In the sidebar on the right, you will see an incomplete list of cities that have a history that includes the Personal Rapid Transit boondoggle. Until now, I saw no reason to include Indianapolis because I did not have access to primary source material. Thanks to the wonderful librarians at the Indianapolis Public Library, I was able to access a few articles (scroll down past the video) about an attempt by PRT promoters in the Indiana State Assembly to fund the planning and building of a German version of PRT, Cabinentaxi in the late 1970's in the Circle City. The story is a bit murky after all these years, but it appears there were two prominent PRT promoters in the Indiana State Assembly who were able to leverage funding for the project.
In the late 1970's, through vigorous efforts of two Indiana legislators, Dr. Ned Lamkin and Richard Doyle, the Indiana Assembly appropriated $300,000 for a study of automated transit in Indianapolis including PRT. This study has been mentioned above in the discussion of Cabinentaxi.
I haven't been following the PRT Boondoggle as much as I used to, but this popped up on the Transport Innovators forum last summer:
Dear Shareholders:
This e-mail is being sent to let you know that the Taxi 2000 Corporation office at 8050 University Avenue NE, Fridley, MN 55432 is being closed and that all
operations will cease June 30, 2017. Our angel investor decided last year that it was no longer in a position to continue investments into the company in view
of their being no immediate prospects of a system contract. We have been unsuccessful in finding other investors, licensees or purchasers of the company assets
and we are now out of funds.
We thank the investor for supporting Taxi 2000 Corporation for more than a decade. We also thank all of the individuals that have supported the Company over its
entire history, whether that support has been through your labor, your financial contribution or your moral support.
While we still believe that it is a superior technology, in the history of inventions that has often proven to be insufficient to bring an idea to the
marketplace.
Sincerely,
Morrie Anderson,
Chairman
Taxi 2000 Corporation
8050 University Avenue NE
Fridley, MN 55432
"This is a company that's been around for a while and it's not produced a single pod system anywhere," Avidor said. "How do they produce a profit?"
This "moribund" company that injected itself noisily into nearly every public meeting about transit in Minnesota and elsewhere, that lobbied for taxpayers' dollars in city after city, now appears to have quietly and stealthily given up the ghost. But Taxi 2000 lives... on the internet, confusing citizens about reality-based transit policy forever. Here's one of many You Tube videos featuring Taxi 2000:
David Gow has several websites promoting Personal Rapid Transit. The Seattle "Get There Fast" PRT website - gettherefast.org seems to be slow in reporting on the new proposal for PRT in David Gow's backyard. The news page at Gow's "kinetic" PRT website is also silent about the CTA PRT Seattle project.
I have been aware for a few months that this organization -- 'CenTran' -- has been in the works. However I had been under the impression what it's about is Son Of Green Line.
Instead, it looks like they're intending a 16-mile monorail+PRT (pod transit) system in the West Seattle to Ballard corridors.
Gow goes on to address the pod aspect of the plan:
However, there are a number of practical issues here. By the time we are ready to do a technology screening (let alone select a design for installation), will these vendors be ready to deliver and operate what could be the largest pod system to date? Will their systems be sufficiently proven in regular operation?
Most of all, I personally object to this local effort being mounted by a small group, out of the public eye, creating yet another transit bureaucracy.
If PRT is going to be done here, it needs to be part of the existing decisionmaking structure. It needs to be done by Seattle or King County, or even Sound Transit. The latter had planned to do a PRT project as part of the Link program ( http://bit.ly/GN66Yg ), but the expected Raytheon PRT program was cancelled.
I have misgivings that High Capacity corridor service might be too much too soon for a flavor of PRT (HCPRT) that hasn't yet been implemented, anywhere.
Gow concludes that the problem with the CTA pod/monorail plan is really institutional:
It's OK to hypothesize something that ambitious. But set up a whole new bureaucracy? Really?
Furthermore, local planning for circulation PRT and collector-distributor PRT have been done in SeaTac and Issaquah. We should look first at those service niches.
