1 Train - 2 trains - red trains - blue trains... Skyway unscrambled and expanded

[thelakelander]

The skyway is a peoplemover.  Its not a suitable mode of transit for long distances.  To stretch into the burbs and other destinations, commuter rail, streetcar and light rail are more cost effective and efficient options.

[stjr]

The skyway is a peoplemover.  Its not a suitable mode of transit for long distances.  To stretch into the burbs and other destinations, commuter rail, streetcar and light rail are more cost effective and efficient options.

I can only roll my eyes at the persistent misconceptions and distortions about the $ky-high-way on these MJ threads, fueled by a love-sick intoxication and blind fascination regarding this oversized toy joy-ride. One must LOL at the selective and twisted "information" thrown out to defend its honor.  Its obvious many posters have a wholesale and overly simplistic misunderstanding of the $ky-high-way's relative features, feasibility, costs, benefits, priorities, value, etc.  The only other explanation is that they work for JTA or one of its $ky-high-way contractors and robotically respond in knee-jerk fashion to any attack upon their beloved boondoggle.  Regardless, it seems nigh impossible to reason with such individuals as its akin to dancing while standing in a quicksand composed of all-too-conveniently invented "facts" or manufactured emotions of enthrallment.

With all the wishful thinking here about it, why don't we just abandon any thought of other mass transit options, rip up all the streets and replace them with the $ky-high-way - the "universal solution" to all our mass transit ills.  Let's run the $ky-high-way to all the corners of town.  Why stop there?  We could find ever more of those mysteriously missing riders if we keep extending it to every corner of the world.  Heck, lets bridge the oceans, and seek out more riders across the nation.  We can then coat the thing in 24 Kt. gold since money is no object.  After that, we can all go into indentured servitude to pay for building and operating the damn thing.  It will all be worth it as we will have found the magic bullet for all our mass transit needs and can sleep happily ever after.

And so goes another fairy tale from fantasy land where dreams come true and reality is tossed to the wind.

Really, no wonder these silly projects get built.  The simple minded thinking of the supposedly better informed haunting these threads doesn't bode well for the rest of the populace.  Thank goodness one can hopefully rely on a power greater than uninformed, misdirected, and thoughtless decision making:  taxpayers ability to indiscriminately revolt against anything that reeks of failure, appears to be a financial sinkhole, and that has no significant constituency due to the few who will ever use it, even in their dreams.  For once, the meek may actually inherit the earth (or, at least, Jax!)

[Ocklawaha]

And one question for Ocklawaha...how fast can those things go?

Would they need to be replaced for longer distances?

I only ever see them going like 20mph and that isn't going to cut it for longer distances...

Ennis is correct that it isn't designed to be longer distance transport. While it has been proved to 50 MPH in a test run, it would have a lot of hunt motion, buff and draft forces, creating a sickening gallop. It is strictly a 1-3 mile per extension type of moving sidewalk.

Also the comment about "Then we would have rail", uh, no, it's not rail at all, it's a monorail and in fact each car rides on 19 tires, including two huge semi-truck type tires. This thing cannot compete head to head with steel wheel on steel rail technology, except in it's limited urbanized enviroment.

OCKLAWAHA

[Ocklawaha]

Seattle, where Monorail - Streetcar - LRT - BRT - Commuter Rail and Bus all converge for seamless mobility

I can only roll my eyes at the persistent misconceptions and distortions about the $ky-high-way on these MJ threads, fueled by a love-sick intoxication and blind fascination regarding this oversized toy joy-ride. One must LOL at the selective and twisted "information" thrown out to defend its honor.  Its obvious many posters have a wholesale and overly simplistic misunderstanding of the $ky-high-way's relative features, feasibility, costs, benefits, priorities, value, etc.  The only other explanation is that they work for JTA or one of its $ky-high-way contractors and robotically respond in knee-jerk fashion to any attack upon their beloved boondoggle.  Regardless, it seems nigh impossible to reason with such individuals as its akin to dancing while standing in a quicksand composed of all-too-conveniently invented "facts" or manufactured emotions of enthrallment.

stjr, this post seems beneath you. I was under the mistaken impression that you wanted a civil dialog. In one paragraph you have accused us of distortions, twisting facts, blind fascination, simplistic misunderstanding, and loving a boondoggle.

