Minitram
Minitram was an
Background
During the 1960s a number of influential studies were published on the nature and future of
The reports suggested the only way to offer all of these features would be to use extensive automation. Systems were imagined with driverless vehicles with sizes anywhere from three to 20 passengers, normally travelling at fixed speeds to reduce timing complexity, with stations built "offline" on sidings to allow traffic to bypass intermediate stops. Even with relatively slow cruise speeds, end-to-end trip times would be better than existing mass transit systems, and especially cars.[2]
The publication of the HUD reports, along with considerable development funding by the
Minitram
Out of the ashes of the Cabtrack debacle came Minitram, designed to be technically simpler than Cabtrack, using on-line stations and scheduling and routing much more similar to conventional metro systems. The concept was no longer along the lines of the PRT systems, and was essentially a small
Initial studies by the TRRL demonstrated route capacities greater than Cabtrack, less construction for the same capacity, and better fare box returns.[5] The studies examined vehicles with 14 to 20 passengers running on elevated tracks with 30 second minimum headways, maximum speeds of 55 km/h and average speeds including stops of 40 km/h.[6] Several potential development sites were considered, including London's Docklands area[6] and between Croydon and New Addington.[7]
The most serious study was for a line in Sheffield which connected the city's spread-out shopping areas. A complete report on the route was published in 1974 by Robert Matthew Johnson-Marshall, calling for a total of 2.5 km of double-track forming roughly a U shape with nine stations. Peak capacity with three-car trains was 5,400 passengers per hour, reducing to as little as 180 per hour when running single cars at off-peak times with 5 minute headways.[8] The government also provided some money to British Rail to study a maglev solution along the same routes.[9]
On 22 May 1975 the Minister for Transport cancelled the system. He argued that the system was not ready for deployment, and the cancellation was final. His argument for final cancellation was to allow the city to consider other transportation options.
The only other interest expressed in the Minitram system was by the
References
Citations
- ^ J. Edward Anderson, "Some Lessons from the History of Personal Rapid Transit", 4 August 1996
- ^ J. Edward Anderson, "An Intelligent Transportation Network System", April 2011
- ^ AGT 1975, p. 236.
- ^ AGT 1975, p. 238.
- ^ TRRL 1976, p. 22.
- ^ a b New Scientist 1973, p. 606.
- ^ New Scientist 1976, p. 447.
- ^ AGT 1975, p. 219.
- ^ AGT 1975, p. 218.
- ^ AGT 1975, p. 220.
- ^ David Banister, "Transport and Urban Development", Taylor & Francis, 1995, p. 179
- ^ Daniel Garcia and James Bow, "The Bi-Level Coaches", Transit Toronto, 10 November 2006
- ^ Mike Filey, "Toronto Sketches 5: The Way We Were", Dundurn Press, 1997, p. 39
Bibliography
- (AGT), "Automated Guideway Transit: an assessment of PRT and other new systems", United States Congress, Government Printing House, June 1975, pp. 218-220
- "TRRL laboratory report", Transport and Road Research Laboratory, 1976
- "Poisons, piles and people movers in London's docklands", New Scientist, 15 March 1973, p. 606
- "Minitram almost dead - long live the maxitrain", New Scientist, 26 February 1976, p. 447
- Jack Irving, Harry Bernstein, C. L. Olson and Jon Buyan, "Fundamentals of Personal Rapid Transit", D.C. Heath and Company, 1978, p. 2
Further reading
- "Minitram in Sheffield: A Report of Civil Engineering, Planning and Operational Studies to Examine the Feasibility of Minitram System in the Centre of Sheffield", Robert Matthew, Johnson-Marshall and Partners, 1974