I love this, the idea and the possibility of a city without cars, gardens will replace roads!! People who insist on having 4000 Sq. ft. of house can park at the edge of town and use this and leave there lincoln navigators behind. You still need roads for the delivery of goods, so smaller gardens!
Nice! I had a similar idea, but it deals with GPS and RC operated vehicles. No need for fancy rails. One calls the transport unit with a cell phone like GPS device. it will know where you are going, etc, etc.
I don't have figures in front of me, but I, too, have seen that building a PRT system is less expensive (per mile) that new road construction, light rail, and subway. Roads simply spawn more traffic, and both light rail and subways only serve a narrow corridor. Public buses, at least here in L.A., are loud and further impede auto traffic. PRT will happen; I'd rather see happen sooner than later! Write to your reps!
Guideways would not cover every street, but rather would run along main avenues, with stations about every 1/4 mile (so, yes, you would likely have to walk a short distance to a station). Stations would be off the main track to allow other pods to pass by. Also, I prefer the pod be on top of the guideway, not underneath (more stability). You would rent the pod (rather than the seat), and should have the option of ride-sharing (to increase efficiency).
Initially, the source of power (coal, natural gas, etc.) for the pods is not so important (though, in the long run, it should run from a renewable resource). The important concept is that PRT allows for non-stop travel from point A to point B. To do this, guideways would have to be elevated to avoid current traffic congestion.
lol! good thing is well... its a bit fast if u wanna go a public deastination.. but no free roam n u cant stop anywhere...and we have legtst to walk... but nice concept
This interesting, but I reall don't like the idea of sitting in a kind of wheel chair AND traveling in a vehicle that's traveling up in the air from a wire...Nice environmental aspect though.
Namellak: You do not have to use a weel chair unless you are disabled, of course. On the other hand, if you are, this is a way fot you to still travel independently.
Have a look att the newer version, see Video Responses or search for tag "gts3"!
greblyksnah: I agree with you on the wheel chair, but it still don't like to be up in the air haning from a wire like that, since I have a problem with hights like some other people. I prefer to travel as close to the ground as possible and I've alread seen the newer version in Stockholm as I'm living in Sweden, but thanks all the same :)
Hanging in wires is just the same as an ordinary elevator. There could be cabins w/o windows. You step inside, wait until at the goal, then step out, and no bothering about at what level the transport was. Maybe a video to look at, showing the same distance in a crowded street instead ;-)
I ask again - Why elevated? If you want an automated system wouldn't it be simpler to build it on the street, at ground level? It's the exact same thing, only it's not up in the air. You mentioned returning the streets to pedestrians -- I'm all for making things safer for pedestrians but devoting the entire street to them seems excessive. Do you realize how much space that would be? Our streets are going to look pretty empty, especially the big wide ones in the suburbs.
So we can't use the transportation infrastructure we already have? The freeways, roads, and streets that have been passed down to us and already connect every city and town on the continent to one another? Yes, let's just ditch all that, all the work and planning that went into creating that infrasturucture.
PerryPlanet: From what you write, you obviously live in a country which you think is all the world. But let me guess that in that country there are areas that are already filled with highways, so there is actually no more space for roads.
An elevated system is far cheaper to build and maintain than roads on the ground. And of course fast vehicles should not occupy ground, that calls for accidents.
I live in the United States. And there must be space for roads, because we keep winding up building new ones, don't we?
You are correct that there are countries where there isn't a good road system. But those countries would likely be second or third-world. Do you really think a system like this is going to be built in a second or third-world country? No, it's going to be built in a first-world country, just like everything else has been.
"And of course fast vehicles should not occupy ground, that calls for accidents."
Why? Instead of freeway lanes, you can have guideways for the automated cars, the cars can still run on electricity, maybe you could put electronic sensors in the vehicles so that if an obstacle came in the way the car would stop in time, etc. You can do the exact same thing shown in the video, only it doesn't have to be elevated! Because believe me, people will fight against elevated tracks.
If high speed vehicles should need to stop as soon as a pedestrian wants to cross, they will become low speed vehicles instead. Maybe that you do not like the elevated idea, but many other people understand the big benefit of adding another transport layer. Luckily (or sadly) the technological evolution goes on, despite some people prefer to stat where they are. Wether this is good or bad can be discussed.
