I support PRT development but I would never suggest “stop[ping] the subways and buses”. That would be absurd and counter-productive.

In fact, I’m a big supporter of heavy rail systems like the NYC subways, because the population density and transit culture creates enough demand to make it feasible to operate 24 hours a day at high frequency.

But I don’t support ill-conceived rail projects in low-density car-centric cities, where investment in big vehicle transit is a waste of energy and capital.

Did you know, for example, that the average energy usage of US light rail is over 7000 BTU/passenger-mile, and that Galveston’s light rail consumes more than 30,000 BTU/pax-mi? For reference, a Hummer with a single passenger is less than 7000. (source: Dept of Energy Transportation Energy Data Book – Fig. 2.2)

The best initial application for PRT is a city like Galveston, not New York. And there are many more Galvestons than New Yorks in this car-dominated country.

For New York, PRT might have a role in less dense outer boroughs, where it could provide circulation support for the existing subway lines, extending the reach of the transit network to areas that are not dense enough for heavy rail lines. This strategy is not about “shutting down” the rail lines, but rather, extending their reach.

There have been discussions on Streetsblog about the heavy weight of US passenger rail cars vis-a-vis lighter and more efficient Japanese models.

As for “heavier and heavier vehicles” — has the subway gained weight lately? I wasn’t aware that the trains gotten heavier.

As for “fruitless and wasteful,” stop the subways and buses and you’ll get a terrifying definition of fruitless. Without them, the city’s economy does not work.

I think Gecko has a point; continuing to spend money on heavier and heavier vehicles to transport the same basic loads is fruitless and wasteful.

Saying the transit system “blasts through 9 billion dollars a year” is typical of the scare tactics surrounding transit (and by that I mean real transit) funding. How much does it cost for asphant to keep all the cars and bikes rolling?

This is “Aramis project” just a small blip in the large personal rapid transit http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_rapid_transit article and there is no reason to believe that the Heathrow Project scheduled to open in 2010 will fail. There are a lot of reasons why projects fail. Regarding the Aramis’ Control issues with software, etc. does not make a lot of sense for failure. Again, the largest industries in the world have a huge stake in transportation: Insurance, banking and finance, oil, auto, steel, electronics, etc., and the personal rapid transit small-vehicle concept is quite simple and quite straight-forward.

The MTA blasts through something like 9 billion dollars a year. Those trains you love so well are designed to go 100 miles per hour where average transit speeds of about 12 miles per hour are considered quite usual and acceptable. Each subway car weighs about 35 tons carrying a maximum of 188 people and maybe moves 20 tons of people and this stuff is way over-engineered to do what it has to do. With a bicycle-type vehicle weight of 25 pounds, the total vehicle weight to move 188 people is about 4,700 pounds or a little more than two tons.

Also, living in your little apartment on the Upper West Side of Manhattan you probably only have to walk a couple of blocks to get to those trains. And, if they fail you can take a bus, a taxi, or in many instances walk; and your train rides are probably mostly one-half hour or less. Most people in the five boroughs do not have the density of services, jobs etc. that Manhattanites have and you are speaking from a rather “elite” position.

And, you’ve admitted on Streetsblog that you hate buses and that a bus ride of an hour or more on a bus is awful.

Let us spend 9 billion dollars a year on small vehicle transit and see what happens.

Here is another excerpt from that wikipedia article on personal rapid transit which indicates the effect of special interest groups on global transportation:

“On March 23, 1973, U.S. Urban Mass Transportation Administration (UMTA) administrator Frank Herringer testified before Congress: “A DOT program leading to the development of a short, one-half to one-second headway, high-capacity PRT (HCPRT) system will be initiated in fiscal year 1974.”[27] However, this HCPRT program was diverted into a modest technology program.[citation needed] According to PRT supporter J. Edward Anderson, this was “because of heavy lobbying from interests fearful of becoming irrelevant if a genuine PRT program became visible”. From that time forward people interested in HCPRT were unable to obtain UMTA research funding.[28]“

Again, let us spend 9 billion dollars a year on small vehicle transit and see what happens.

