3 ms·
He does have a good point though. According to the video, the problem is we are building more roads to fix our existing traffic problem but they too get filled
by pavs 11y ago
He does have a good point though. According to the video, the problem is we are building more roads to fix our existing traffic problem but they too get filled up, but int he video it shows skyTran works by being hooked to a overhead infrastructure. So you will still need to build overhead infrastructure to use ST. In theory this doesn't seem any better than adding more layers of highway.
The video also suggest it as a replacement of our existing transportation system as opposed to complementing our existing system (removes all the highways and just shows the ST).
So just by watching the video, I too don't see the obvious benefit.
- chipsy 11y agoThe usual rebuttals are: Overhead rails are smaller and cheaper than highways for the capacity, standardized pods can be lighter and smaller-scale, and the automated guidance allows shorter timings for acceleration and braking. However, when transit planners run the numbers, they come up against a different problem, which is that building this isn't really a substitute for a new metro line. The peak capacity is still more along the lines of what a highway can provide, and that wouldn't do much to improve the rush hour commute - plus, if they wanted a highway, there's always funding around for those. So the PRT approach has mostly been implemented, to date, in airport systems and private campuses.
- melling 11y agoPeople can walk under it. Kids can play near them and it won't be dangerous. The ground is for humans who are walking, playing, or on bikes, for instance. Humans and cars interacting lead to lots of dead humans: http://gothamist.com/2014/10/15/there_have_now_been_200_traffic_fat.php http://gothamist.com/2014/10/15/there_have_now_been_200_traf...