Las Vegas Monorail Finally Ready To Open

wee simpsons by spacerodent · 2004-06-30 16:31 · Score: 2, Funny

I wonder if they broke into song and dance at the annoucment of its construction

What happens in Brockway, stays in Brockway by Anonymous Coward · 2004-06-30 16:32 · Score: 2, Funny

They just better have a damn good conductor.

Re:What happens in Brockway, stays in Brockway by JamesKPolk · 2004-06-30 17:34 · Score: 3, Funny

Or hope Leonard Nimoy is in town doing a show.
Re:What happens in Brockway, stays in Brockway by Zorilla · 2004-06-30 17:48 · Score: 2, Funny

Donuts; is there anything they can't do?

--

It would be cool if it didn't suck.
Re:What happens in Brockway, stays in Brockway by Short+Circuit · 2004-07-01 01:29 · Score: 3, Funny

If it's maglev, then they probably have a super conductor!

Otherwise, depending on their power needs, 6-gauge wire should work. :)

--
tasks(723) drafts(105) languages(484) examples(29106)

$$$ according to Zagat by Anonymous Coward · 2004-06-30 16:33 · Score: 5, Informative

Wow, could it cost a little bit more? $3 a ride! $40 for 3 days? No week pass? Mono d'oh indeed.

Re:$$$ according to Zagat by Hans+Lehmann · 2004-06-30 16:47 · Score: 4, Informative

Wow, could it cost a little bit more? $3 a ride! $40 for 3 days? No week pass?
It's clearly marketed to the weekend tourists, rather than the local commuters. Tourists, many of whom fly in for the weekend, like to travel around town (no point in giving all your money to one casino when there are so many needy casino's in town). Now you've got a choice of a quick $3 monorail ride, a $8 cab fare through grid-locked streets, or hoofing it in the 100+ degree sun. It's a no-brainer.
Once they do get it to the airport (around 2007 or so), it'll be the best thing to hit Vegas since the machine-gun shooting range.

--
09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
Re:$$$ according to Zagat by el-spectre · 2004-06-30 17:40 · Score: 3, Informative

There are a couple of these ranges. One is at the end of the strip (I forget which end) and is run by really safety conscious folks. I learned to fire a MP5 there.

There's another one, its more of a gun store, and it's in N. Las Vegas. The folks there are a bit, ah... conspiracy fan-ish, but they've got some good gear.

--
"Faith: Belief without evidence in what is told by one who speaks without knowledge, of things without parallel." - A.B.
Re:$$$ according to Zagat by irving47 · 2004-06-30 18:10 · Score: 3, Informative

Amen to the cab part, but you're forgetting about the bus! $2 per trip or $5 for a 24 hour period. And the traffic will get out of the way of the bus.

--
I had a sucky sig.
Re:$$$ according to Zagat by DrXym · 2004-06-30 20:14 · Score: 2, Informative

And it's not even an $8 cab ride. To get from somewhere like Excalibur to Downtown costs at least $20 + tip and from one end of the strip to the other is something like $10 + tip. A monorail would be very useful, especially when it runs the entire length.

Of course there are two extremely unfashionable modes of transport that would also get you from one end of the strip to the other. The first is your legs, although in Vegas that might be a non-starter. I'm not exagerating when I say I have never seen so many grotesquely obese people as on my trips to Vegas.

The other is the public buses that run up and down the strip and to/from downtown for something like $1.25 - i.e. $20 extra in your pocket to see a show, buy a meal, gamble or whatever. After being fleeced in the cab to downtown we caught the bus and were jolly glad of it. It takes 45 mins to get back, but most of that is gridlock which you'd be paying for in a taxi anyway.
Re:$$$ according to Zagat by orcus · 2004-07-01 01:14 · Score: 2, Funny

Ah, the old "Lady in Red" distraction - get's em every time.

Pity there wasn't an agent around :-)

--
First they burn books, then they burn people.

I hope by odano · 2004-06-30 16:34 · Score: 2, Funny

I hope they use a little more discression in hiring the operator than the springfield monorail.

Wow, that's a big train! by Sampizcat · 2004-06-30 16:35 · Score: 2, Funny

The first part of the monorail, which uses Bombardier M-VI train vehicles, 'a derivative of the famous Walt Disney World Mark VI trains', is 4 miles long

I had to do a double-take when I read this the first time. I thought it said the train itself was 4 miles long...

i've always wondered... by spacerodent · 2004-06-30 16:35 · Score: 5, Interesting

I've always wondered why the US hasn't built up their mass transit abilities on the national level. We have subways in various towns but none of them link together and we don't have any of the long rail lines like they do in Germany or Japan. I also feel safe in saying the rail road is pretty shitty in compairson to other countries. I wonder if this is because as Americans we demand the right and excuse to use cars or if we have no other option right now.

Re:i've always wondered... by DNS-and-BIND · 2004-06-30 16:41 · Score: 3, Informative

WTF dude. I've lived in countries with excellent public transportation, and it still sucks. It's expensive; the train goes when it wants to, not when you want to; the other passengers on the train sometimes smell really bad; and trains stop running after a certain hour; and it takes a long time to get to where you're going. It used to take me an hour to go 5 miles by train. I could make the same trip in 10 minutes by car.
Other countries also lack the outstanding Interstate Highway System.

--
Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
Re:i've always wondered... by Anonymous Coward · 2004-06-30 16:43 · Score: 5, Informative

Where cities are close together, the mass transit systems are integrated. One can take non-Amtrak trains from Philadelphia to New Haven, Connecticut. Baltimore and Washington are connected by MARC trains, and Oakland and San Francisco are connected by Bart and S.F. and San Jose are connected by CalTrain.
And we do have some long lines, but as you say, they are pretty shitty. But those other countries are much more densely populated and smaller. In the Northeast Amtrak, the commuter railroads and subways make a pretty good approximation of what exists in Europe.
Re:i've always wondered... by Mycroft_VIII · 2004-06-30 16:44 · Score: 3, Interesting

It's simple. The US is phyiscally to big for this sort of thing to go nation wide. Now mind you they could do a couple or so on each coast. And just maybee somthing connecting a city or two in texas through Kansas city to St. Louis to Chicago, but even that may be stretching it.
Look at it as if each US state where a single european country, then make a comparison.

Mycroft

--
https://signup.leagueoflegends.com/?ref=4c3ed6600b6ea
Re:i've always wondered... by TheOnlyCoolTim · 2004-06-30 17:29 · Score: 3, Informative

The trains stop running at night and you can outrun it in a car, but you think that's excellent public transportation?

Visit NYC sometime. Trains 24/7 that are faster and cheaper than a car or taxi.