Since you are obviously the expert in this field, how about going through that list of accusations and tell us how we did each one. For example which of us works for JTA? (I'm sorry, that was just one more thing we were accused of) What facts did we twist and how? What have we distorted? etc.

With all the wishful thinking here about it, why don't we just abandon any thought of other mass transit options, rip up all the streets and replace them with the $ky-high-way - the "universal solution" to all our mass transit ills.  Let's run the $ky-high-way to all the corners of town.  Why stop there?  We could find ever more of those mysteriously missing riders if we keep extending it to every corner of the world.  Heck, lets bridge the oceans, and seek out more riders across the nation.  We can then coat the thing in 24 Kt. gold since money is no object.  After that, we can all go into indentured servitude to pay for building and operating the damn thing.  It will all be worth it as we will have found the magic bullet for all our mass transit needs and can sleep happily ever after.

Uh? stjr, who said this was universal transit? Who said this would mean abandonment of other transit? When did we say it would cure all the transit ills?

And so goes another fairy tale from fantasy land where dreams come true and reality is tossed to the wind.

If we live in fantasy land, then please grace us with your profession so when properly addressed we may yield to the expert.

Really, no wonder these silly projects get built.  The simple minded thinking of the supposedly better informed haunting these threads doesn't bode well for the rest of the populace.  Thank goodness one can hopefully rely on a power greater than uninformed, misdirected, and thoughtless decision making:  taxpayers ability to indiscriminately revolt against anything that reeks of failure, appears to be a financial sinkhole, and that has no significant constituency due to the few who will ever use it, even in their dreams.  For once, the meek may actually inherit the earth (or, at least, Jax!)

Why is it I get the feeling that you wouldn't know a "Butterfly door" from an "Anti-climber", or a "Bear trap" from a "juice jack." Somewhere along the line you made a decision not to discuss or consider any other view at at that point your mind must have snapped shut like a steel trap. It's really sad because for awhile I thought you were serious and we were having an open discussion of ideas, facts and figures.    

OCKLAWAHA

[BridgeTroll]

stjr... To use your very own words...

I can only roll my eyes at the persistent misconceptions and distortions

...that you attribute to others.  You have consistantly and without justification misrepresented the positions of anybody who offer a differing opinion than your own.  We get it stjr... you hate the skyway in all forms and want it dismantled or better yet imploded with dynamite in a made for TV event... we get it.  Your position however is a wishful fantasy and not grounded in reality...

[ChriswUfGator]

The skyway is a peoplemover.  Its not a suitable mode of transit for long distances.  To stretch into the burbs and other destinations, commuter rail, streetcar and light rail are more cost effective and efficient options.

Tell that to New York or Chicago...they both have useful elevated railways systems that serve the whole metro area.

And in any event a ground-based rail system won't fly, since it's very difficult and very expensive to exercise eminent domain powers now, and the room simply doesn't exist in the areas that most need to be served.

[thelakelander]

Elevation has nothing to do with the technology.  The systems you mentioned are heavy rail systems.  The skyway is not.  Take a look at the images below.  The visual difference in the technology should stand out.

Jacksonville Skyway


Chicago EL

http://quyhac.blogspot.com/2007/04/mode-of-transport-metro.html

As far as being elevated or not, and paying for ROW, streetcars/light rail can run in existing public ROW.  ROW agreements would have to worked out to use existing rail for commuter rail, but its common practice.  All of these options would be more cost effective than purchasing ROW for elevated support columns and constructing elevated infrastructure all over town.

[Ocklawaha]

This is the Sydney Australia Monorail System, is longer, faster and higher capacity, yet look at that track - One look at his photo, then at our own Skyway, and most should see where our costs skyrocketed.

The skyway is a peoplemover.  Its not a suitable mode of transit for long distances.  To stretch into the burbs and other destinations, commuter rail, streetcar and light rail are more cost effective and efficient options.

Tell that to New York or Chicago...they both have useful elevated railways systems that serve the whole metro area.