Will David Gow report his opposition to the Seattle monorail/PRT project at Examiner.com or his PRT promoting websites?
A unique operational feature is that the vehicles will keep moving slowly through stations without completely stopping. This operation has proved successful when tested with handicapped passengers.
Here's a video with an annoying soundtrack showing a scale model of the Modutram pod in action. Watch as the white pod noisily jerks while switching toward the end - hilarious!
Building Communities Exhibition: Visuals and Models of the New Urban Community
Aug 15 2011 11:00 am
This annual week-long, public event will be held August 15 - 19 in the Crystal Court of the IDS Center, in Downtown Minneapolis, Minnesota. The Building Community Exhibition offers a sneak peek at the future of our urban communities. There will be scale models, renderings, computer animations and multi-media displays of planned, ongoing, and recently completed construction projects that are shaping our urban communities. The Advanced Transit Association is teaming up with Citizens for Personal Rapid Transiti (www.cprt.org) for this exhibition. On Thursday, August 18 the Building Communities Exhibition is hosting "Transportation Day." This day features a noontime speaker session, where an ATRA representative will give a presentation along side other predominant transportation policy-makers.
And finally, of course, we can't forget about the most notorious transportation proposal which was actually considered by for our regional transportation initiative (OKI), the Skyloop - a monorail-like personal rapid transit system.
Read about the Sky Loop PRT fiasco HERE. Click on the picture to make it bigger:
Christer Lindstrom, who is presenting the latest podcar conference at Stockholm tells me that the article which 'redefined' PRT characteristics was originally drafted by Steve Raney, who to my knowledge works & represents your interests in the US - therefore this mail addressed to you directly. Christer has 'assumed' that the article has been officially endorsed by ATRA, when it is apparent that it has never been. This is perhaps a shortsighted, illegal and unethical act on the part of Steve to wrongly portray the family of 4 seat systems as the only PRT candidates perhaps to establish some business advantages for Ultra, Vectus & 2getthere in the near future with many city officials - as non-discerning audiences - by way of a deceptive ATRA endorsement, when none of this was required in the first place.
BAA is also due next month to launch a system of robotic cars, or a Personal Rapid Transit system, to ferry passengers between the T5 Business passengers’ car park and the terminal without having to wait for a shuttle bus.
It is anticipated that the system will go fully live this summer, with the 21 pod vehicles operating 22 hours a day.
"It is anticipated"? Why aren't they more certain? A little history may help explain why they only anticipate going public...
Before Heathrow, the ULTra folks said they were ready to go six years ago - "The system was to have started carrying passengers at Cardiff Bay in 2005".
July 23, 2004: "the system could be in place at Heathrow by 2006"
21 October 2008: "... we are very much looking forward to launching this to passengers in 2009."
2010 (broken link, screenshot HERE): "Testing of the PRT System is continuing and, with all installation and communications challenges now resolved, we anticipate commencing passenger services in late Spring 2010.""
September 14, 2010: "We may find that we are allowed to gradually move to full operation unannounced later this summer."
This lack of certainty has not helped the credibility of the as-yet unproved pod "system" as PRT promoter Steve Raney explains in this video:
Meanwhile, here in Minnesota, there's an effort to get legislative support for the proposed PRT project in Coon Rapids. The session is scheduled to end in May... just before the new launch date. Hmmmmmmmm.....
Recent news about the ongoing, worldwide pod boondoggle:
It's sad to read about yet another community wasting time on Personal Rapid Transit, but at least Mr. Lawlor has reported fairly the pros and cons of PRT. Lawlor quotes the indefatigable, pod-promoting Larry Fabian. The article also quotes retired Professor Vukan Vuchic:
"People study it a lot, but when it's closer to actually building it, it never gets done."
