|
|
Post by Transit Coalition on Mar 12, 2007 18:37:08 GMT -8
Would a Wilshire Boulevard Monorail be good or not for the community? With a monorail installed, you wouldn't have to worry about Left turns to get off of Wilshire, as there wouldn't be any room for left turn pockets. What other benefits or negatives can you visualize?  The Wilshire Monorail Analysis Group Camera-de-future took this Purple Line Passenger Monorail Train picture during the Monorail's normal scheduled operation along Wilshire Boulevard April 1, 2020. Notice how the columns block all the left-turn lanes. Too bad they didn't have any budget left for a landscaped median; it would have reduced the number of cars hitting the columns. We discovered these dueling websites. One favors such a project and the other has serious reservations on every single detail that the proponent hypes. The pushing the monorail has no more knowledge than you fellow board posters. He basically thinks that you are stupid if you oppose his idea, as he believes he is one of the greatest thinkers of all times. So, read and learn about the pathology and the psychology of monorail proponents. It is interesting and enlightening. Just remember, if you don't like the monorail pitch, there is something wrong with you! Oh, an just to enforce the civility of our esteemed discussion board, TTC will offer all comers a free Pipe, so you can transport yourself back into the Ray Bradbury era where anything is / was possible as long as you dream big! |
|
|
|
Post by Elson on Mar 12, 2007 19:18:31 GMT -8
Where would it go exactly?
Would it be run by the MTA or by a separate entity?
And if so, how would the fares be structured (probably no longer an issue with the TAP system in place)?
|
|
|
|
Post by antonio on Mar 12, 2007 20:07:27 GMT -8
More importantly, how does it tie in with the existing system? Yet another uncesssary transfer, this time at Wilshire/Western. Why hamper ourselves with a third kind of railway technology especially one that is a pipe dream from the 1950's?
|
|
|
|
Post by Elson on Mar 12, 2007 22:34:01 GMT -8
More importantly, how does it tie in with the existing system? Yet another uncesssary transfer, this time at Wilshire/Western. Why hamper ourselves with a third kind of railway technology especially one that is a pipe dream from the 1950's? Exactly. Public officials who tout a monorail or maglev line that bucks the standard of the current transit system is only going for an ego-inflating pet (pork?) project. I'm glad Someone you Know Very Well didn't ask for a "Monorail To The Sea" (doesn't have quite the same ring to it anyway...). Monorails are only good for airports and amusement parks. They are inflexible when it comes to more complex operations, and they aren't as safe as their supporters tout them to be (a friend of mine used to drive the Alweg monorail in Disneyland and he told me horror stories of the rubber tires going out and small fires in the train). |
|
|
|
Post by whitmanlam on Mar 12, 2007 22:51:16 GMT -8
What would a monorail station look like on Wilshire ? A station in the middle of the street with an elevator and stairs going up ? Lovely views for a tourist. But a real visual blight on Wilshire resident s and business owners.
Nice work monorail guy, now we can effectively block out the view of those annoying billboard ads.
|
|
|
|
Post by bobdavis on Mar 13, 2007 10:08:17 GMT -8
As the unofficial spokesperson for the railroad and rail transit industries among friends and co-workers, I have to field questions about "monorails" from time to time. First of all, there are two basic kinds: Suspended (as in Wuppertal, Germany, or the long-gone LA County Fair overhead line) and Monobeam (as in Disneyland and Las Vegas). Some of the drawback of "monobeam" are: Fixed train consists (can't change from one to three or more units like light rail or subway). Can't operate at grade level (think about it) and not practical for subway. Slow and bulky switches (I ask "monorail" advocates to design an equivalent of the Chicago Transit Howard St. interlocker). Because switches are so much more of a complication, very expensive to provide crossovers to bypass a disabled train. Systems are "proprietary" (can't "second source" vehicles or track components; compare with Metro using Kinki-Sharyo, Siemens and Breda cars on same track, or San Francisco Muni using new LRV's and vintage streetcars on same track). Let's leave the "monorails" to the amusement parks (after all, Vegas is an amusement park for grownups) and let real trains serve the real world.
|
|
|
|
Post by James Fujita on Mar 13, 2007 10:25:13 GMT -8
there's only one instance in which I would EVER support a monorail in Los Angeles and it is definately not Wilshire: specifically, if Los Angeles were to turn Terminal Island into another touristic Odaiba. of course, for that to happen, L.A. would have to abandon the highly-profitable port operations (yeah, right); also, I would expect Metro Rail to build at least one light rail line to San Pedro before then (yes, I know, not in the immediate plans). even then, a monorail would be extremely iffy. the Yurikamome upon which this little flight of fancy is based is not a true monorail operation, as Wikipedia points out. and I'd be curious to know if a regular light rail line could be placed on the Vincent Thomas Bridge (our equivalent to the Rainbow Bridge). and there is a regular rail line which serves the Odaiba area. (light rail from Long Beach to San Pedro?) but basically, if some private company wanted to build a futuristic "gee-whiz" tourist shuttle line in an area with no real commuter traffic needs and no high ridership expectations, then I wouldn't object too much. as long as I wasn't paying for it. |
|
|
|
Post by Jason Saunders on Jul 2, 2007 23:23:54 GMT -8
I am not opposed to the idea of extending the Red Line west as an elevated line. Current examples in Los Angeles of successful elevated segments are the Gold Line Chinatown Arial Structure and Green Line El Segundo segment. The stations on these segments are some the most visually stunning and interesting in the entire Los Angeles LRT system.
As many of you know Redline HRT technology is used in Tapai's and Bangkok's partial arial systems and probably quite a few more cities.
I do recognize there would be certain trade offs as outlined in Bart's missive however cost savings by daylighting the Red Line would be significant. It should be an option studied in any future Red Line extension study.
J
|
|
|
|
Post by nickv on Jul 17, 2007 21:41:20 GMT -8
LA Times Opinion - Is the subway the right way? 7/17
One opinion read:
The common sense thing to do is keep Metro Rail consistent and seamless, expand our regional and local transit system, and build CA HSR on steel rails.
If the rest of the existing Metro Rail system is steel wheels on steel rails, Metro might as well make the Wilshire extenstion the same and connect it to the existing Purple Line. As posted by other users, this eliminates the need of a transfer. There's those who worry that the sea level will rise during the next 50 years; would they feel better if the line is elevated as it approaches the coast? I don't mind if parts have to be elevated due to...whatever reason, but connect the line seamlessly with the existing purple line with steel rails. Between the high ridership demand, possible breakdowns, difficult track switches, and the limitation of having an all elevated structure, I think monorail would be too risky for this corridor.
By the way, I was taught (correct me if I'm wrong) that it's safer to be underground during an earthquake.
|
|