Tim

--
Omnia vestra castrorum habetur nobis.
Re:i've always wondered... by Rysith · 2004-06-30 17:30 · Score: 2, Informative

Where was this? I went on vacation to London, and the subway system (sorry, tube) there was excellent: trains every few minutes, posted schedules so that you could plan on being on time for the less common trains (like to the airport), and certainly faster than 5 miles in an hour. Oh, and fairly cheap, too (not sure exactly, I had a month all-you-can-ride pass) If the city I live in had the same level of public transport, I would use it much more than my car.
Re:i've always wondered... by Zorilla · 2004-06-30 18:01 · Score: 2, Interesting

I live in rural Japan. People here are almost as dependent on cars as Americans are. Cars on the local market aren't cheap, either (but are cheap as hell if you can buy a used one from a US servicemember, my '96 Toyota in excellent condition cost $2000). Probably half of the cars here are 3-cylinder because the taxes on them aren't nearly as steep as something larger. Only difference in the roads are that they accomodate for bike riders and pedestrians in the form of steep curbs, barriers (like you might see on bridges in the US, only on level roads), and well marked crosswalks.

If you're talking about going long distances though, I believe the toll roads are actually more expensive than a train trip, which is quite expensive itself.

--

It would be cool if it didn't suck.
Re:i've always wondered... by tlainevool · 2004-06-30 18:06 · Score: 4, Interesting

"The US is phyiscally to big for this sort of thing to go nation wide."

I don't thing so. Europe is 3,837,000 Sq. Miles and the US is 3,537,438 Sq. Miles. Europe has a good continent-wide train system. Its just the love of cars that keeps trains from not working in the US.
Re:i've always wondered... by dekeji · 2004-06-30 18:31 · Score: 2, Insightful

It's because we think that if the US subsidizes railroads, it's communism, but when the US subsidizes inefficient automobile and air travel, it's the free market.

Why is that? Brilliant marketing and lobbying over decades by the auto and airline industries.
Re:i've always wondered... by Jodka · 2004-06-30 18:31 · Score: 4, Insightful

"I've always wondered why the US hasn't built up their mass transit abilities on the national level."

That's the wrong question. You should be asking why we lost the one that we had. At the beginning of the century you could travel to almost anywhere you wanted to go in the US by rail. Little villages all across countryside had passenger rail service, most with multiple stops a day.

--
Ceci n'est pas une signature.
Re:i've always wondered... by Lars+T. · 2004-06-30 18:35 · Score: 2, Informative

Yeah, what ever. Does this mean Europe is more united than the Uncooperative States of America?

--
Lars T.
To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck
Re:i've always wondered... by DNS-and-BIND · 2004-06-30 19:06 · Score: 2, Interesting

A heavily urbanized, dense urban area will always benefit. New York City is very unlike most of America, but I don't expect New Yorkers to believe that. Here in "flyover territory", as you call it, things are different. Who the heck takes taxis, anyway? The cities I've lived in, you can stand on the street for an hour and not see a single taxi.

--
Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
Re:i've always wondered... by trout_fish · 2004-06-30 19:56 · Score: 2, Informative

Trip 3: Walk to bus stop, 1 minute. Wait for bus, 2 minutes. Bus Journey, 10 minutes. Walk straight to platform (with season ticket for train), 1 minute. Wait for train, 5 minutes. Train Journey, 22 minutes. Walk to office, 2 minutes. Total Journey 43 minutes. Total cost, 13 UKP

Trip 4: Walk to car, get in car, 1 minute. Drive, sit in traffic jam, drive, sit in traffic jam, drive, sit in traffic jam, drive, 60 minutes. Queue to park, 5 minutes. Walk to office, 5 minutes. Total Journey 81 minutes. Total cost, 10 UKP to park, 3 UKP petrol, plus car maintenance, tax, insurance, etc.

Public transport can work.
Re:i've always wondered... by Anonymous Coward · 2004-06-30 20:57 · Score: 2, Informative

Population of Europe: 727,786,000
Population of the USA: 293,027,500

Also note that most of the US population is on the coastlines. In the midwest, you can easily drive for 50 miles without running across another town, and even when you do it's rarely more than 10,000 people. Running track to all of those little towns would cost train companies more than they'd ever hope to make from the few additional customers they'd gain.

It's not the love of cars so much as the sheer cost that prevents huge, European-style public transportation systems from taking hold in the US, with the exceptions of the largest cities. Everywhere that's dense enough to run public transportation already has some form of it, and everywhere else is just too spread out for anything but cars to be effective.
Re:i've always wondered... by k8to · 2004-06-30 22:17 · Score: 4, Informative

This _sounds_ good on the face of it, but history says otherwise.

In the late 1800s and early 1900s, the US had far and away the largest amount of public transit, larger than any country in europe. In the 19-teens more miles of streetcar track existed in the United States than in the entire rest of the world combined. Inter-city rail was commonly used, and relatively affordable and dependable as compared to many of the nations we currently associate with rail such as Germany or France.

It's hard to identify true root causes, but certainly between the 1920s and the 1950s, american culture and spending patterns had fallen so heavily into the pattern of the automobile, that much of this was lost. Some might point to the american habit of so strongly valuing the new (cf. electricity, plumbing, etc.), while others might talk about our devaluing of the collectivist, thus valuing individual transportation. Still another point of consideration is the ugly side of capitalism, when private industry and infrustructure can sometimes poorly interact. Recent examples include Enron and the California power disaster, historically one can look to rail companies and their self destructive rail non-maintenance habits.

In any event, public transit thrived despite our lack of physical density for a good 60 years, and then died. Perhaps the point could be made that it could no longer successfully compete against private transit in our relatively non-dense environment, but even the bostonwash DC corridor has very poor transit now as compared to history and yet remains rather dense.

The problem is a good deal more complex than you suggest.

--
-josh
Re:i've always wondered... by bwy · 2004-06-30 23:51 · Score: 4, Insightful

Probably because most people only get 2 weeks vacation and you can fly between any 2 points in the US for $200 or under if you are a smart fare shopper. Back at the turn of the century wasting time on a train was the only way to get anywhere. I'll happily take my 6 hour plane ride from FL to CA, thanks.
Re:i've always wondered... by RzUpAnmsCwrds · 2004-07-01 03:14 · Score: 4, Informative

" don't thing so. Europe is 3,837,000 Sq. Miles and the US is 3,537,438 Sq. Miles."

That statement is misleading as it includes part of Russia.

The European Union, for example, is about 1/3 the size of the continental US, and it has about 150 million more people (1.5 times as many).

That's approximately 4.5 times more people per square-km as the US.

Go to Wyoming some time and tell me that a nationwide mass-transit system is feasable. It's not.

That said, we could do much better. Amtrak is a disaster, and we need more "short-haul" solutions. I can take the bus from my city (Fort Collins, ~100km north of Denver) to Denver, but there is no rail. There should be.