ChriswUfGator, Great input BTW, Ennis has it right that the Skyway not unlike Morgantown WVA, Los Colinas, Detroit or Miami Metro-Mover, is more of a horizontal elevator then a rapid transit system. As a transportation consultant I can assure you that a diverse mix of transit types, even if relatively small in route miles, sells. The public loves choice and it is possible to form that matrix with dedicated effort, and federal money. This is a "secret" that the deep South/Florida just hasn't caught onto yet.

And in any event a ground-based rail system won't fly, since it's very difficult and very expensive to exercise eminent domain powers now, and the room simply doesn't exist in the areas that most need to be served.

Ground based rail is less money per mile to construct then a highway, and has 3x the capacity for for moving people, per direction, per hour. As for service areas, commuter rail can  run with Amtrak and CSX on the same tracks. We have more miles of track within Jacksonville then most of the rest of the state. Track and right-of-way are the least of our worries in building a great transit system. Where track is missing (to the beaches for example) we have high power lines that form a natural corridor for transit, when this is mixed with in street, on median, alongside railroad, curbside, abandoned railroad, elevated, subway rail (depending on the need for any given neighborhood), we come out as very attractive for transit success.

At least JTA seems to be listening and one might say the backfield is in motion!

OCKLAWAHA

[ChriswUfGator]

Elevation has nothing to do with the technology.  The systems you mentioned are heavy rail systems.  The skyway is not.  Take a look at the images below.  The visual difference in the technology should stand out.

Jacksonville Skyway


Chicago EL

http://quyhac.blogspot.com/2007/04/mode-of-transport-metro.html

As far as being elevated or not, and paying for ROW, streetcars/light rail can run in existing public ROW.  ROW agreements would have to worked out to use existing rail for commuter rail, but its common practice.  All of these options would be more cost effective than purchasing ROW for elevated support columns and constructing elevated infrastructure all over town.

I respectfully disagree with your assessment...

Seattle's elevated monorail, a very similar setup to Jacksonville's as far as the tracks go, does 50mph. That's a useable speed for long-distance transport.

You could do the same around here, using the existing tracks with upgraded trains. I don't think it's anywhere near as big a deal as you're making out, you could simply build longer trains with higher speed capabilities. The tracks themselves are already double-tracks made from solid poured concrete, they'll certainly handle the stress with no problems. The track portion of the system, as Ock noted in his own post, is way overbuilt to begin with.

And I still think an EL is the way to go, since the areas that need to be served most around here don't have room for traditional tracks. Although Ock has a great idea about lines under the power towers, using the land already cleared. That's smart. But in urban areas like RS, SM, etc., an EL is the way to go.

[thelakelander]

You're totally missing the point made about the different in mode technology.  In transit, one mode does not fit all.  Heavy, commuter, light, streetcar and the skyway all have their pros and cons.  When you properly evaluate the pros and cons for the corridor you intend to serve, modes change based on their effectiveness.  This is why Seattle has developed streetcar, commuter rail and light rail (should open later this year) lines, instead of expanding their monorail.

[thelakelander]

I respectfully disagree with your assessment...

Seattle's elevated monorail, a very similar setup to Jacksonville's as far as the tracks go, does 50mph. That's a useable speed for long-distance transport.

You could do the same around here, using the existing tracks with upgraded trains.

I don't think it's anywhere near as big a deal as you're making out, you could simply build longer trains with higher speed capabilities. The tracks themselves are already double-tracks made from solid poured concrete, they'll certainly handle the stress with no problems. The track portion of the system, as Ock noted in his own post, is way overbuilt to begin with.

The skyway does not have tracks.  It has rubber tires that run on concrete beams.  Anything outside of downtown would require purchasing ROW (even if its elevated) and the capital costs would be insane.  However, if we're taking about expanding rail into Clay or St. Johns Counties, there are existing railroad tracks already in place.  This would be a cheaper option to stretch mass transit service into the burbs.  Even if the skyway had not been overbuilt, it would still cost three times as much as no-frills commuter rail and streetcar systems.

And I still think an EL is the way to go, since the areas that need to be served most around here don't have room for traditional tracks. Although Ock has a great idea about lines under the power towers, using the land already cleared. That's smart. But in urban areas like RS, SM, etc., an EL is the way to go.

