May, 2010

24
May

2010

Lost Toronto Funicular

A Funicular near Toronto's High Park. Image by Edward Dale.

I’ll admit it: One of the things I love about cable transit is the “treasure hunt” quality of the entire thing. It’s a “lost” technology with clues and remnants scattered around the world. Picking those clues up and piecing them together is – for me – one of the most exciting parts of this work.

So you can imagine how thrilled I was to receive an email from my uncle which included the picture to left. He stumbled upon it the other day and snapped a photo of it.

This funicular, unbeknownst to me, is located near High Park in my hometown of Toronto, Canada. I’ve yet to find any research on the system.

Lost or unknown infrastructure is nothing new to Torontonians, but to discover a funicular is almost totally unheard of:

Who built it and when? Why? Is it still operational? Who owns it? What was it used for? Could we use it today? Would we want to use it today?

So many questions, too few answers. So, Toronto: Do you know anything about the High Park Funicular?

23
May

2010

The Titlis Gondola

The Mount Titlis Gondola. Image by Casual Chin.

The above is one of several cable lines connecting Mount Titlis to the resort town of Engelberg, Switzerland. Built in 1984 by the Von Roll Company, it’s an incredibly common and dated MDG system:

  • It’s slow - 15 km/hr.
  • It’s cornering requires large stations.
  • It doesn’t have great capacity – 1,600 persons per hour.
  • It’s nothing impressive in terms of length – only 2,289 meters.

In other words the Titlis Gondola is completely and utterly common. Except for one thing: As you can see from the picture above, there is a section that passes through a field which is perfectly flat. This field section of the Titlis Gondola comprises almost a third of the total length of the system.

So why am I telling you this?

An argument that’s often used against CPT is that it is appropriate for alpine installations only. The technology can’t work in flat areas, the argument goes. The Titlis Gondola is demonstrable proof against that argument. The height of the towers through this field are also low enough to qualify this system for low profile status.

Yes, CPT is spreading quickly, but the reality of the situation is this: Most examples of what the technology can do still exist only in ski resorts. People interested in this topic need to reconcile that within their own heads.

More importantly, I think: The cable industry, advocates and promoters of the technology have to learn to extrapolate and translate ski resort installations into urban systems.

Given how many skiers there are in the world, this shouldn’t be too difficult.

22
May

2010

Palmylink Rendering

Check out the Sketchup rendering of the Palmylink proposal that came out of New Zealand last week:

21
May

2010

Independence vs. Interdepence

I’ve heard the argument that cable’s not a viable form of transit because vehicles cannot move independently of each other. Standard transit technologies – the argument goes – are self-propelled and are therefore immune to problems experienced by other transit vehicles on a line.

This argument is only half-true. The first part is true: Yes, in standard configurations all vehicles are self-propelled. The second part is false: Just because all vehicles move independently of one another, does not mean they are not impacted by each other.

Consider, for example, how many times a fully-functioning streetcar, LRV or subway is stuck in place due to the malfunction of a vehicle ahead of it. Because all vehicles share the same right-of-way, they are just as interdependent upon each others’ movement as a cable system. Even PRT would be susceptible to this (if it existed), and independence is one of that technology’s key selling points.

A problem in one part of a transit system will always reverberate throughout the rest of that system, independent or not.

Buses, one could argue, avoid this problem entirely, but their full independence means high operational costs due to the need for a large number of drivers. (Their independence, however, is also questionable due to the mitigating impacts of traffic, stop lights and scheduling.)

The independence argument is a red herring and completely masks three significant advantages to interdependent movement:

  1. Cheap Automation – As cable systems move interdependently, automation can be accomplished easier and more cost-effectively than complex automation of independent vehicles. You don’t need a driver in each vehicle – human or otherwise.
  2. Economies of Scale – Rather than build 30 engines to propel 30 vehicles, cable systems build one engine to move 30 vehicles. The economies of scale that occur here are one of the single greatest reasons for cable’s cost-effectiveness.
  3. Reliable Headways - Ever waited for half an hour for a bus or streetcar only to have four arrive at one time? That’s what happens with independent vehicles. In a cable system, that doesn’t occur. Because vehicles move interdependently, chain-gangs of vehicles (‘bunching’ as it’s called) is a virtual impossibility.

It’s easy to get caught up in terms like “independence” because it sounds like a good thing. But – really and truly -independence is a non-argument.

After all, independence without impact is irrelevant.

20
May

2010

A Problem Of Options

People don’t ride airplanes because they’re pleasant. They ride them because they have no other real choice. Want proof? Notice how many people are choosing High Speed Rail instead of short haul flights. When there’s choice, people choose.

The problem Public Transit faces is this: It’s not an airplane. There are a huge number of alternative choices to Public Transit that people currently prefer:

  • The Private Automobile
  • Carpooling
  • Electric Bicycles
  • Mopeds or Vespas
  • Rollerblades
  • Skateboarding
  • Cycling
  • Jogging
  • Walking
  • Telecommuting
  • Taxis
  • Car Shares

If they seriously want to convert people to their way of thinking, Public Transit should want to provide a better product. Moral sway won’t work any more than guilt will, yet those are the very tactics transit advocates use.

Public Transit’s current strategy seems to be one of not trying to win now, but to wait until the other guys (read: automobiles) lose sometime in the future. This strategy is only possible given mass government subsidy and I’m not sure it will ever pan out.

The thing is, the other guys aren’t interested in losing now; they’re playing to win. Cars and vespas are smaller than ever; India and China are cranking them out cheaper than the world’s ever seen; electric cars are just around the corner; and bike lanes are (finally) popping up everywhere.

Meanwhile, electric bicycles have reduced the size of vehicles further; Car Shares are eliminating the need for excess parking; and the re-emergence of dense, urban living means that many people simply walk or jog to work.  And walking is still as cheap as it’s ever been.

What has Public Transit done lately?

19
May

2010

Pigeons Love Public Transit, Too

It’s only 30 seconds. Watch it till the end, trust me.

18
May

2010

Calgary’s Plus 15 Network: The Key to Urban Gondolas?

The Calgary Plus 15 Network. Public Domain.

A Plus 15 bridge with abstract metal sculptures in Calgary's downtown core. Image by Spatial Mongrel.

Calgary, Alberta, Canada is a city of around 1 million people. It’s the financial centre of Canada’s petrol economy and is very, very cold. Average temperatures range from a low of -15°C (5°F) to a high of 10°C (49°F).

Calgarians are therefore blessed with a network of elevated walkways called the Plus 15 System. This network enables movement throughout the financial district and downtown core without stepping outside. The Plus 15 network’s 16 km of length and 59 bridges make it the largest such system in the world.

The Plus 15, whose name refers to the height at which these bridges are above street level, is not without controversy. Some feel that the network’s 16 km and 59 bridges rob the street of pedestrian traffic and life. But that’s not the point or reason I wish to draw attention to this system.

Instead, consider the following images:

A multistory bridge is just one of 59 bridges that make up Calgary's Plus 15 Network. Image by the Calgary Downtown Association.

Image by John Vetterli.

Image by fredthechicken.

Image by kootenayvolcano.

Some of the bridges are purely utilitarian and others are architectural marvels. But again, that’s not the point. In yesterday’s post we discussed the new Baden Gondelbahn proposal. One of the images from that new proposal was this:

Image by PD via Tages Anzeiger.

See the point now? Integrating Urban Gondolas and Cable Propelled Transit into dense urban environments may not be so difficult after all.

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...