Now, the truth is that it's simply more convenient to drive. Everyone goes ~130kph on the Interstate, and there is rarely any traffic north of Denver, so it only takes about 45 minutes to get to Denver. Compare that to a rail service which would have to be much faster to even compete (to compensate for the time spent getting to the station).
Re:i've always wondered... by David+Greene · 2004-07-01 05:45 · Score: 2, Interesting

Land would also have to get a lot more expensive as well. Right now, it's very cheap for Wal*Mart to build a huge, single-floor store, with a huge flat parking lot. All of those huge stores with huge parking lots, mean that you have to walk a long ways if you want to visit multiple stores.
I am currently working on a proposal in Minnesota known as the Land Value Tax. The idea is to tax commercial and indusrtial land at a higher rate than the building. This encourages more efficient use of the land, fewer parking lots and abandoned buildings, etc. In Harrisburg, PA, the number of vacant buildings went from ~5,000 to about 400 after a similar bill was passed. This has been done and it's worked very well. Hopefully it will gain wider adoption.

--
Re:i've always wondered... by Chester+K · 2004-07-01 06:41 · Score: 2, Informative

Europe is 3,837,000 Sq. Miles and the US is 3,537,438 Sq. Miles.

Europe is also fairly populated throughout, meaning that complete coverage is cost-efficient. The US has areas of moderate-to-heavy population surrounded by nothing but miles and miles and miles of farm fields.

Who'd want to take a train to the middle of North Dakota?

--

NO CARRIER

In other news, new trains in Minnesota by dieman · 2004-06-30 16:35 · Score: 4, Informative

We also got our first light rail line in Minnesota, the Hiawatha Line. Also driven with Bombardier trains of an original design.

I took some pictures of the opening here.

96,000 people tried out the line last weekend during its debut!

--
-- dieman - Scott Dier

Re:In other news, new trains in Minnesota by dieman · 2004-06-30 16:49 · Score: 2, Interesting

Yeah, I'm thinking about moving the .mov file. :)

Apache::Gallery does caching, so really my box isn't doing too bad. Its all about the B/W though, but my webserver is configured as QBSS queuing on the link -- it should be the 'last' packets out on the pipe.

--
-- dieman - Scott Dier
Re:In other news, new trains in Minnesota by dieman · 2004-06-30 18:13 · Score: 2, Interesting

The state of minnesota spent $100 million on capitol costs. The *rest* of the funding was provided by the federal government.

http://www.startribune.com/stories/462/4826639.h tm l

Now the operating costs are far differen't -- I'll admit.

It wasn't money avaliable for a stadium or other costs.

We have insufficient highway infrastructure. Take a look at highway 252 sometime. Anoka County has one of the worst commutes in the nation and the region.

--
-- dieman - Scott Dier
Re:In other news, new trains in Minnesota by Jonathan · 2004-06-30 23:09 · Score: 2, Insightful

We've been debating in MN for almost a decade on how to fund the building of a new baseball stadium for the Twins (remember contraction?), which is estimated to cost $438 million. The debate isn't even to fund the whole cost, only part of it.

Instead we build a choo choo train! Current cost is $712 million,

Well, a train is infinitely* more useful than a stadium, so why complain? Transportation is part of the government's business, after all, while entertainment isn't. The idea of "creating jobs" never held much water because the jobs at a stadium, such as hot-dog vendor, aren't exactly great.

Instead we build a choo choo train! Current cost is $712 million, although it was only estimated to cost $444 million. For those unfamiliar with Minnesota, we've got some of the best highway infrastructure in the country and we're about as spread out as a metropolitan area can be, so trains aren't exactly an efficient solution to traffic congestion, especially when the train only travels 12 miles.

Yeah, but do you really think anyone's going to be driving cars in 25 years? Individual transport is already a pretty irresponsible use of oil and it is only going to get more so as oil becomes scarcer and scarcer and more and more wars are needed to secure oil fields in the hands of friendly governments. Sounds like MN is actually thinking about the future for a change. Good for them.

CSI by mrpuffypants · 2004-06-30 16:36 · Score: 5, Funny

Until some guys gets run over by the Monorail in CSI I'm not even going to acknowledge it.

Re:Yipee!!!!! by SupaMegaBuffalo · 2004-06-30 16:38 · Score: 3, Insightful

Also, they should Open Source this POS

Ummm... huh?

I hope you mean only releasing the source code for those who would like to see it, and not that you want the code developed according to the usual open source models.
Developing a system to control a vehicle carrying people is one thing that, at least i for one think, should be done by a set of well coordinated group of professionals.

University by Fooby · 2004-06-30 16:38 · Score: 4, Funny

There's a university in Las Vegas? And I thought UPenn was a party school...

Re:Yipee!!!!! by faedle · 2004-06-30 16:47 · Score: 5, Interesting

Much like BART had all kinds of computer problems when it first went online. These things were not totally unanticipated. This is "new" tech, in the sense that Las Vegas Monorail will be the first mass-transit application of "driverless" rail systems anywhere in the United States (BART comes close, but somebody still pushes the "close door" button).

Yes, it's "old" 70's (well, really, 50's, as it differs very little from the original Alweg designs that run on Seattle and Anaheim trackage) technology. However, buses are, what, 30's technology? Light rail vehicles, also, are nothing more than the modern version of the 1910's streetcars.

In transit systems, very little changes.. because it dosen't have to. The fundamental job of getting people from one place to another across town is a simple one: it dosen't need maglev. The physics of rubber tires on a concrete "roadway" are well understood. Construction techniques required to build the Las Vegas Monorail are essentially no different than what was needed to build I-215: once you know how to pour concrete, it doesn't matter if you're building a highway for cars or a guideway for a monorail.

Personally, I can't wait. Monorail technology is a good transit solution: clean and quiet, with the potential to be cheap and easily maintained. Hopefully, Las Vegas Monorail will prove out as good as the monorail enthusiasts (like myself) have been saying it will.

Limousines and the free market by Anonymous Coward · 2004-06-30 16:47 · Score: 5, Interesting

It's interesting that the taxi cab and limousine services are fighting the monorail tooth and nail.

When I went to Florida, I had to catch a plane from Orlando airport, so I caught a bus to 'airport boulevard' - having been told it was near the airport. It was in the middle of nowhere and there was no chance of hailing a cab (even if as a poor student, I could have afforded one), so I walked for 90 minutes in the midday sun until I got to my flight - with 15 minutes to spare.

I had been told I was on the right bus, but there didn't seem to be a bus stop in the entire airport. I was completely incredulous. Is this the reason why?

So much for the free market and consumer choice.

Re:Limousines and the free market by mandalayx · 2004-06-30 18:38 · Score: 3, Insightful

The last line of your sentence, "So much for the free market and consumer choice" has no relevance to what you said at all.