As internet URLs are not allowed in YouTube comments I can not write them here, but with a Google search for "prt cost" will give some pages about this. There is also a site swedetrack (with the usual dot com extension) that includes figures about this.
The system developed in Morgantown is not actually PRT, but is an automated people mover. It usually operates on a set schedule, and utilizes vehicles that carry about 20 people. The PRT systems under construction that you mention are very small and are not proven cases for PRT in urban settings. Take ULTra, all it does is connect a parking lot to an airport terminal. We don't really know how these systems work in urban settings yet.
Light rail isn't very appropiate for small towns, but streetcars certainly can be. I'm not sure why PRT would be viable in a place where rail is not viable, as the cost to construct those elevated guideways is quite large, and elevated guideways do not fit many people's vision of what a "small town" should look like.
Calgary, Canada, has trains that are connected to overhead electrical wires, and the electricity that runs through those wires, all of it, comes from renewable resources. :)
I think this video should be renamed "A Convenient Dream".
Look, the thing about this video is the sheer impracticality of the whole thing. WHY does it have to be elevated? I've heard people complain about a single streetcar wire, how do you think they'll feel about an elevated guideway? It runs on electricty? Great, why don't we just make electric cars? Why PRT? Why is this needed?
Yes, but there are other technologies that are smart and can run on solar or wind, like light rail, which are available now. This PRT thing seems much too unrealistic for the next 25 years. I'm not saying progress and technology should stop or anything crazy like that, but instead of putting all our hope into a technology which might not develop in time to save us from the oil crisis, we should focus right now on implementing existing, practical technologies.
The idea seems nice enough, but also very inefficient. To accommodate the parking demands would require many of those "parking structures", which would take up a lot of space in cities where so much space is already devoted to transit. And then to hold much of the car traffic that currently clogs our freeways would require a tremendous amount of aerial track, or the tracks themselves will become clogged with traffic. But to build so many tracks would destroy the scenery in many towns.
Personal rapid transit or PRT has been around as a concept for a long time.
But it isn't expensive enough to make the oil companies happy- it would be a lot cheaper than cars and the unions would hate losing the repetitive road work.
But if engineers who cared about energy consumption and convenience were in charge, it would work great!
And speaking as someone who was injured seroiusly by an 88 year old driver, I like the idea of automated cars.
solves nothing!
australianmade74 10 months ago
I love this, the idea and the possibility of a city without cars, gardens will replace roads!! People who insist on having 4000 Sq. ft. of house can park at the edge of town and use this and leave there lincoln navigators behind. You still need roads for the delivery of goods, so smaller gardens!
edwinstar100 1 year ago
imo it would work best in denmark since its small and would be pretty nice
MrJ00l 1 year ago
have you watched "wall-e"???
MercedesRenovatio 1 year ago
defeats the purpose of public transport....
DocUnsane 1 year ago
we have no money for endless infrastructure. we do has lemo pledge
trainluvr 1 year ago
Nice! I had a similar idea, but it deals with GPS and RC operated vehicles. No need for fancy rails. One calls the transport unit with a cell phone like GPS device. it will know where you are going, etc, etc.
alfredobrown 2 years ago
In the future, everyone is handicapped or sits on a wheelchair.
hughtub 2 years ago
looks way more expensive than any normal rail operation, and seems a lot like a car
dumbass1984 2 years ago
I like it, cept the fact that nobody seems to walk anymore....even going into and gettin' out of their car.
DocQui 2 years ago
I like it!
heftycat 2 years ago
wouldn't we all get really fat with this transport system?
stijn165792 2 years ago 5
Wall-e.
dragoons9009 2 years ago
Walking distances aren't any shorter than the ones nowadays with conventional cars (We're getting fatter anyway).
boneimre 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@stijn165792
"wouldn't we all get really fat with this transport system?"
