Clay Chastain coming back with light rail

[warwickland]

the handicap accessibility issue is up to the design of the particular PRT system (there are several companies offering their own version of PRT).  for example, the Skyweb design addresses handicapped passengers thus:

ah, ok thanks, i had looked at others and there was no mention.

[bahua]

The whole issue with human interaction isn't that big a deal, in my opinion, because using a system like Skytran, you don't spend a lot of time using it. You get where you're going. The interaction is as important as it is with current popular transit methods because current methods are so slow that people need to fill the time with some humanity. That's fine, but I consider it a result of the technology being too slow.

[warwickland]

The whole issue with human interaction isn't that big a deal, in my opinion, because using a system like Skytran, you don't spend a lot of time using it. You get where you're going. The interaction is as important as it is with current popular transit methods because current methods are so slow that people need to fill the time with some humanity. That's fine, but I consider it a result of the technology being too slow.

maybe we should create wide swaths of asphalt for people to get from point a to point b quicker than bus or LRT in detatched skytrans that people can now control! 

sorry for being an ass.

[mean]

I wanna see a skytran pod with a bike rack. 

Shouldn't be a big deal, one imagines. But even if it's infeasible for some reason, it doesn't negate the worth of the system, in my opinion. There will still be buses with bike racks.

that would absolutely flunk the whole system for me if i was a transportation planner, and its one of my explanations as to why i dont think PRT is acceptable in present form.

Similarly, it's one of my explanations as to why I don't think transportation planning is acceptable in its present form.

Yes, it might make someone feel good to know they've developed a system that can accomodate all the people all the time. But it does a city a lot more good to have a system that can accomodate most of the people most of the time, for an exponentially smaller price tag. In this case, especially given that we're so painfully short on funds and have very much other important and expensive work to do, economic practicality strikes me as the most important factor.

[kard]

maybe we should create wide swaths of asphalt for people to get from point a to point b quicker than bus or LRT in detatched skytrans that people can now control! 

sorry for being an ass.

I'm not bashing PRT here, just thinking

This is a good point.  Would PRT be able to handle something like rush hour?  At first it would supplement automobile and freeway traffic, but I'm not seeing how a single-track of PRT pods could carry the density of a freeway or a train.  Even if the track is full of flying pods it would still be single file.

[mean]

I'm not bashing PRT here, just thinking

This is a good point.  Would PRT be able to handle something like rush hour?  At first it would supplement automobile and freeway traffic, but I'm not seeing how a single-track of PRT pods could carry the density of a freeway or a train.  Even if the track is full of flying pods it would still be single file.

Yes, but do you realize how much smaller pods are than cars?! How many people drive SUVs that can hold 5-10 people, to get one person to work? Clearly you didn't read any of the information, my friend. This is probably the most relevant link, but I encourage you to read the rest of the site:

http://skytran.net/01Homepage/congestion-animation.htm

Of course, the same benefits would apply to PRT systems in general.

[justin8216]

I thought he moved to Saudi Arabia with Michael Jackson?

[kard]

Has any city ever done public PRT?  Would this be like (gulp) "building two stadiums side-by-side"?

[ComandanteCero]

this would be like sending the Spirit of St. Louis across the atlantic.  We'd be the first city in the world to implement a transportation technology that will almost surely catch on in the coming century as it becomes more familiar, and becomes tested and proven to public officials.

[mean]

Has any city ever done public PRT?  Would this be like (gulp) "building two stadiums side-by-side"?

Hah! No, no city has implemented PRT on any significant scale that I am aware of. But there was a time when no city had implemented underground trains, a time when no city had implemented streetcars, a time when no city had implemented buses...why not be bold and attempt something new and innovative, rather than play catchup?

I appreciate your analogy, but I don't think that you can fairly compare the TSC to PRT. Yes, we'd be the first on both counts, but one was an experiment designed to forge ahead into the unknown, at a time when suburban-styled development was predicted to be the future; the other is an attempt to bring us back from that experiment to the degree possible, toward traditional schools of urban design thought. You could say that one represents the mistake, while the other is an attempted solution.

[staubio]

I almost completely buy into the promise of PRT, but I think the big loss there is the corridor of additional investment and density that springs up along the rail line.  The permanence of those stations does a lot fo development.  PRT is as flexible as cars, basically, and wouldn't require -- and this wouldn't create -- nodes of density.

I say we go for it, though.  Why don't we shut Clay down with our own PRT ballot initiative.  Get the signatures, explain it the public, put it on the ballot.  It should be a much easier sell with a lot more stuff for more people with less cost.  Anyone know how to contact Clay and ask him to switch gears a bit, especially if we deliver an army of backers -- or shall we just take over?

[schugg]

I almost completely buy into the promise of PRT, but I think the big loss there is the corridor of additional investment and density that springs up along the rail line.  The permanence of those stations does a lot fo development.  PRT is as flexible as cars, basically, and wouldn't require -- and this wouldn't create -- nodes of density.

I say we go for it, though.  Why don't we shut Clay down with our own PRT ballot initiative.  Get the signatures, explain it the public, put it on the ballot.  It should be a much easier sell with a lot more stuff for more people with less cost.  Anyone know how to contact Clay and ask him to switch gears a bit, especially if we deliver an army of backers -- or shall we just take over?

just take over!  can be done.