If you had planned your route in advance, carefully, instead of just winging it, you might have taken the right bus. For example, I can drive to "University Ave" and be miles away from the actual University.

The cabs aren't there because, as you say, you were in the "middle of nowhere". If this were a cab driver forum, you'd find no sympathy. Plus, if you happened upon a pay phone or thought ahead to bring a cell phone while traveling, you could call a taxi dispatcher. Or lacking a phone number for taxi dispatch, called local directory service (hint: 411 isn't just asking for girls' numbers) and a taxi would come.

In fact, it seems like your case is an excellent example of consumer choice--except you made some pretty naive choices. But since you were a tourist, I suppose it's excusable. Just plan ahead when you travel next time...you're a student, so you should be good at researching these kinds of things!

Anyone who has been to Vegas knows by swagr · 2004-06-30 16:48 · Score: 5, Funny

that this monorail will take you directly from the center of a casino, to the center of many other casinos, via routes that pass through casinos.
In order to get to any of the stations, you'll need to walk through 3 miles of casinos. In order to buy tickets, you'll need to walk through 4 miles of casinos. If you're drunk and gambling, tickets are free.

--

-... --- .-. . -.. ..--..

Useless by DNS-and-BIND · 2004-06-30 16:48 · Score: 5, Interesting

Like most public transportation projects I've been on, this one is pretty useless. You can't go from the airport to the hotel...what's the point? The system is similarly useless to anyone who actually *lives* in Vegas. Los Angeles authorities thought it would be a good idea to build some trains...they don't go anywhere that you'd ever want to go. It doesn't connect to the airport because the taxicab union lobbied against it. The Houston rail "system" is similarly pointless. Atlanta's isn't bad, mostly because union opposition was overcome and it actually connects to the airport.

--
Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!

Re:Yipee!!!!! by IANAAC · 2004-06-30 16:53 · Score: 2, Insightful

Now if this was Maglev or something else as cool...

Do you even know how maglev works? Why on earth would you think that maglev would be

a: efficient
b: affordable
or c: even doable in a 4 mile stretch?

"Oooh!. Maglev! Let's do that!" Try to get beyond the buzzwords.

Well, this is a first.... by lortho · 2004-06-30 16:55 · Score: 3, Funny

The obligatory Simpsons reference/joke made in the the actual story, before the first comment is even posted? Thought I'd never see the day... ;)

Re:Yipee!!!!! by faedle · 2004-06-30 16:58 · Score: 4, Insightful

Wasn't supposed to be a solution for everybody. It was, however, supposed to be a solution for the Strip and Convention Center.

Being as the vast majority of the Las Vegas economy seems to revolve around liberating cash from tourists, looks like a good thing to me.

Besides, that $654 million dollars came entirely from the private sector, through direct financial contributions and bonds. The taxpayers of Clark County aren't paying for it, so why the hell are you bitching?

High-speed rail by Anonymous Coward · 2004-06-30 16:59 · Score: 2, Informative

The full text of this article from The Economist follows. The original content is subscriber-only; it is reproduced here in the hope and expectation that you will find it useful.

----

High-speed rail

Trop peu, trop tard, trop Amtrak

Aug 9th 2001 | CHICAGO
From The Economist print edition

Fast trains may be coming to the mid-west--and stopping too often

THE roads are clogged. The airports are worse. Might fast trains provide relief for America's frustrated travellers? A coalition of nine mid-western states has plans for a rail system that would whisk travellers between the region's big cities at high speeds and connect them to points beyond with a network of slower trains and buses. Strangely enough, Congress, which would have to pay much of the cost, is warming to the idea.

The Midwest Regional Rail Initiative (MWRRI) is a joint venture between nine state transport agencies, the Amtrak rail system and the Federal Railroad Administration. The coalition has unveiled detailed plans and cost estimates for a 3,000-mile rail system with Chicago as its hub that would connect cities such as Detroit, Milwaukee, St Louis and Minneapolis at speeds of up to 110 miles per hour (some 50-75mph slower than French or Japanese trains, but enough to wow the mid-west).

[Image]

Randy Wade at Wisconsin's Department of Transportation claims that the region is ideally suited for high-speed rail. Over distances of several hundred miles, such as the 280-mile trip from Chicago to Detroit, rail is potentially faster, more comfortable and more productive than car travel. It should be cheaper than flying and delivers passengers into the city centre, rather than to distant airports. And cities in the mid-west are already connected by freight rail lines that can be upgraded to accommodate faster trains. MWRRI thinks that a well-run system could attract nearly 10m riders a year by 2010.

Such transport visions are two a penny and often worth as much (ask any Eurotunnel shareholder). The General Accounting Office recently estimated the cost of a national high-speed system to be $50 billion-70 billion. But both the Senate and the House are considering bills that would enable Amtrak, America's quasi-public passenger rail agency, to issue up to $12 billion in bonds to pay for capital improvements in 11 designated high-speed rail corridors. The bonds would not pay interest; bondholders would receive federal income-tax credits instead.

Such stealth subsidies are unlikely to irritate voters, impatient with traffic jams and cancelled flights. "You can't imagine congestion getting better anywhere--ever," says Mr Wade. Tom Daschle and Trent Lott, the Democratic and Republican leaders, are among the bill's 51 co-sponsors in the Senate. The White House has not taken a position yet; but, while he was governor of Texas, George Bush cut the ribbon when Amtrak began running the Texas Eagle from San Antonio to Chicago.

The bill making its way through Congress would provide a down-payment on the MWRRI plan, which can be built step by step. The full system will need lots more money, to pay among other things for the trains and improved infrastructure. Even supporters concede that high-speed rail would do well to cover its operating costs, never mind the capital investment. Politicians will have to be sold on the social benefits of getting Americans off the highways and runways.

Which they might be, except for the most potent enemy of passenger rail in America: Amtrak itself. Critics of federal spending for high-speed rail do not oppose the idea in principle; they just think that giving Amtrak control over something like $12 billion in capital spending is insane.

America's passenger rail system, which was deregulated in 1997, is supposed to cover its operating costs by December

Re:Yipee!!!!! by michaelhood · 2004-06-30 17:00 · Score: 2, Funny

Also, they should Open Source this POS

Agreed. If this was OSS, we could all test this on our own Monorail test beds we have at home!

*ahem* by bgeiger · 2004-06-30 17:02 · Score: 2

"Please stand clear of the doors. Por favor, mantenganse alejados de las puertas."

--
o/~ All God's children shall be free in Pirates of the Caribbean, when we reach that Magic Kingdom in the sky... o/~

Don't like the LVMonorail? Build your own! by evacuate_the_bull · 2004-06-30 17:06 · Score: 3, Informative

Just like Kim Pedersen. Wired did a nice story on him a few months ago and now he's started the Monorail Society.

Cool!