Chicago's EL does not stretch into most of Chicagoland.  The Metra commuter rail system does that.  NYC also has commuter rail, like NJ Transit and Metro-North, in its suburbs that feed riders into the city.

Extending the Skyway into Riverside would be a disaster for the historic district and mass transit proponents.  If we want to sink the idea of expanding mass transit in Jacksonville, taking the Skyway into the heart of historic districts would be the way to go.  However, a streetcar line linking core neighborhoods with DT, would be historically accurate, more visually appealing, cheaper to construct and maintain annually.  Since streetcars can run in streets, there is also no need to purchase ROW for new transit corridors.

With that said, as more and more rail corridors come online, there is a good chance that portions of them will have to be elevated in heavily congested areas.  However, we're a few decades away from that happening.

[ChriswUfGator]

I respectfully disagree with your assessment...

Seattle's elevated monorail, a very similar setup to Jacksonville's as far as the tracks go, does 50mph. That's a useable speed for long-distance transport.

You could do the same around here, using the existing tracks with upgraded trains.

I don't think it's anywhere near as big a deal as you're making out, you could simply build longer trains with higher speed capabilities. The tracks themselves are already double-tracks made from solid poured concrete, they'll certainly handle the stress with no problems. The track portion of the system, as Ock noted in his own post, is way overbuilt to begin with.

The skyway does not have tracks.  It has rubber tires that run on concrete beams.  Anything outside of downtown would require purchasing ROW (even if its elevated) and the capital costs would be insane.  However, if we're taking about expanding rail into Clay or St. Johns Counties, there are existing railroad tracks already in place.  This would be a cheaper option to stretch mass transit service into the burbs.  Even if the skyway had not been overbuilt, it would still cost three times as much as no-frills commuter rail and streetcar systems.

And I still think an EL is the way to go, since the areas that need to be served most around here don't have room for traditional tracks. Although Ock has a great idea about lines under the power towers, using the land already cleared. That's smart. But in urban areas like RS, SM, etc., an EL is the way to go.

Chicago's EL does not stretch into most of Chicagoland.  The Metra commuter rail system does that.  NYC also has commuter rail, like NJ Transit and Metro-North, in its suburbs that feed riders into the city.

Extending the Skyway into Riverside would be a disaster for the historic district and mass transit proponents.  If we want to sink the idea of expanding mass transit in Jacksonville, taking the Skyway into the heart of historic districts would be the way to go.  However, a streetcar line linking core neighborhoods with DT, would be historically accurate, more visually appealing, cheaper to construct and maintain annually.  Since streetcars can run in streets, there is also no need to purchase ROW for new transit corridors.

With that said, as more and more rail corridors come online, there is a good chance that portions of them will have to be elevated in heavily congested areas.  However, we're a few decades away from that happening.

1: The cost of buying air rights or the small strip of property necessary to build an elevated railway is nowhere NEAR the cost of razing the 100ft wide swath you'd need for a traditional multi-track railway. It would be NOWHERE CLOSE.

2: Like every other elevated railway, except for Disney and Jacksonville (LOL!) Chicago's is part of a larger rail system. In areas where land is easier to obtain, it runs on the ground. Where land is scarce, it's elevated to minimize it's footprint. That's the whole point. I see no reason why we couldn't design a dual-purpose train that can run on an elevated as well as ground tracks. Trains can go uphill you know...

3: I know what the current trains are, and that's why I've already said we need new ones. You could easily mount steel rails to the existing elevated cement rail lines, at a minimal cost. The main cost is pouring all that concrete. Re-design the trains, and add tracks if you want. That prolly wouldn't be that expensive.

4: The whole point of this thread is asking for opinions on what would make the skyway viable. I gave my opinion. Nothing I have said is at all impossible. It's all perfectly feasible, and already exists exactly as I'm describing it in other cities, as I've pointed out and given examples, like Seattle.

5: I got your point, I just disagreed with it. That doesn't mean I don't understand it.