Google the following cities with "Personal Rapid Transit"; Daventry, Duluth, Minneapolis, Winona, Long Branch, Indianapolis, Rosemount, Seattle, Cincinnati, Ithaca, Alameda, Denver... all had a similar experience with PRT - the pod promoters came to town with lots of media hype, PowerPoint presentations, promises, demands... and months, years later... nothing.
What never happens is any meaningful citizen participation - this is what I wrote in the Winona Daily News:
Boston Personal Rapid Transit promoter Lawrence J. Fabian in his Sept. 23 letter chided the citizens of Winona for their lack of enthusiasm for the PRT plan proposed by the city of Winona.
“If Winona wants to think small,” scolds Fabian.
An interesting criticism when you consider that Winonans never really had an opportunity to comment or ask questions in a public forum about the PRT project.
According to a Jan. 20 article in the Winona Daily News, a meeting where the public could have asked questions was for Winona City Council members only, “While there was little discussion of PRT during the meeting, the vote came after council members examined the system during a pre-council informational session that lasted more than one hour.”
I recall a similar PRT “informational session” for Minneapolis city officials only on March 26, 2005. When a proposal for a PRT project later came up for a vote in committee, the PRT promoters failed to show up and the matter was tabled. More recently, public officials in Daventry, England, complained that PRT promoters would not show up at public forums to answer questions. The Minnesota Department of Transportation held a “PRT workshop” Aug. 18, which cost $50 to attend and was not a public meeting. Why are PRT promoters avoiding the public?
When the city of Winona revisits the issue of PRT, as it has recently indicated it would, I would suggest they hold a free, public forum and invite critics as well as promoters. I would also suggest inviting experts in the field; transit engineers, transit advocacy groups and environmental groups. But most of all, I urge Winona city officials to invite the public.
Grassroots support for any big public project is essential. For it is the citizens who will end up paying for it— and if built, living with it.
Hopefully, the citizens and public officials of Newport News will avoid wasting time and money on PRT by insisting on open and meaningful public participation in the decision-making process.
At present, Heathrow airport is the only place where the pod is operational. While it is right now being used by the airport staff, the commercial operations will start soon after Christmas.
Well, it's after New Years and the "news" from the ULTra January Newsletter is that they are still testing, testing , testing...
1. November Heathrow “revenue service trials” produce excellent results
The four weeks of "Simulated Revenue Service" trial - intended to mimic real operating conditions - using Terminal 5 staff as passengers - is now complete. This involved operation of the system for 10.5 hr each day of the trial period. During these trials ULTra achieved a System Availability - defined as the ability for any passenger to travel to any station during any given minute -- of 99.6%. For comparison, most APMs (Automatic People Movers) in similar applications function with availability levels between 97.5% and 99.5%, and are more reliable than manually-driven alternatives. Among all transit modes, ULTra's debut performance puts it near the front of the pack in terms of delivering proven reliability.
So why not open it to the public? What are they afraid of?
Meanwhile, ULTra gives us an picture (see below) what an elevated PRT station would look like. Heathrow doesn't have a free=standing elevated station. Plans for city-wide PRT systems would have scores of these huge, ugly stations, festooned with advertising. Note the pylons sunk in the middle of the sidewalk. Very pedestrian-un-friendly:
According to a presentation by Martin Lowson (available at the ATRA website) the new launch window was supposed to be "Mid 2010":
Testing of the PRT System is continuing and, with all installation and communications challenges now resolved, we anticipate commencing passenger services in late Spring 2010." This is what I'd call a joint BAA/ATS approved statement. http://www.ultraprt.com/cms/index.php?page=latest-schedule
That link is broken. Here's a screenshot:
Well, when June arrived we got this info via a tweet from the PRT Guru that linked to his website where we found this statement:
June 2010: It appears ULTra will not meet its previously-announced June opening date at London’s Heathrow Airport. BAA has issued the following statement: "The Heathrow pod is innovative technology and we have always said that the system will be launched when it is ready to do so. The system, as well as being a world first, is bespoke [customized] to fit into existing airport infrastructure and the process of completing this is informing our decision about the launch date. Testing is continuing and we anticipate that the system will officially launch in the near future."