--
Satanists get good grades too...suspiciously good grades

Oblig. by G-funk · 2004-06-30 17:09 · Score: 4, Funny

Since this was on last night, here of course is the song!

Lyle Lanley: Well, sir, there's nothing on earth Like a genuine, Bona fide, Electrified, Six-car Monorail! ... What'd I say?

Ned Flanders: Monorail!

Lyle Lanley: What's it called?

Patty+Selma: Monorail!

Lyle Lanley: That's right! Monorail!

[crowd chants `Monorail' softly and rhythmically]

Miss Hoover: I hear those things are awfully loud...

Lyle Lanley: It glides as softly as a cloud.

Apu: Is there a chance the track could bend?

Lyle Lanley: Not on your life, my Hindu friend.

Barney: What about us brain-dead slobs?

Lyle Lanley: You'll all be given cushy jobs.

Abe: Were you sent here by the devil?

Lyle Lanley: No, good sir, I'm on the level.

Wiggum: The ring came off my pudding can.

Lyle Lanley: Take my pen knife, my good man.

I swear it's Springfield's only choice...

Throw up your hands and raise your voice!

All: [singing] Monorail!

Lyle Lanley: What's it called?

All: Monorail!

Lyle Lanley: Once again...

All: Monorail!

Marge: But Main Street's still all cracked and broken...

Bart: Sorry, Mom, the mob has spoken!

All: [singing] Monorail! Monorail! Monorail! [big finish] Monorail!

Homer: Mono... D'oh!

--
Send lawyers, guns, and money!

Not that uncommon by gotr00t · 2004-06-30 17:18 · Score: 3, Interesting

The BART (Bay Area Rapid Transit) system in the SF/Bay Area costs just about the same to use, the only difference is that its not a flat rate, but rather, a calculated fare from station to station, averaging around $3 a ride, one way. The discounts if bought in bulk are minimal (only $4 savings when $60 worth of fare is bought), and I don't think there is an "all day pass" or anything of that sort.

I think it goes to show that when you think of this kind of rapid transit system, don't think "bus fare," which is usually cheaper. It may also be because these systems are not subsidized by local or state authorities, forcing them to charge higher fare. (though I'm not sure if this is true in either of these cases)

Re:Not that uncommon by localman · 2004-06-30 18:24 · Score: 2, Informative

Yes, when I lived in the SF Bay Area I paid $3.80 each way per day to ride the BART to and from work. But the BART carried me 35 miles in 45 minutes. During rush hour that is quite a feat.

Cheers.
Re:Not that uncommon by mcrbids · 2004-06-30 18:39 · Score: 2, Informative

About 10-15 years ago, I lived for a summer in San Fransisco. I bought a "muni-pass" which gave me unlimited BART and SF/Metro for ~ $20/month anywhere in SF.(I was a minor at the time - 17 Y.O.)

This was for the buses trolleys, and BART trains.

I remember the adult version costing somewhere around $80-$100, and provided unlimited BART in the greater Bay Area.

Aren't these still available?

--
I have no problem with your religion until you decide it's reason to deprive others of the truth.
Re:Not that uncommon by k8to · 2004-06-30 22:05 · Score: 2, Interesting

The BART has not offered unlimited use fares within the last several decades. There _are_ deals which include ulimited city transit and a certain amount of BART usage included. Typically BART Plus is 30 in BART ridership (about 10 trips) and uliminted MUNI.

--
-josh

Bart Driverless ? by molo · 2004-06-30 17:20 · Score: 2, Informative

Wikipedia on BART:

The trains are computer-controlled and arrive on-time with regular accuracy. Drivers are present in case of unforeseen difficulties.

If you have other information, please correct the wikipedia entry.

-molo

--
Using your sig line to advertise for friends is lame.

Re:Bart Driverless ? by k8to · 2004-06-30 22:31 · Score: 4, Informative

The BART system was designed and intended as a driverless system. This turned out to be a bit of an overconfidence issue since the automatic systems had several kinks, the most significant of which being the train-near sensors.

The basic problem was that BART trains were designed so as to be able to detect the presence of another train relatively near ahead on the tracks. I'm not sure what the method used was, whether it was designed to simply detect objects (radar or something similar) or whether trains produced signals that the other trains picked up. Certainly detecting large objects seems insufficient for trains designed to travel at large speeds which must also operate inside tunnels etc. In any event, during hot weather outside, the sensors would have false-positive problems, detecting trains that did not exist, and would refuse to continue. To limp past this problem, drivers were necessary to take over the role of choosing when it was no longer safe to advance. By default the trains still operated autonomously in most other ways.

Casual observation indicates a number of issues with the trains are apparently mildly driver-operated. Trains which are less than full length seem to have their stop position adjusted by the 'driver' (sometimes very ineptly). The 'driver' sometimes adjusts stop times, which is quite useful for rush hour or event-related crowds, although I sometimes wish it was pre-set so people would board more efficiently. Also it seems the 'driver' has some possibility to affect train speed, as there have definitely been cases where a change of driver just north of Union City resulted in a much changed rate of progress for the duration of the trip, although I suspect this input is optional, and infrequently used.

Certainly the BART train console is relatively elaborate, but after the manner of a point-of-sale terminal, with several print-insert buttons and no visible analog inputs of any sort. When I have watched bart train 'drivers', I have certainly seen entire station-to-station journeys made with no input at all.

--
-josh

Re:Yipee!!!!! by faedle · 2004-06-30 17:21 · Score: 2, Interesting

On BART, the "driver" does nothing more than push a "close door" button. They are not in control of the train, except when the automation system fails (which when I worked there in the 80's was "often"). However, part of BART's design was to have a 100% automated system. The "driver" is there solely because of a concession to the transit operator's unions. 99% of the time, the BART operator is just passively sitting in his chair.. bored out of his tiny little mind.

SFO Airport SkyTrain is not, technically, a "mass transit" system, it is an airport peoplemover. Many airport peoplemovers are "driverless", including Denver's. I was speaking strictly of mass transit systems.

Docklands Light Rail isn't in the US. At least, last time I checked England was still part of the United Kingdom. Has something changed?

Re:Yipee!!!!! by faedle · 2004-06-30 17:30 · Score: 2, Interesting

Dunno. Considering that BART was the first fully automated passenger rail system in the world, I guess Europe is stll learning from the US.

"Driverless" is an important test concept on the Las Vegas Monorail not because it couldn't "theoretically" be done in the US (many systems, like SF-MUNI, BART, the Chicago "El", and the LA Metro Red Line are fully or partially automated). Questions of liability prevent many systems from operating "driverless." Concerns of organized labor (this was BART's problem) prevented other systems from running "driverless."

The technology has existed for 30 years (see BART). Because LV Monorail was largely privately funded, they got to dictate terms a lot more than a lot of transit agencies get to.

