• @erwan@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      71 year ago

      Trains suck if you don’t have frequency, and because of the population density with a good frequency more than half of the trains will be completely empty and the rest almost empty.

      • Maxe
        link
        fedilink
        121 year ago

        If you out half the funding from car infrastructure instead into train and bus infrastructure this would not be a problem. Induced demand works both ways.

        • @erwan@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          21 year ago

          The population in rural areas is so low that no matter how you induce demand, it won’t work.

          • @anachronist@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            31 year ago

            Look up “interurban railways”. Most towns east of the Mississippi used to have frequent rail service with whistle stops at every farm and crossroads. In addition to passengers these railroads also transported the harvest, Sears purchases, kit houses, even hearses!

        • @Thevenin@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          21 year ago

          Even with unlimited funding, you want to scale the size of the train to the population that could potentially ride on it.

          A P42 locomotive pulling 7 Amtrak superliner cars is 700 tons of steel getting 0.4 miles per gallon of diesel. That’s a crapton of mining and drilling and CO2, and it would be incredibly wasteful if it ended up carrying, like, two people at a time.

  • Butterbee (She/Her)
    link
    fedilink
    English
    201 year ago

    Yes Louis Brennan designed a gyroscopic monorail in the early 1900’s but there’s a reason it didn’t work out. Every car needs its own gyroscope which is a lot of dynamic components that need maintenance. A regular two rail train is much simpler and cheaper to operate. The idea these techbros have that everything is made better with individual pods is pretty wasteful when we already have better and cheaper solutions to virtually every problem they have tried to invent for us. Are we even super concerned about rural folks taking transit? By definition they are a small portion of the population and have the greatest need for personal transport. Where we need transit adoption is in urban areas with large populations who all want to drive their personal 2 tonnes of plastic and steel right into town and park it (for free obviously) in their own little parking space.

    A gadgetbahn like this will only serve a limited population and won’t be able to tie into the existing transit network. There might be niche situations where it’s not a terrible idea but it is not a good generalized solution.

    • AggressivelyPassive
      link
      fedilink
      21 year ago

      I could see those as an option for rural areas without much traffic. A full train might not be economical, but a small pod is. It could transport people to the closest proper train station where they can hop off.

      But that would mean you’d have to maintain a ton of tracks for a handful of people.

  • pruwyben
    link
    fedilink
    151 year ago

    Looking forward to the Adam Something video about this.

    • Aldehyde
      link
      fedilink
      91 year ago

      I immediately thought about connecting multiple of these together to make a train haha

      • midnight
        link
        fedilink
        101 year ago

        Connect them together for efficiency, and maybe use both rails for stability and to reduce design conplexity. (you dont even need any additional infrastructure!) Also, have them arrive regularly, so that users don’t need to bother with an app! Brilliant!

        Seriously though, it’s really amazing how people keep inventing trains but worse. I guess this idea makes some sense if there aren’t enough riders for regular train service, but still…

  • @cestvrai@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    101 year ago

    Seems over-complicated…

    I could imagine an autonomous, on-demand rural train service. Due to the low expected traffic, it seems like you could just build some additional sidings and use a more conventional design.

        • @FuzzChef@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          21 year ago

          If someone was willing to invest into building and maintaining infrastructure there would be no need for this concept, but that’s a political issue. The idea of this concept is do make the best of what you have.

  • 👍Maximum Derek👍
    link
    fedilink
    English
    9
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    The Brennan monorail rides again!

    Some of this technology may sound a bit “over-ambitious,” but keep in mind the project was inspired by a fully functional self-balancing monorail that mechanical engineer Louis Brennan designed and demonstrated back in the early 1900s.

  • @BurningRiver@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    81 year ago

    However, what if it were possible to hail a small electric vehicle right when you needed it – via a taxi- or Uber-style app

    Uber style app. Seriously, fuck no. Send trains or don’t, fuck Uber and their business model.

  • @Swedneck@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    81 year ago

    I’m cautiously optimistic about this, it seems like an okay idea and the fact that they have vehicles working on a test track IRL means it’s at least not an obvious scam like hyperloop.

    Also the fact that they have a specific use case in mind, don’t say it’s going to revolutionize all transportation, and are reusing existing infrastructure, all bode well.

      • @MrFloppy@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        31 year ago

        It’s only for the alpha-test vehicles. The crane does not touch the rails, it’s a security issue for testing e.g. min power gyro

      • @Swedneck@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        21 year ago

        The problem is that the wheels have flanges on both sides, so I don’t think switches work.

        The best solution would be a loop connecting the rails at each end, but that’s obviously not compatible with running regular freight trains since it would need to be switchless.

        Thus presumably they need to be externally flipped around and moved, for which I’d guess a crane like those used for moving containers on and off trains is ideal.

        With a crane they could also easily move the vehicles to a storage area so freight trains can pass through.

  • @MrFloppy@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    3
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I think “Draisy” is faster on the track and a much more realistic project. But “Monocab” is a University project, so it’s ok for me that a few millions are invested there.

    • @Landsharkgun@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      11 year ago

      Yes, this looks much better. My other thought would be road-rail buses, but getting on/off the tracks might be too much work to be worth the extra flexibility.

  • @Landsharkgun@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    31 year ago

    That looks horrible. Cramped, the giant windows means it’s hot and the sun is always in your eyes… Any reason they need to only use one rail? We already have road & rail buses, trucks, etc…just use those.

  • Ephera
    link
    fedilink
    21 year ago

    Project founder Thorsten Försterling tells us that the team is working on a track-installed machine that will be able to lift individual pods off of one rail and place them on the other (without passengers in them at the time), keeping them from all collecting at either end of the route.

    What the heck, can’t you just have a Y at the end?