"The Heathrow pod is innovative technology and we have always said that the system will be launched when it is ready to do so. The system, as well as being a world first, is bespoke (custom-made) to fit into existing airport infrastructure and the process of completing this is informing our decision about the launch date. Testing is continuing and we anticipate that the system will officially launch in the near future." - BAA's schedule statement, June 2010.
It's not surprising that the effect of these postponements of the much-publicized ULTra have made public officials skeptical, even irritated at PRT promoters as explained in this video:
At this week’s meeting, Van Hamm provided selectmen with an overview of the new scaled-back two-year trial run proposal to build a smaller one-mile system at a cost of around $9.5 million, which would run between the DCR parking lot on the bayside of Hull, to the beginning of the HRA property.
The new proposal calls for five stations with 67 pods, she said.
Van Hamm said there would be an economic growth potential provided by an uptick in visitors to the community, who she feels would view the Jpods as more of a novelty amusement park ride, which she envisions would bring a benefit to nearby businesses.
She estimated income of about $1.5 million a year from 2,000 riders in the warmer months and 1,000 riders in the winter paying $6 a ride.
Six bucks for a one mile ride?
“I would personally like to see the president or CEO from the company come down and do a more thorough presentation to the board,” Olivieri said.
Van Hamm asked Oliveri if he’d like to call James on his cell to get answers to some of the financial questions he has.
“No, we asked him before, and his response was he was going to sell t-shirts…. I want someone who can give us concrete answers,” said Olivieri.
Selectman John Brannan also voiced puzzlement over the figures that would make such a proposal work.
“If you have a lot of investors willing to lose money, please send them my way — I have a lot of ideas myself…. It’s not a build it, and they will come (situation),” said Brannan, saying he wants to see a marketing plan and more financial information about the plan.
Citing the interest of full disclosure, Brannan asked Van Hamm if she has any potential financial gain from this project, and she responded “I’m here as a resident of Hull.”
It's sad to see the yet another community waste time on Personal Rapid Transit. Hull is not alone. Scores of cities have had similar experiences with the PRT hucksters; Daventry, Duluth, Minneapolis, St. Paul, Winona, Long Branch, Indianapolis, Rosemount, Seattle, Cincinnati, Ithaca, Alameda, Denver and many more...
The PRT hucksters like to claim the pods are a "new technology". PRT is neither new or a technology.
PRT is an argument - an argument that conventional transit is not "faster, better, cheaper" than so-called "innovative transportation technologies", PRT being one of them. The problem is futuristic pie-in-the-sky gadgetbahn PRT schemes exist only as unproven concepts. At times, the PRT hucksters produced prototype pods or even a test track... but there really is no there, there.
The anti-transit arguments of the PRT hucksters of today or no different than when they wore sideburns and bell bottoms.
Minnpost: What's your reaction to Gov.-elect Dayton reappointing Tom Sorel as transportation commissioner?
Frank Hornstein: He's a breath of fresh air at MnDOT and a good advocate for a multimodal approach to transportation. The only complaint I have is that he has embraced PRT (personal rapid transit) in a way that's not helpful. It's something suitable for an amusement park and a distraction from the bigger challenges we face.
With Republicans in control of the MN legislature, there has never been a better opportunity for the PRT hucksters to get a PRT bill passed.
MNObserver has a good post on The Cucking Stool about the consequences of the Wisconsin's Governor-elect Scott Walker decision to opt out of the Upper MIdwest high speed rail network.
Having campaigned on a platform of jobs, jobs, jobs, Wisconsin's Governor-elect Scott Walker has taken steps - even before he has been sworn in - that have driven a private manufacturing employer from the state, has eliminated 4,700 short term jobs, and cost hundreds of permanent jobs...