It's meant for tourists on the Strip. by Trunks · 2004-06-30 17:31 · Score: 4, Insightful

Have you ever tried walking from one end of the strip to the other in the middle of summer? It takes forever to get anywhere by car or taxi, and the walk is WAY too long (especially when it's hot as hell outside).

Yeah, it doesn't get to the airport yet and has yet to cover the entire strip, but it's a start and will be a boon to many who regularly visit Vegas.

--
This post sponsored by Ninja Burger. "

Re:It's meant for tourists on the Strip. by DNS-and-BIND · 2004-06-30 18:41 · Score: 2, Insightful

Nobody walks in Vegas...not even from hotel to hotel. I never had a problem with taxis, other than the expense. The only place you can walk in Vegas is in Downtown. The tourists hate downtown because it's not new and exciting and expensive, it's rundown oldstyle Vegas with low table minimums and cheap rooms.

--
Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
Re:It's meant for tourists on the Strip. by ediron2 · 2004-07-01 06:26 · Score: 2, Informative

I think the 'nobody walks in vegas' that Dumbass-n-Blind referenced is a good sign he's not paying attention to us 'unwashed masses'. He's wrongly ignoring anyone but the limo-elite and people willing to pay cabfare rather than walk a block.
I've just spent a huge amount of time working in Vegas, and I am really annoyed to learn that the monorail will soon open now that I'm gone. I'd have *loved* to had an easy/free way to hop a significant distance up the strip and start exploring again there, as I enjoyed just wandering thru the places exploring.
Similarly, when someone would visit, I'd tell them something like: See Sirens of TI, go inside of the pyramid at Luxor (the balconies and grand lobby are architecturally striking), the 4d Trekkie thing, the 'piazza at twilight' in the Venetian, the new LED dome on Fremont (I didn't get there... that's even worse than missing the Monorail opening, in my book!) and ride the 'Speed' roller-coaster ride. Problem is, unless you've got a chauffeur, that'll take 3 cab rides or more to do and can't be done in a day, since walking those distances isn't reasonable. So, to most folks I would end up saying 'pick just one thing', or downgrading my suggestions until they were riding a 2nd-rate ride, settling on show quality, or otherwise making deep compromises to fit the plans into their brief schedule.
Monorail good. Good for tourists. Good for tourism. Good for the environment. Anyone that works in Las Vegas should understand that their daily commute doesn't lend itself to railways. And it just doesn't compare to the consolidated need of half a million people or more on a peak weekend being squeezed into properties bordering 3 miles of one road. Even then, the rail's not a bad thing, since a strong rail system decreases parking/driving pressure and that's indirectly good for the workers.
Last of all: everyone in america needs a few good public-transit experiences. Otherwise, we'll never learn from our wiser european counterparts on the value of a public transit system. What better place to expose zillions of people to it than a tourist destination like Vegas?! Again, Monorail Good. Detractors idiots.

And best of all... by character_assassin · 2004-06-30 17:32 · Score: 4, Funny

... it terminates at the Las Vegas Hilton, better known to Slashdotters as the home of the Star Trek Experience. Don't forget to visit Quark's Bar, where you can order - shudder - "The Wrap Of Khan."

--

If you mod me down, I shall become more powerful than you can possibly imagine.

Re:And best of all... by identity0 · 2004-06-30 20:20 · Score: 5, Funny

Oh shit, now you have me picturing some fat Slashdotter sitting on the john in his hotel at 2am....

"Kaaaaaaaaaaahhn!!!"

Several Responses by Aidtopia · 2004-06-30 17:34 · Score: 2, Interesting

Responses to several comments here:

Monorail "track" is a lot more expensive to build per foot than light rail. That's the main reason Disney hasn't built any new monorail for a while, even when they moved all the parking a couple blocks away from the Anaheim park entrance.

There's no good way to evacuate an elevated monorail train in an emergency. Somewhere on the net I've read a copy of the procedures for the WDW monorail, which involves helping passengers slide down the curved windshield so they can walk along the beam to the nearest station. Yeah, right.

Say all you want about the lightrail system Los Angeles built. Fact is, it's far more popular than ever anticipated. Yeah, it goes through some pretty scary neighborhoods. But the point is to make it possible for people who live there to get into downtown where the jobs are. It's worked pretty well. And the Metrolink extensions do take some of the commuter burden off the Orange County to LA freeways.

Re:Several Responses by faedle · 2004-06-30 17:50 · Score: 2, Informative

Woah, buddy.

First off, Disneyland's choice regarding the Disneyland Monorail had nothing to do with cost, or efficiency. It has more to do with Disney's internal pricing policies regarding the two Anaheim parks than anything else. We are actually now hearing that there WILL be extensions to the Disneyland Monorail at some point in the future, but not to the parking structure.. likely to a theoretical "third" park that is still in development.

Secondly, please provide some proof to the claim that Monorail is more expensive than an elevated, grade seperate light rail.

Thirdly, evacuating a monorail is no different than any other elevated train. If you have no catwalk (like the Disneyland monorails, or even the Chicago "El"), you just don't. However, only TWICE (that I was able to find) in the entire 40 year operating history of the Disneyland Monorail has an evacuation been required. In both cases, City of Anaheim ladder trucks were used, one of which is stationed ON DISNEYLAND PROPERTY anyway. The simple fact of the matter is it is much easier for ANY transit vehicle to proceed to the nearest station than to stop dead on the tracks and evacuate mid-span. I don't care who you are, monorail, light rail, or even busway.. a mid-span evacuation is dangerous and not routinely done by any of these transit modes.

A couple of years ago, SF-MUNI (the light rail system in San Francisco) experienced a complete failure of the automation system that runs the subway. Trains were stopped, dead, inside underground tunnels. No effort was made by SF-MUNI to evacuate passengers, even though the SF-MUNI subways are equipped with catwalks and emergency exits. Some passengers were stuck in trains for 2 or more hours.

The fact of the matter is, very few rail systems routinely evacuate passengers to the catwalks, even when they have them, unless their life is in immediate danger. There are more dangers present outside the train: high voltage, potential passing trains, etc.
Re:Several Responses by green+pizza · 2004-06-30 23:32 · Score: 2, Informative

Monorail "track" is a lot more expensive to build per foot than light rail. That's the main reason Disney hasn't built any new monorail for a while

In the case of Walt Disney World in Orlando, FL, Disney hasn't built any new track as there's nowhere else to extend the scenic monorail line. MGM Studios, Wild Animal Kingdom, and Blizzard Beach are located adjacent to the two main attractions (the Magic Kingdom and EPCOT), hidden from view only by some trees. The monorail ride to one of these newer attractions would be very short and would kill the whole experience.

Granted, the alternative (the smelly, slow busses) is no better...

