Conventional Rail Vs. 'Gadgetbahnen'

Do "innovative" transportation solutions and personal rapid transit offer greater utility than conventional steel wheel and rail technology?

1 minute read

November 25, 2002, 10:00 AM PST

By Chris Steins @planetizen

Writing in a PLANetizen editorial, authors Michael D. Setty and Leroy W. Demery, Jr. evaluate whether "innovative" transportation solutions such as MAGLEV monorail and personal rapid transit offer greater utility than conventional steel wheel and rail technology? Or are they simply clunky and expensive alternatives? "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 economicnot technicalin nature. For example, a severe limitation of maglev is the very high cost of introducing entirely new infrastructure into urban areas, versus the relatively low cost of upgrading existing rail lines."

Thanks to Chris Steins

FULL STORY: Conventional Rail vs. 'Gadgetbahnen'

Monday, November 25, 2002 in Planetizen

Transportation United States

I love the variety of courses, many practical, and all richly illustrated. They have inspired many ideas that I've applied in practice, and in my own teaching. Mary G., Urban Planner

I love the variety of courses, many practical, and all richly illustrated. They have inspired many ideas that I've applied in practice, and in my own teaching.

Mary G., Urban Planner

Get top-rated, practical training

Start Learning

Advertise with us

Urban Design for Planners 1: Software Tools

This six-course series explores essential urban design concepts using open source software and equips planners with the tools they need to participate fully in the urban design process.