Walker's decision, of course had consequences for Minnesota. Kevin Giles at the Strib::
About $1.2 billion in federal money had been reserved for high-speed projects in Wisconsin and Ohio. The U.S. Department of Transportation on Thursday awarded those funds to 13 other states -- but not Minnesota -- because Republican governors-elect in Wisconsin and Ohio had promised to kill the projects despite years of planning to build a network of faster trains in the Midwest.
The Wisconsin segment that lost funding -- $810 million from Milwaukee to Madison -- was one of 25 "alignments" under consideration in a Minnesota study to determine the best route to Chicago and what it would cost, Krom said.
The preferred route will be named when the study is completed in June 2012. But "when it gets built is another issue," he said.
[snip]
Jerry Miller, who chairs the Minnesota High-Speed Rail Commission, expressed disappointment that Wisconsin Gov.-elect Scott Walker opposed the project.
"Connecting our region by high-speed rail will create 15,000 new jobs and economic opportunities for years to come," Miller, who is also mayor of Winona, Minn., said Friday. "By shifting this funding to places like Washington, California and Florida, we are also exporting future private-sector job growth to our neighbors and making the region less competitive."
Both Miller and Krom said they would work with Minnesota Gov.-elect Mark Dayton to seek his support for the rail line.
As Chair of the MN HSR Commission, how hard did Jerry Miller lobby his fellow Republicans in Minnesota and Wisconsin? Did Mayor Miller lobby as hard for HSR as he did for Personal Rapid Transit?
Here is a video of Mayor Miller wasting everyone's time promoting fantasy-based pod transport instead of reality-based conventional transportation from Winona 360:
Reporter Megan McNulty interviews Winona City Manager Eric Sorenson and Mayor Jerry Miller on their thoughts about the proposed plans for a Personal Rapid Transit model of transportation in Winona.
I'm sure you've received a sizable amount of emails regarding your anti-PRT stance. Add this one to the pile.
I won't try to change your opinion, nor will I try to change your anti-PRT religion. Both would obviously be futile. What I would like you to know is that the costs of what we have now are far too great and current public transportation will not enjoy forever its taxpayer-supported funding bounty. In the end, your side will lose because it is far more costly, far less convenient, and by any measure of ridership it has consistently failed to reach an adequate percentage of the population (unless you're talking about ultra-dense cities like New York). Let's face it, light rail and buses are doomed to pass away into history. The economy and the mood of the taxpayers to continue to support a failed system is growing thin.
I offer you best wishes through what will in the coming years be a greatly trying time for you and your light rail funders. I feel sorry for you that you picked the losing side, nobody likes to lose, but those are the facts.
PS: you do not have permission to use any of my words or information in any way shape or form.
Sincerely, A non-loyal (never again) reader of one of your columns.
I hate to disapoint Tom B., but I don't get a " sizable amount of emails" about my "anti-PRT stance". In fact, I hardly get any emails from pod people. There is a very, verysmall number of grassroots PRT supporters.
“This is disruptive technology,” said Edward Anderson, standing beside a red, egg-shaped PRT prototype in the Taxi 2000 Corporation shop in Fridley.
Well, looking around Minneapolis I don't see thousands of pods on a network of iron trestles. After all those years the pod people don't have one... not one... true PRT system in revenue service anywhere in the world.
After years of outrageous hype about PRT being "faster, better, cheaper" than conventional transit, the pod people have nothing to show except the much-postponed Heathrow project (rumored to debut "soon after Christmas") and the scaled-back Masdar project.
On Sunday, November 28th, the Masdar PRT system opened to the public. To quote Larry Fabian, 2getthere, the manufacturer, got there. 2getthere operates the system with the support of Singapore Mass Rapid Transit. Masdar City is a new carbon-free city being developed adjacent to Abu Dhabi in the UAE.
The system has 10 passenger and 3 freight vehicles serving 2 passenger and 3 freight stations connected by approximately one mile of track. The system is in operation 18 hours a day, seven days a week serving the Masdar Institute of Technology. Trips take about 2 and a half minutes and are presently free of charge. Average wait times are expected to be about 30 seconds.
