I need to address a couple of issues. First the matter of getting exposure. As I Google “PRT” I find that this acronym stands for more than Personal Rapid Transit, or Personal Rail Transit. I find this blog is nowhere to be found. But then again, did I even say “Personal Rapid Transit” in previous musings? If I say “Personal Rapid Transit” again and again, will it come up in a search? PERSONAL RAPID TRANSIT! PERSONAL RAPID TRANSIT!
Now on to other business. So far I have rejected the notion that “pods” sit on top of a track… Well my opinions go way further than that. So here’s a little something to chew on..
- Cars shouldn’t be just one size. They should be sized and in quantities based on need.
- Cars shouldn’t just carry passengers. They should carry parcels as well.
- Cars shouldn’t just go one way…(on each track) Why not go both ways? It would be handy when backing out of private property, good for third lane options where the third lane flows tward the city in the morning, and away from the city at quitting time.
- I believe that vehicles can go both ways on larger streets. (The “one way” assumption seems to be based on problems making tight turns, spacing of cars, making elevated stations, and other issues connected with cars that ride above the track. I believe that PRT could share stops with buses, on both sides of the street.
- Unlike previous models, I believe cars should be spaced dynamically, based on weight and speed. I do not think this is too complicated for present technology.