Optional pods come with a built-in treadmill.
kmarinas86 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
i'd be embarrased to live in a future time that gay
Scrige 3 years ago
lol
slax32 3 years ago
I don't have figures in front of me, but I, too, have seen that building a PRT system is less expensive (per mile) that new road construction, light rail, and subway. Roads simply spawn more traffic, and both light rail and subways only serve a narrow corridor. Public buses, at least here in L.A., are loud and further impede auto traffic. PRT will happen; I'd rather see happen sooner than later! Write to your reps!
ahoog69 3 years ago
Guideways would not cover every street, but rather would run along main avenues, with stations about every 1/4 mile (so, yes, you would likely have to walk a short distance to a station). Stations would be off the main track to allow other pods to pass by. Also, I prefer the pod be on top of the guideway, not underneath (more stability). You would rent the pod (rather than the seat), and should have the option of ride-sharing (to increase efficiency).
ahoog69 3 years ago
Initially, the source of power (coal, natural gas, etc.) for the pods is not so important (though, in the long run, it should run from a renewable resource). The important concept is that PRT allows for non-stop travel from point A to point B. To do this, guideways would have to be elevated to avoid current traffic congestion.
ahoog69 3 years ago
O_O That was Beautiful!
Modeltrainguy 3 years ago
lol! good thing is well... its a bit fast if u wanna go a public deastination.. but no free roam n u cant stop anywhere...and we have legtst to walk... but nice concept
jianhan111 3 years ago
Interesting concept, like the idea of it being able to work in rural areas.
Wavetalon 3 years ago
This interesting, but I reall don't like the idea of sitting in a kind of wheel chair AND traveling in a vehicle that's traveling up in the air from a wire...Nice environmental aspect though.
Namellak 4 years ago
Namellak: You do not have to use a weel chair unless you are disabled, of course. On the other hand, if you are, this is a way fot you to still travel independently.
Have a look att the newer version, see Video Responses or search for tag "gts3"!
greblyksnah 4 years ago
greblyksnah: I agree with you on the wheel chair, but it still don't like to be up in the air haning from a wire like that, since I have a problem with hights like some other people. I prefer to travel as close to the ground as possible and I've alread seen the newer version in Stockholm as I'm living in Sweden, but thanks all the same :)
Namellak 4 years ago
Hanging in wires is just the same as an ordinary elevator. There could be cabins w/o windows. You step inside, wait until at the goal, then step out, and no bothering about at what level the transport was. Maybe a video to look at, showing the same distance in a crowded street instead ;-)
greblyksnah 4 years ago
Another important thing is the speed of the system - 250 km/hour, which is of course far more than the allowed speed on the ground. /Elin
elinluna 4 years ago
I ask again - Why elevated? If you want an automated system wouldn't it be simpler to build it on the street, at ground level? It's the exact same thing, only it's not up in the air. You mentioned returning the streets to pedestrians -- I'm all for making things safer for pedestrians but devoting the entire street to them seems excessive. Do you realize how much space that would be? Our streets are going to look pretty empty, especially the big wide ones in the suburbs.
PerryPlanet 4 years ago
"Ugly? Well, we will adopt to that as all else. Ask any New Yorker."
Yes, I'm sure that argument is going to fly in small town America.
PerryPlanet 4 years ago
Because like this it can fly over streets, railways, forests, whatever. /Elin
elinluna 4 years ago
So we can't use the transportation infrastructure we already have? The freeways, roads, and streets that have been passed down to us and already connect every city and town on the continent to one another? Yes, let's just ditch all that, all the work and planning that went into creating that infrasturucture.
PerryPlanet 4 years ago
1.The existing transportation systems are not enough.
2. This new system allows us to travel in areas where there are no roads today.
3. It is driven by electricity which means it is much better for sustainability.
/Elin
elinluna 4 years ago
"This new system allows us to travel in areas where there are no roads today."
And why on earth would we want to do that? Can you name a single community in the entire country that is not accessible by road?
And why couldn't a ground-level system also run on electricity?
PerryPlanet 4 years ago
What country are you talking about?
elinluna 4 years ago
PerryPlanet: From what you write, you obviously live in a country which you think is all the world. But let me guess that in that country there are areas that are already filled with highways, so there is actually no more space for roads.