Can Masdar really be called a system with only two at-grade-level stations and runs a short distance in a basement? Isn't PRT supposed to be elevated? How can they say that PRT can pay for itself when trips are "free of charge"? One mile of track? who is going to bother with the pods in the basement when they can walk that distance easier and faster?
And how are the snail-paced, battery-operated, automated vehicles at Heathrow and Masdar any different than the vehicle in the video below?:
They get the money from all of us. I am not sure where you are, but if I call a help line here, almost any Company, I get to talk to somebody in India. As many services as possible have been out-sourced to India and Pakistan, and the people who held the jobs here are on welfare or working in a coffee shop. This is called "progress", I think, or "maximizing profits".
It is the result of our Universities ( both Countries) deciding that it is more profitable to educate foreign students instead of our own. These students then return home and start up businesses to compete with out local businesses, and they pay lower salaries, so they win every time.
Terrorism and Transportation Choice Thu, 2010/02/04 - 12:00am
Dennis, we went through the whole buildup of aviation mostly in the years 1945 to 2000 without having to restrict firearms on aircraft.
During thise years, can you name me one problem that ever occurred, or one persin that was ever injured? If you can, it certainly did not ever get published in the aircraft accident and incident reports that I was reading constantly during that period.
Lesser of 2 evils....which would you prefer,(1) a trained, armed, passenger or (2) a terrorist who has total freedom to kill everybody on board? If you really want to put the fear of Allah into these terrorists, you should make it be known that ALL your bullets have been dipped in pig blood. All the Military bullets, too.
This does look like it may be our Transportation expert. It might be best to find out him, just to be prepared. Artists just HATE criticism. Why don't we do what we can to interfere with HIS way of makung a living? Remember: DONT GET MAD, GET EVEN. Jack Slade
In our view, it is a big waste of time advocating such "gee-whiz" options, given the severe limits of monorails and similar technologies such as PRT, when U.S. transportation problems are almost always sociopolitical and economic–not technical–in nature.
Demery returns to the subject in "Where's the Gadgetbahn?" at publictransit.us
The introduction:
If there is a country where Personal Rapid Transit (PRT) "should" work and "should" already have been built, then it's Japan.
Having traveled extensively throughout that country over the past three decades, I shall take this a step farther: if there is a place in Japan where PRT "should" work - and "should" already been built - then it's _____.
One could fill in the "blank" above with a number of locations, based on empirical observation of the built environment. During the past five years, maps and aerial photo images became available online and quality has been improved steadily. It is now possible to study the urban geography of Japan, "armchair" style, whether or not one has any knowledge of Japanese. This series shall present several examples of locations in Japan where the built environment appears conducive to PRT development. It shall also consider results obtained by other transport modes, e.g. automated guideway transport (AGT), in specific locations.
With both houses of the Minnesota Legislature in the hands of the GOP, will PRT bills be introduced again? Last year, PRT legislation was stopped by DFL legislators in the House and Senate.
If PRT legislation is again introduced in the next session, I hope legislators and the media will remember the godawful politicians who supported PRT in the past.
Let's start with the legislature's biggest promoter of PRT Mark Olson, arguably one of the worst representatives to sit in the Minnesota House.
Rep. Tom Hackbarth nominated Mark Olson his friend and colleague of many years. It was seconded by another guy (bearded)I couldn’t hear at all. Heidi concluded the nomination speeches by exhorting everyone to vote for Mark because he is cute. It was really charming. It’s all on tape somewhere. There were 2-3 cameras rolling. Phil Krinkie was also on stage in support. You have to give Mark credit. He rallied his people and they showed up.
Phil Krinke, now head of the right-wing Taxpayers League also voted for Olson's pods.
"People on the right, people on the left, we have the common goal of moving people with transit, but doing it in the most cost-effective manner, in fact, in a manner that may end up costing no government subsidy, it may end up paying for itself,"
