Feel free to discuss the implications of these images (none of them were photoshopped):
The Ocean Park Gondola. Image by flickr user Luke Chan.
The Madrid Teleferico. Image by flickr user R.Duran.
Feel free to discuss the implications of these images (none of them were photoshopped):
The Ocean Park Gondola. Image by flickr user Luke Chan.
The Madrid Teleferico. Image by flickr user R.Duran.
8 Comments
The Ocean Park Gondola looks kinda serious. It’s a great shot and I have a feeling this could work out in cities.
On the one hand those are small cabins and the capacity is… let’s say ‘limited’. But as you can see there are numbers of cabins aligned. Those small cabins need smaller and cheaper technology – and those are more flexible in case of usage and storage.
Combine the video the MISTER guy did (showing the garages) with those cabins and there you go with a good concept.
In case of 3S it will be difficult to put the lines next to each other (sizes and forces). In that situation I’d prefer lines above each other.
@ LX,
Right now I’m hearing from my sources that stacking with a 3S is not in the works. It seems like the tower foundations would have to be quite substantial. Which means – of course – it can be done, just no one is willing to try it yet.
I am interested to see what the stations look like. Is there any photos Steven? Also, I’m curious why engineers would go for horizontal ‘stacking’ as opposed to vertical. Anyone got thoughts on why this may be the case?
@ Ryan,
Having some difficulties finding them and not a lot of time to do so. Will keep you informed.
I’d say:
– they’ve got plenty of area in those pictures (no need to go vertical)
– the final stations don’t have to be vertical (easier to access)
– both lines run nearer to ground (safety aspect to riders)
– the towers would be twice as high as they are right now
– or one line was installed a couple of years later than the other
(so first pictures shows how it’s done and how it will look like – but on the second one engineers made preparations for a further installation)
@ LX,
Bingo.
Actually the forces on towers work absolutely vertical. So, it even wouldn’t be necessary to size up the foundations substantial.
Only thing would be the tower construction itself, wouldn’t it? It would have to bring twice the load down to ground. Wind and maybe direction changes could be another problem (remember angles of 1-2° are possible on towers).
In case of the Roosevelt Island Towers i.e.: theoretically the structural elements of the towers would only have to be twice the size + additional ropetrack installations.
Picture for inspiration: http://www.zoll.de/z1_bilder/a1_vst/strommast.jpg 😉