[kard]

Well...taking over...baby steps.  I think the most one could hope for is spreading the word about this.  I wouldn't expect it to pass the first time.  But it could later on.  Not to say this wouldn't be worth the time and effort, but being realistic, one would have to get a lot more support then just some folks from an Internet fourm going for it.

(Someone contact Fairfield...and then get him elected).

That said, I'm all for it.

[warwickland]

my position is that people barely know a damn thing about LRT in this city - looking at the last election. imagine trying to sell PRT? not to be a debbie downer, just being realistic. if it is the technology it promises to be, its about 20 years too early (that is to say 30 for KC). LRT has a pretty good track record, but PRT is unproven, good luck with hyde park, etc.

[49r]

I'm not so sure having a commuter-based LRT system terminate in Swope park is such a bad idea.  It's in the middle of a highly residential neighborhood (plenty of daily commuters) and would provide ample Park-N-Ride opportunities.  A must for commuters.

Plus, I think that more local folks would utilize the train to get to the airport than visitors to KC, out of towners who presently need a rental car would still need to rent a car, LRT shouldn't have any impact on that.

[mean]

I'm contacting the Unimodal people to see if they have anything constructive to add or campaign materials to donate. If we raised some money and ran a legit campaign, we might have a chance. In any case, we have a better public name than Clay Chastain.

To do this we'd have to decide on a name, then register with the state and register a domain. Then we'd have to put up a informative web site that solicits donations. Shoot press releases to everyone; I have contacts at various local media outlets, and local blogs will pick it up. Solicit more donations. Spend the money on further promotion. Petition drives, obviously. How about TV and radio commercials? Yard signs? Organized rallies?

I've given thought to running this campaign for years so I have a lot of ideas and in fact a web site started for my nonexistent campaign organization, from back when I thought LRT was the answer. Naming ideas? I'm willing to register a domain and build (or commission the building of) a web site, do the legal legwork with the state, and write and distribute press releases.

[ComandanteCero]

Well, here are a couple of issues with PRT (playing devil's advocate):

1) Not proven.  Need to help fund a test track, through some combination of private and public funds, more private than public.

2) What PRT system do you "endorse".  There are several companies out there with their own version (Skytrac, Skytran, Skycab, etc etc), if you pick one, who do you pick?

3) Need federal approval (this would be in tandem to tests run at the test track).

4) Once the test track has been built, proven, tested, and the technology approved, would need to prove Kansas Citians that it works, and we should help fund this private venture.

p.s: i should add there is a modified PRT system in West Virgina.  It's something of a hybrid in that it carries up to 8 people in a vehicle, and it looks like hell.  But it was built in the late 70's, as a test system, by the Federal government (back when the government was more progressive and was actually funding research into new modes of transportation  ((this funding dried up in the Reagan years, and never came back))).

[DaveKCMO]

To do this we'd have to decide on a name, then register with the state and register a domain. Then we'd have to put up a informative web site that solicits donations. Shoot press releases to everyone; I have contacts at various local media outlets, and local blogs will pick it up. Solicit more donations. Spend the money on further promotion. Petition drives, obviously. How about TV and radio commercials? Yard signs? Organized rallies?

you could do a secure online poll (unique users vote only once) on which stops people would use. for example, the plaza would probably be the top location, followed by the sports complex, downtown, and the airport. string them all together and there's your route (or two)!

[bbqboy]

I would be afraid to go FAST in that, as it looks like a VW Bus on Tracks.

[mean]

1) Not proven.  Need to help fund a test track, through some combination of private and public funds, more private than public.

Agreed. I think this money could easily be raised through private donations. You're talking about significantly less than a million dollars.

2) What PRT system do you "endorse".  There are several companies out there with their own version (Skytrac, Skytran, Skycab, etc etc), if you pick one, who do you pick?

Personally, I would pick SkyTran because I know the most about it, and its specifications (http://www.skytran.net/04Technical/pod12.htm) make the most sense to me. I would like to hear arguments for other systems (PRT or otherwise), but SkyTran is so well-engineered that it would take a pretty remarkable system to beat it, in my opinion.

3) Need federal approval (this would be in tandem to tests run at the test track).

I dunno about this. We can do what we want, more or less, as far as I know. In any case, that's pretty far down the road. Baby steps...

4) Once the test track has been built, proven, tested, and the technology approved, would need to prove Kansas Citians that it works, and we should help fund this private venture.

I think once all that is done, private investment will take care of almost everything. Once we can demonstrate that this works, and is so cheap and efficient that it can make a profit, I think we will find venture capitalists willing to invest in the future of Kansas City. You gotta figure, something like this will attract visitors and residents on a scale Kansas City hasn't seen since the mid-19th Century, and businesses will follow. Economic development will progress differently than along a traditional rail spine, for sure, but it will inevitably happen.

Some public investment would be great, too, though. Ideally I would like to get a little money from the state and federal governments if possible, and any metro counties that want to participate could opt-in. At the end of the day, what would be really great would be to team up with St. Louis with state and federal money, and build a line between the two cities. SkyTran performs at 200mph between cities. You're looking at about $25 to get there in a little over an hour. Cross-state deals would be awesome, too. Think big. The idea would eventually be to add in Lawrence, Topka, Wichita, Des Moines, Omaha...! Just imagine the ability to travel cheaply at 200mph between all our regional cities. The casual tourism would be incredible. "Hey honey, let's go to Omaha for dinner!"

But, baby steps...

Also, that West Virginia thing is horrid!