Ratheon built a PRT prototype. Nixon spent (wasted?) something like $100 million on one in the south. And currently, there is one being finished at Heathrow Airport I believe which is probably quite nice. George Haikalis and George Bliss wrote a paper on people-powered PRT a number of years back.

Probably the nicest one is Shweeb which is a modern version of commercial cycle-rail systems built in the 1880s. (www.shweeb.com) Shweeb is a human-power only system easily upgradable to accept auxiliary electric power assist. Under human power only riders have gone as fast as 56 mph!

It is really kind of amazing how goofy some of the stuff is that goes on about transportation with the world’s largest industries that are involved: Insurance, banking and finance, oil, auto, steel, electronics, etc., etc., etc; the stakes are really high; especially, as one of the major causes of the climate change crisis.

Also, you missed the double post — I remembered I was the first to bring PRT into the conversation, regretted this immediately, and withdrew the accusation.

Regarding the link from the NYT … noted.

This is really fun coming from Mark.

Mark, Here is a good NY Times article about how excercise eliminates stress:

“Phys Ed: Why Exercise Makes You Less Anxious”
http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/11/18/phys-ed-why-exercise-makes-you-less-anxious

Hint, hint, hint, . . .

DOT, the MTA, and advocates need not only to get boots on the ground, but to get listening ears into neighborhoods. Pay attention. If the arguments of pols demagoguing against good initiatives from the agency gain traction, it’s coming from someplace. Perhaps it’s a response to past failures to deal with pressing neighborhood issues — like truck traffic, hideously bad local air quality, and so on. Get out there, learn about what people are living with, and meet them where they are.

I agree completely, and what passes for communication from DOT staff is maddeningly inconsistent and undependable – and that’s when they like you! So it could definitely use some improvement. Same goes for the MTA: just this week I was waiting for the bus – which turned out to be triple-bunched – and if I and my fellow passengers had a phone number that would get results it would be ringing off the hook. Instead, we just sighed at our own powerlessness.

But I don’t think the organizers need to be – or should be – from the MTA or the DOT. It would probably not look so good for DOT to be spending money promoting its own policies during a budget crunch. Plus, if in 2014 Mayor Liu and Governor Espada decide to order all the MTA and DOT reps to organize the communities in support of LOMEX and the Prospect Parking Garage, you’ve just lost control of a powerful opposition tool.

The best place for community organizers to be based is the private sector, which is not so bad because that’s also the best place to look for funding. Some of that is being done already with the Pratt Center, T.A., Livable Streets Education and others. But a well-funded network of organizers who can connect with their communities and have time to listen, advocate and get results would really make a difference.

My heart would like to point out that every time I spend more than an hour on a bus, I get off feeling like I’ve had a hole shot through my head. I’m not sure if it’s the diesel vibration or the diesel fumes, but whatever it is, it takes makes me feel like hell. I never have this problem with rail.

I once made the mistake of taking a bus to Washington DC and another bus home the same day. Five hours each way as I recall. I got home feeling like a piece of livestock with a bolt shot through its head. Felt sick for days afterward.

So my heart tips its hat to you. But my head wants transit to make as much headway as possible in Mikey’s third term — before the dark ages begin again.

Rapid deployment of streetcars in affluent, high-tax-paying areas is (a) appropriate since we’re the ones paying for them, and (b) a great argument for expansion of both BRT /and/ streetcars.

Busses suck.

Faster, please.

When I cycle to work in Greenpoint or Newton Creek or Red Hook or Sunset Park or Brooklyn’s Navy Yard there are lots of blue collar workers getting around on bikes and the Kent Avenue bikeway is most encouraging.

Fortunately, newly appointed New York City Transit president Thomas Prendergast comes from Vancouver’s Translink, a system which oversees conventional transit along with bicycling, an important idea he should aggressively and immediately continue.