ata melb e-vgroup-slides1

“The SP Express Commuter System”(SPEC System)

Brian GarsdenMarch 2013

The search for the “Holy Grail” – that being: a system for moving

people around, quickly and efficiently, in the world’s presently

congested cities

To take a “big picture” view and ask:

“When it comes to moving people around in cities – can we do it better? If so how?”

Private cars? Public Transport? (PT) An acceptable mix? Are our present efforts on track? Should there be more uptake of modern

Personal Rapid Transport (PRT) schemes? Why is a fix so elusive?

1) difficulty in prising people out of their much-loved cars - a situation reinforced by “Big Oil”, car makers and others

2) formidable obstacles in retro-fitting PRT to an established, crowded city;◦ but that is where it is needed (no good building

it in areas of low density)◦ but sometimes there is opportunity to secure

rights-of-way ahead of need

Let us try a different approach (Instead of taking what we have now;

things we know; things we are familiar with; to modify these in the hope of improvements) – take a blank sheet

Start with the creation of a “specification” – a statement of what a commuter wants

We can hazard a good guess at this

safety comfort service available whenever wanted “respectable” speed (perhaps 100km/h ?) express travel, not influenced by the travel

plans of others

system that flows freely, without possibility of jams, with high carrying capacity

reliable in operation efficient (re energy use, in moving people) happy customers avoiding operating empty vehicles just to

meet a timetable, when there is no demand

system free of local pollution (i.e. remote energy generation)

elimination of road rage and trauma from accidents

a city that is efficient a city that is a pleasant place in which to

live

Let us seek, with an open mind, a great solution, the Holy Grail. How will we know when we’ve found it?

“The best public transport system that 21st century technology can devise”

the primary test: that commuters will gladly choose it rather than use cars

(there are other tests - re outcomes for the operating authority and for society)

No. There is still a way to go much of what we know has its origins in

19th century technology work to modernise “Personal Rapid

Transit” (PRT) is diverse, un-coordinated and slow to find acceptance

schemes don’t yet “join all the dots”

Ideas first presented in IEAust Journal -1972 Described in “Goodbye Gridlock” Seaview

Press (2006) Process: take a blank sheet; create a

“specification” for what constitutes the “Holy Grail”; devise a virtual design (that is feasible with existing technology)

This sets the scene at the visionary overview level

(One may see this as a “wish list” – made boldly, without thoughts of

this will be too costly this may not be feasible)

Adopting a low-cost (computer based 3D Virtual Design) approach for early

concepts leading to detailed designs – this phase could take us to the level where we address “the devil in the

detail”

In this book, both the broad overview (involving the specified features – the “wish list”) and the devil in the detail are explained – at least to the point that shows all features are possible within the capacity of existing 21st century technology.

No great breakthrough is needed (other than in thinking big, being ambitious)

safe - vehicles all move at common speed under automatic control - no drivers

system speed 100km/h - much improved on the common 20-30 km/h for cars and PRT

everyone seated in comfortable cabin express travel, on demand, 24/7 service system capacity beats 30 freeways

Goodbye Gridlock explains in detail one aim in the book was to answer

skepticism to show how speed, capacity and performance could be achieved

a criticism of the book was lack of images this was intentional to:

◦ encourage the reader to visualise a solution◦ keep the book’s cost to less than $15

No. But we acknowledge PRT work (Pod Cars) by many people around the world

There are systems that have some of the features, such as: seats for all, point-to-point service, driver-less, on-demand, around-the-clock, energy efficient (elimination of intermediate stops) and so on, but there is not yet one that “joins all the dots”

Google “pod cars” - over 64 million results

much good work has been done around the world and much money has been spent

the uptake of PRT has been disappointing it is difficult in Australia to get politicians

at all levels (federal, state, local) to take PRT seriously. Some think “more buses” is visionary

Not one of them is comparable in: method of gathering pods for launch; method for entering and exiting the guide-way; vehicle design; propulsion system. Not one has all features of: system speed; system capacity (people per hour); on-demand (with vehicles moving only when meeting a need)

need is pressing. The car is not the answer◦ no matter what its fuel

mix of modes needs better integration◦ active transport (walking, cycling)◦ cars◦ existing Public Transport, future PRT

a great PRT system needs a great concept

start with a blank sheet and specify “wants”

In seeking the Holy Grail - the best Public Transport System the 21st century can devise - the concept given the name SPEC System is worthy of attention. It aims to match, as closely as possible, the “wants” with what is feasible.

The right consortium (academic, business, government) to progress R&D could:

back a “best-practice” concept that had all of the parties aiming at the same target

standardise the basic metrics:◦ system speed◦ time pulse (“slot”) parameter◦ cluster (“train of pods”) configuration

adopt preferred propulsion method

perhaps Australia’s population is not big enough for us to go our own way in developing a unique PRT system?

however, Australians have a proud history in generating good ideas

a way forward is in R&D using 3D Virtual Reality to create value via IP (joint effort, academic, business and government with shared vision). Let us all join the debate!