With all the land Disney owns in the Reddy Creek area, I don't understand why they built all of their newer parks so close together, especially when they started out with a nice distance between the Magic Kingdom, EPCOT, and the parking complex.

Why? by TheOnlyCoolTim · 2004-06-30 17:40 · Score: 2, Interesting

Does anyone know if a monorail actually has any advantages over regular two rail operation and under what situations?

Tim

--
Omnia vestra castrorum habetur nobis.

Re:Why? by Alex+Reynolds · 2004-06-30 18:00 · Score: 2, Funny

Why, the track cost is halved, obviously! *rimshot*
Re:Why? by RollingThunder · 2004-06-30 18:27 · Score: 2, Informative

Day to day operation is generally much quieter. With rubber on concrete, rather than steel on steel, the ride is quiet(er) and smooth(er).
Re:Why? by Peter+McC · 2004-06-30 19:34 · Score: 3, Informative

This is not unique to monorails. For instance, the Montreal subway system uses rubber tires on concrete paths, but it's otherwise identical to a standard subway system (they still have the standard track and wheels on the cars as a backup in case of flat tires). The ride is certainly quieter than metal-on-metal, especially around the corners, but it can be fairly bouncy.

--
You know what I hate? Wait, what do you like? I hate that!
Re:Why? by vrt3 · 2004-06-30 20:25 · Score: 2, Informative

Lots of subway systems use rubber tires. The Paris subway, for example, switched from steel wheels to rubber tires exactly for that reason.

--
This sig under construction. Please check back later.
Re:Why? by roothog · 2004-07-01 01:28 · Score: 3, Informative

Monorail beamway has a significantly smaller footprint and blocks less sky than traditional elevated two-rail guideway. See pages 14/15 and 38/39 of this PDF for some pictures. Sorry, a quick google search did not return any web pages with pics.
If you compare it with at-grade two-rail, then the advantage is that an elevated monorail has no road crossings. Of course, this is true of any elevated transit system.
Note that the small beam makes monorail evacuations more difficult than elevated light-rail evacuation. For light rail, people can just walk to one end of the train and step out onto the guideway. The Las Vegas monorail system installed emergency walkways between the beams. Riders step out of the side train doors onto the walkway. Disney World does not have emergency walkways and evacuates to the roof of the train. You then walk across the top of the train to one end and shimmy down the windscreen to the beam, and then walk the beam. (The beam is 26 or 28 inches wide). No WDW monorail has ever been evacuated, although there was a train fire years ago in an old Mark IV train.

Re:Yipee!!!!! by Hans+Lehmann · 2004-06-30 17:40 · Score: 4, Interesting

This is "new" tech, in the sense that Las Vegas Monorail will be the first mass-transit application of "driverless" rail systems anywhere in the United States (BART comes close, but somebody still pushes the "close door" button).

Not exactly a rail system, but the PRT that services WVU in Morgantown, WV., has been running for about 30 years now. Driverless, electrically driven cars with rubber tires on a concrete track, powered from a 3rd rail. The tracks are steam-heated in winter. It was a pork-barrel Rockefeller project from day one, and most likely sucks up great piles of federal funds to this day. Being prone to breakdowns, the University still had to keep buses & drivers on constant standby to shuttle students between the two spread-out campuses.

I remember news stories when I was attending college there in the late 70's about how stray dogs would occasionaly manage to get onto the track. The PRT cars, being computer controlled, would soon overtake and squish the pooches without even slowing down, while the passengers watched the whole thing, unable to do anything about it.

--
09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0

A Monorail in Las Vegas? by Anonymous Coward · 2004-06-30 17:41 · Score: 3, Funny

I dunno, seems like more of Shelbyville idea to me.

Were you sent here by the Devil? by greycortex · 2004-06-30 17:55 · Score: 2, Funny

No good sir, I'm on the level.

I'll add a review by snooo53 · 2004-06-30 17:55 · Score: 2, Interesting

First let me start of by saying, I love the idea of public transportation, and that this was a great *idea* Unfortunately this light rail line is wrought with major problems in its implementation.

-First of all, the tracks are laid right into the street. Not only has it been causing massive traffic congestion but often times the train itself has to wait for traffic lights! They should have elevated it or buried it.

-Stations: There are WAY too many stations. Obviously there was some lobbying going on by the downtown businesses because there is a freaking stop every 2 blocks!! It is literally faster to walk. The NYC subway stops are a more sensible 10 blocks or more away from each other for the most part.

-Furthermore, most of these stations are OUTDOORS with NO ENCLOSED SPACE. Let me remind you this is a state with 6 months of winter, and subzero temperatures are very common. And none of them match up with the skyway system here (an excellent way to get around in the winter btw).

-It doesn't connect to anything important...yet. They are working on the connections to the airport and the Mall of America, but those will not be done until Dec. 04.

That 96000 total is extremely deceptive in that after the weekend when it was no longer FREE, the attendance dropped like a rock. The peak attendance on these trains was something like 14 people at a time. On a monday morning during rush hour. Not suprising considering how inefficient they are. The bus system is much the same here.

My hope is that they take this stretch of the line as a lesson in what not to do, and instead try to model it off of other major cities with successful public transit.

--
The sending of this message pretty much inconveniences everyone involved.

Re:Yipee!!!!! by ffsnjb · 2004-06-30 18:35 · Score: 3, Insightful

But as bondholders, as long as the project is successful (and the risk on this is low), NV will get the investment back, plus interest, saving taxpayers money in the long run (ignoring inflation and larger budgets).

Governments SHOULD do this type of investing. If they did it correctly, we wouldn't have to pay taxes anymore. My dream is to build the federal treasury to a point where it operates off an annuity with no more income from the people. Granted, this will take a lot of upfront investment by the people, but it's a damn good thing.

Now to get elected...

--
"Why do you consent to live in ignorance and fear?" - Bad Religion

I dont like the LV monorail by nekdut · 2004-06-30 20:44 · Score: 3, Informative

I am a frequent visitor of Vegas and I doubt I will EVER use the new monorail. First of all, the construction of this monorail closed a number of FREE trams/rails that I often used. There was an excellent free rail between the MGM and Ballys, as well as the Monte Carlo -> Bellagio tram. Both closed down for this construction. Now going from MGM to Ballys will cost $$ and the Monte Carlo Bellagio tram still remains closed! It's on the other side of the street for god sakes. There was no reason to close this excellent free service.

Second, the cost. I usually go with a group of friends, and if the 5 of us split a cab, it always cost $10 or less total, AND takes us door to door instead of only a few stations WAY at the back of the casinos. This is also 24 hrs a day. The monorail closes at midnight!! Who the hell heads back to their room at midnight in vegas?!

The only advantage the monorail has is a direct route to the convention center. Large conventions could make good use of this, but otherwise, I'd suggest tourists stay away.