An elevated system is far cheaper to build and maintain than roads on the ground. And of course fast vehicles should not occupy ground, that calls for accidents.
greblyksnah 4 years ago
I live in the United States. And there must be space for roads, because we keep winding up building new ones, don't we?
You are correct that there are countries where there isn't a good road system. But those countries would likely be second or third-world. Do you really think a system like this is going to be built in a second or third-world country? No, it's going to be built in a first-world country, just like everything else has been.
PerryPlanet 4 years ago
"An elevated system is far cheaper to build and maintain than roads on the ground."
Do you have proof of this? Has one of these systems been built, and have you analyzed the costs?
PerryPlanet 4 years ago
"And of course fast vehicles should not occupy ground, that calls for accidents."
Why? Instead of freeway lanes, you can have guideways for the automated cars, the cars can still run on electricity, maybe you could put electronic sensors in the vehicles so that if an obstacle came in the way the car would stop in time, etc. You can do the exact same thing shown in the video, only it doesn't have to be elevated! Because believe me, people will fight against elevated tracks.
PerryPlanet 4 years ago
If high speed vehicles should need to stop as soon as a pedestrian wants to cross, they will become low speed vehicles instead. Maybe that you do not like the elevated idea, but many other people understand the big benefit of adding another transport layer. Luckily (or sadly) the technological evolution goes on, despite some people prefer to stat where they are. Wether this is good or bad can be discussed.
greblyksnah 4 years ago
As internet URLs are not allowed in YouTube comments I can not write them here, but with a Google search for "prt cost" will give some pages about this. There is also a site swedetrack (with the usual dot com extension) that includes figures about this.
greblyksnah 4 years ago
The system developed in Morgantown is not actually PRT, but is an automated people mover. It usually operates on a set schedule, and utilizes vehicles that carry about 20 people. The PRT systems under construction that you mention are very small and are not proven cases for PRT in urban settings. Take ULTra, all it does is connect a parking lot to an airport terminal. We don't really know how these systems work in urban settings yet.
PerryPlanet 4 years ago
Light rail isn't very appropiate for small towns, but streetcars certainly can be. I'm not sure why PRT would be viable in a place where rail is not viable, as the cost to construct those elevated guideways is quite large, and elevated guideways do not fit many people's vision of what a "small town" should look like.
Calgary, Canada, has trains that are connected to overhead electrical wires, and the electricity that runs through those wires, all of it, comes from renewable resources. :)
PerryPlanet 4 years ago
I think this video should be renamed "A Convenient Dream".
Look, the thing about this video is the sheer impracticality of the whole thing. WHY does it have to be elevated? I've heard people complain about a single streetcar wire, how do you think they'll feel about an elevated guideway? It runs on electricty? Great, why don't we just make electric cars? Why PRT? Why is this needed?
PerryPlanet 4 years ago
Yes, but there are other technologies that are smart and can run on solar or wind, like light rail, which are available now. This PRT thing seems much too unrealistic for the next 25 years. I'm not saying progress and technology should stop or anything crazy like that, but instead of putting all our hope into a technology which might not develop in time to save us from the oil crisis, we should focus right now on implementing existing, practical technologies.
PerryPlanet 4 years ago
I have added a version showing solar panels
greblyksnah 4 years ago
The idea seems nice enough, but also very inefficient. To accommodate the parking demands would require many of those "parking structures", which would take up a lot of space in cities where so much space is already devoted to transit. And then to hold much of the car traffic that currently clogs our freeways would require a tremendous amount of aerial track, or the tracks themselves will become clogged with traffic. But to build so many tracks would destroy the scenery in many towns.
PerryPlanet 4 years ago
Personal rapid transit or PRT has been around as a concept for a long time.
But it isn't expensive enough to make the oil companies happy- it would be a lot cheaper than cars and the unions would hate losing the repetitive road work.
But if engineers who cared about energy consumption and convenience were in charge, it would work great!
And speaking as someone who was injured seroiusly by an 88 year old driver, I like the idea of automated cars.
grumpystiltskin 4 years ago
cool
CCms07 4 years ago
holy crap! thatss an awesome idea
123nameless123 4 years ago