10 ms·
The obvious problem seems to be that he wants a 200km/h speed which causes problems on corners and for getting vehicles into the traffic stream. This is causin
by slyall 15y ago
The obvious problem seems to be that he wants a 200km/h speed which causes problems on corners and for getting vehicles into the traffic stream.
This is causing a doubling of his costs which wrecks the business model.
However even a 50 km/h speed ( remember no stopping at lights or for jams ) is going to be good-enough for many urban areas ( perhaps amining higher between suburbs ) so he can bring his cost back down.
The ULTra system ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ULTra_%28rapid_transit%29 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ULTra_%28rapid_transit%29 ) currently has a maximum speed of just 40km/h although they are working on faster speeds and reduced spacing between cars.
- chipsy 15y agoYes, I noticed that assumption too, and a few others(for example the assumption of "car parked outside home" - now you have to value either the cost of car ownership and parking, or the time cost for an on-demand fleet to reach the passenger) With a lower speed target the system may still offer benefits over roads and mass transit in terms of reliability/availability. The number of existing PRT companies continuing with this approach suggests it has some merit. Maglev PRT still seems worth researching for intercity traffic though - the requirements for routing get a lot easier, and you still have benefits of speed and lightness.