Re: New form of rail transportation

[Vaughan Williams <ender2000@my-deja.com>]

> Essentially for public transport to be feasibel it must have a
competitive advantage over using yoru own car whether that be cost,
time, comfort or some cobinatation of these factors. People have to
prefer to use the systemrather than using their own car.

Correct. With its own lane and traffic light priority, the bus along
Springvale Rd would compete favourably with the car time-wise, bearing
in mind most people would only catch it a relatively short distance and
many would be using it to access the train.

> The reason why I selected Springvale road as an example was that it
crosses the Dandenong line, passes the terminus of the GlenWaverley
line, crosses the Lilydale/Belgrave line and will eventually cross the
East Burwood tram if it is extended. Public transportation along this
route would not only service the areas along this road but also provide
a means of cutting across the suburbs and removing the necessity to
travel into the city to get to areas across town.

Correct. Springvale Rd is one of many such routes. By combining the
three passenger flows (local, feeder, and cross-suburban) enough
passengers can be generated for a high quality service. There is very
little cross-suburban travel.

> Melbourne's train system is crying out for some form of ring railway
or a form of public transportation to cut across town.Eventually this
may to some extent be facilitated by an express bus service running
along the ring road and Scoresby freeway but this would not be an
optimal solution.

Nonsense - there is so little cross suburban travel that an ordinary
bus can cater for it (and it doesn't matter if they all use cars anyway
because there aren't many of them). A bus along the ring road as you
say wouldn't be very helpful because there aren't any destinations
along the ring road - the bus would have to deviate off the freeway to
serve the destinations and thereby lose its speed advantage.

> The prinicipal issue (as usual) is cost and one of the principal
costs is land. A suspended railway avoids much of this cost
> by using existing rights of way - eg roads.

And an ordinary bus avoids the need for a suspended railway.

> You mention that a bus service along Sprinvale Road could have
traffic light priority. This would play havoc with traffic diring peak
periods and still not provide a smooth express service. An optimal
service has to have its own right of way.

It wouldn't play havoc with traffic - not to the extent that the level
crossings do (which should be removed). The bottom line is that people
who are driving in peak hour need to accept that public transport has
priority. A bus with 50 people shouldn't be held up so that 20 cars
with one person each can go first.

> It might be an idea to redesign trains or buses so that they can use
the overhead suspension system as well as existing railways or roads.
Eg One might travel by train to Nunawading station at which point the
train would hook up to the overhead suspension system, lift off the
ground and continue suspended down to Springvale. It could then
continue down to Cranbourne using the rail line. Alternatively I could
catch a bus in Donvale. It would then continue to Nuawading where it
would switch to the suspension system and then run swiftly down to
Springvale.

How about a nuclear powered monorail while youre at it. Do you know how
many people travel from Nunawading to Cranbourne?

> It is even conceivable that both trams and buses could share an
overhead suspension system. It would take some redesigning though.

Sounds like infrastructure fetishism gone mad to me.

Vaughan


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.