coming down from NYC and urban NJ seem ideal technology for Atlantic City).
But if anyone thinks this portends a change in thinking as to the future of mass transit ... better get Disney or the mob involved before adopting monorail as your savior from congestion!
Re:Let me be the first to ask... (Score:2)
In the past few years I have visited a quite a few cities in this world around the size of Las Vegas with excellent mass transit. Getting around Vegas was a disaster. (I had a car) Getting around these other cities was a much cheaper, faster, and more enjoyable experience.
Athens [metropla.net] - 3 million (rode in 2001, damn is Greek hard to read)
Barcelona [metropla.net] - 1.6 million (rode in 2002, fantastic system, took two taxis in nine days)
Budapest [metropla.net] - 2 million (rode in 2000. took me everywhere)
Bucharest [metropla.net] - 2.3 million (rode in 2000. comprehensive but a little dodgy. about as clean as NYC)
Prague [metropla.net] - 1.2 million (rode in 2000. they even have English signs!)
Warsaw [metropla.net] 1.6 million (1999,2000,2001 - only one underground, but linked with dozens of tram lines.)
I should mention that all of these cities have extensive bus and streetcar networks which mesh seamlessly with their metros. And that all of these systems have incredibly high ridership. They're always packed, and yet they always run on time.
Next to what I've seen abroad, NYC is ok, Washington DC is fair, and Chicago and Boston (where I live and ride the T daily) are utterly pathetic. (I wish the crooked politicians in Boston would put 1/10th of what they put into the roads and the "big dig" into the MBTA. It'd be a city worth living in.)
I do believe that I'll visit Vegas again when their Monorail is up and running. And I bet I'll see a lot more of the city than I did on my last visit. (then again, if you've seen one glitzy casino...)
Re:Let me be the first to ask... (Score:2)
Re:Let me be the first to ask... (Score:2)
Re:Let me be the first to ask... (Score:2)
In fact, they are building them because current trains have NOT enough capacity. Especially the highly congested route between Tokyo and Osaka. (Probably the first "real" route sporting maglev.)
AFAIK, the construction costs are indeed higher. Nonetheless, the conventional successors of highspeed trains as the Shinkansen, the TGV or the ICE are mostly limited to roughly 300km/h operational speed. The problem is at very high speed the wheels and the track are strained to the extreme, which leads to wear and tear of the same.
A future successors of the Shinkansen (Linear Chuo Shinkansen [rtri.or.jp] ) will be based on maglev, as the supposed successor of the ICE-line the Transrapid [transrapid.de].
The Linear Chuo Shinkansen is supposed to have an operational speed of 500km/h. The current Transrapid built in China has an operational speed of 300km/h
Not to mention the better acceleration and lower noise rate, delivered by these solutions.
The Transrapid reaches 300km/h after 5km from a standing start and breaks certainly as fast as it accelerates.
Furthermore, the energy consumption of current maglev based trains are about 40% lower than their conventional counterparts.
Re:Monorail (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Sounds interesting to me... (Score:2)
I think it has to do with the fact that the casino's are MASSIVE and there's nothing in between to help judge the distance.
Jason.
Re:Sounds interesting to me... (Score:2)
Many of 'em are pretty big, but they're right next to each other. There aren't many open lots left on the Strip...from Trop to Sahara, the only open lot of any considerable size is the southeast corner of Sahara & Las Vegas Blvd., north of Circus Circus. The rest of it has been built up for some time now.
The Odd Mod (Score:2)
Seriously, I mean the AC's right. The post in question clearly wasn't a troll. Heck, I'd even hesistate to mod the original down as Redundant, seeing as it came only two minutes after the first posting of the song. And come on, given the article topic, it's not like you didn't expect the song to make a showing, right? =)
Re:Monorail (Score:3, Informative)
Re:A good idea....but too small (Score:2)
I'll bet the high price is due to typical classy Vegas features:
A plan to install over 3 million synchronized pulsing neon lights, flash bulbs and lasers on the track and the trains. The multiple megawatts of lights will create dazzling complex virtual waves of light shooting through the city 24-hours per day. The light show will be accompanied by a specially commissioned sound track from Andrew Lloyd Webber will be blasted from high-powered loudspeakers.
Another expensive feature is the plan to accelerate the cars to 90MPH in under 3 seconds, giving enough velocity to negotiate thrilling 360 degree vertical loops installed at every third block.
Re:how about... (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Or... (Score:2, Interesting)