Have any of you been to vegas? by dabug911 · 2004-06-30 21:09 · Score: 5, Informative

The main purpose of this monorail is to create easier travel between the LVCA (convention center) and the strip. The conventnion center is a good distance away from the strip if you walk, this will make staying on the strip and traveling to the LVCA much easier. Plus most travelers will be business and be paying with business account more then likely. Others will be people who just need a quick way to get around. I'm sure day passes will eventually be released for this system. But its not always easy to get around between areas in vegas, even if it doesn't seem that far. While this is useless for locals its perfect for travelers who want to see different areas of vegas. Once this reachs out to Downtown this will provide much more bsuiness for that area that is hard to reach right now and that most people dont' want to pay the extra money to go and visit. sinc down town is a few miles away from the strip and is renovating also to become popular again this is a great thing for the las vegas economy.

But for the most part vegas gets most of its income now adays from CONVENTION TRAVELERS. Which means that making it easier to get back and fourth to the convention center is always a plus. The stations they have built for this system are really nice and will also help the business traveller

--
I can't believe its not butter!

Nobody ever counts the road subsidies by Goonie · 2004-06-30 21:26 · Score: 2, Insightful

I'll bet London to a brick you're probably some breed of Neanderthal^Wconservative, so I'll point you in the direction of these papers, many of them by a guy called Paul Weyrich who on other issues seems to be about as conservative as they come. Basically, people like yourself ignore the truly gargantuan subsidies that go to road funding.

--

Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from a rigged demo
--Andy Finkel (J. Klass?)

It's A Difference In Population Mass by BigDork1001 · 2004-06-30 22:54 · Score: 3, Insightful

I've always wondered why the US hasn't built up their mass transit abilities on the national level.

I'm an American currently stationed in Germany and I used to wonder the same thing myself before I got over here. Here's why it won't work the same.

Over here in Europe the populations are clumped together a lot more than in the states. In Germany all the villages are pretty tightly packed. You don't have big yards, many people live in small houses that are right up against the next house or at most has a small alleyway seperating the houses. You have these little villages and then you'll have a kilometer or three of farm land or woods and then the next village. In the states everyone has a big back yard, a house, and we aren't living right on top of each other. Our suburbs and definatly our rural areas are more spread out.

It's not feasible for every village in the US to have a train station or bus stop because with everyone so spread out it might be a couple mile walk to the nearest public transportation pick up. Where I grew up, Maine, NY, I was a few miles away from the center of the town and at least 6 or 7 miles away from the nearest bus stop. Where in Germany they are never more than a half mile or so from the nearest bus stop, or so it seems to me.

And so that's my opinion of why the US cannot have a mass transit system like they have here in Europe.

--
"Armed forces abroad are of little value unless there is prudent counsel at home" - Cicero

It's because of high parking costs by Secrity · 2004-06-30 22:56 · Score: 5, Insightful

Another problem is that to get to mass transit stations, most people have to travel some number of miles from their home. Most inter-city train stations are in the center of a city and parking is impossible or VERY expensive. In some cities this is not a problem for local trains because the systems' designers provided for ample suburban station parking and the local administrators see free parking as an incentive for people to use mass transit. In other cities, such as with the Washington, DC METRO system, the inadequately sized METRO parking lots fill up early in the day and the administrators charge for parking to subsidise rail operations. For more information about Washington DC METRO fair and parking increases and anticipated reduction in usage, see today's article at http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A193 08-2004Jun30.html

Mass Transit Bring It....!!!! by foniksonik · 2004-06-30 23:06 · Score: 2, Interesting

Fuck the taxis... the limos.... bring on mass transit...What's the Problem? Oh no you have competition? Let people make their own decision about how they can best get to their destination.

Mass Transit cannot and will not solve all transportation problems. On the other hand it will allow visitors and locals to have a choice of transportation.

Again if your business can't survive a tech revolution... your business is not fit to survive..... simple as that.

--
A fool throws a stone into a well and a thousand sages can not remove it.

Re:Yipee!!!!! by Secrity · 2004-06-30 23:49 · Score: 2, Insightful

The Dallas Fort Worth airport had a similar tram system that connected the various terminals. It appeared to be fully automated, although it could have been remotely operated. I still remember that you had to use coins (50c?) to get into the system and that the dollar bill changers at the tram stations gave you 95 cents for a dollar bill.

It seems odd that they would go to the expense of steam heating the "track", it seems that it would have been cheaper to just cover the whole thing. Covering the track would greatly reduce the need for steam heating and reduce or eliminate weather related deterioration of the track, mechanicals, and possibly the cars.

Re:a correction to one of your statements by eriko · 2004-06-30 23:56 · Score: 3, Funny

Yep. You've heard that Alaska is going to split into two states? That'll make Texas the *third* largest state.

--
Ceci n'est pas une sig.

Re:Yipee!!!!! by Dashing+Leech · 2004-07-01 00:15 · Score: 3, Funny

Yes, it's "old" 70's (well, really, 50's, as it differs very little from the original Alweg designs that run on Seattle and Anaheim trackage) technology. However, buses are, what, 30's technology? Light rail vehicles, also, are nothing more than the modern version of the 1910's streetcars.

Oh, everything's stolen nowadays. Why, the fax machine is nothing but a waffle iron with a phone attached.

(I can't believe I managed to use a relevent Simpson's quote in a story on monorails without refering to the monorail episode.)

Re:Yipee!!!!! by achaudhary · 2004-07-01 01:27 · Score: 2, Interesting

Though it is not entirely new in North America: Vancouver's (British Columbia) SkyTrain system uses similar Bombardier technology and is the backbone of their transit system. Also, in New York City, both Newark and Kennedy airports (small towns in themselves) have Bombardier systems connecting the terminals to each other and to regional rail networks a few miles away from the airports.

Vegas Taxis Severely Inadequate by Bob9113 · 2004-07-01 02:15 · Score: 2, Insightful

airport (which the taxicab and limo groups fight tooth and nail)

You know, this would be a lot more palatable if the taxi and limo services provided remotely acceptable service. When I'm landing in Vegas I don't give a crap about the $10 - $20 for the cab fare - what I hate is standing in a line of 3,000 people for 45 minutes waiting for a cab. In fact, if there were a line for the cheap monorail and little or no line for the cabs, I would still gladly take the cabs - I'm on my way to meet friends from other cities and I already know I'm going to lose money.

Everyone arrives in Vegas on Friday at 7 PM. The Vegas taxi queue is an impressive one, with 20 or 30 stands, but it's still entirely inadequate. When moving large volumes of people from one fixed point to another fixed point (airport/strip), it's worthwhile looking into systems designed to transit people in mass numbers.

--
Stop-Prism.org: Opt Out of Surveillance

Slashdot Mirror

Las Vegas Monorail Finally Ready To Open

90 of 469 comments (clear)