[stjr]

I can only roll my eyes at the persistent misconceptions and distortions about the $ky-high-way on these MJ threads, fueled by a love-sick intoxication and blind fascination regarding this oversized toy joy-ride. One must LOL at the selective and twisted "information" thrown out to defend its honor.  Its obvious many posters have a wholesale and overly simplistic misunderstanding of the $ky-high-way's relative features, feasibility, costs, benefits, priorities, value, etc.  The only other explanation is that they work for JTA or one of its $ky-high-way contractors and robotically respond in knee-jerk fashion to any attack upon their beloved boondoggle.  Regardless, it seems nigh impossible to reason with such individuals as its akin to dancing while standing in a quicksand composed of all-too-conveniently invented "facts" or manufactured emotions of enthrallment.

stjr, this post seems beneath you. I was under the mistaken impression that you wanted a civil dialog. In one paragraph you have accused us of distortions, twisting facts, blind fascination, simplistic misunderstanding, and loving a boondoggle.

Ock, you are being way too serious and defensive here.  Please don't confuse my edge with a personal attack on you or any other person.  If you note, I said "many posters", not all.  And, I didn't name names.  This is pointed at the "many posters" on these threads who persistently advocate an UNqualified expansion to any area of town they so desire while consistently disregarding the  $ky-high-way's sordid performance history, limited capabilities and applicabilities, questionable costs vs. benefits, better alternatives, and overall lack of feasibility.  I and others, including you and Lake, regularly posts supplementary info about these issues yet some people continue to blindly march on without taking much, if any, of it into account.  Just go back and re-read the numerous threads and you can't miss this.  I see nothing here that should detract from your personal position which I take to be a QUALIFIED expansion.

Since you are obviously the expert in this field, how about going through that list of accusations and tell us how we did each one. For example which of us works for JTA? (I'm sorry, that was just one more thing we were accused of) What facts did we twist and how? What have we distorted? etc.[/color][/b]

Ock, I never declared myself an expert but if you wish to confer that title upon me I would be so honored!    I will give myself credit for trying to bring to bear a dose of common sense and a desire to advocate for the long-term good for our entire community - elements which are often lacking in addressing community issues.  I won't deny that others, given the same attributes, may come to differing conclusions - and that's OK by me.

To me, these threads are mostly opinions peppered with an occasional tidbit of factual information.  If expertise in every subject commented on is required, then MJ would shrivel and die.  I feel my opinion is no better or worse than any other, it's just my opinion.  You and anyone else are entitled to disagree.  Life is too short to get one's back up over any post on this or any other internet forum unless it's a personal attack on someone (not to be confused with a strident disagreement with public personas).

I never said a given poster worked for JTA, I just speculated this could be a motivation for someone to stake a pro position.  I will say, knowing JTA's history, I wouldn't be surprised if one of their employees or contractors wasn't present here posting the company line.  I can't say for sure but neither can you.

With all the wishful thinking here about it, why don't we just abandon any thought of other mass transit options, rip up all the streets and replace them with the $ky-high-way - the "universal solution" to all our mass transit ills.  Let's run the $ky-high-way to all the corners of town.  Why stop there?  We could find ever more of those mysteriously missing riders if we keep extending it to every corner of the world.  Heck, lets bridge the oceans, and seek out more riders across the nation.  We can then coat the thing in 24 Kt. gold since money is no object.  After that, we can all go into indentured servitude to pay for building and operating the damn thing.  It will all be worth it as we will have found the magic bullet for all our mass transit needs and can sleep happily ever after.

Uh? stjr, who said this was universal transit? Who said this would mean abandonment of other transit? When did we say it would cure all the transit ills?

And so goes another fairy tale from fantasy land where dreams come true and reality is tossed to the wind.

If we live in fantasy land, then please grace us with your profession so when properly addressed we may yield to the expert.

Ock, this is sarcasm.  Would it help if I labeled it as such?  I merely took to the extreme the UNqualified expansion pistons.  Sorry you missed out on it even though I self-described it as fairy tale.

Really, no wonder these silly projects get built.  The simple minded thinking of the supposedly better informed haunting these threads doesn't bode well for the rest of the populace.  Thank goodness one can hopefully rely on a power greater than uninformed, misdirected, and thoughtless decision making:  taxpayers ability to indiscriminately revolt against anything that reeks of failure, appears to be a financial sinkhole, and that has no significant constituency due to the few who will ever use it, even in their dreams.  For once, the meek may actually inherit the earth (or, at least, Jax!)

Why is it I get the feeling that you wouldn't know a "Butterfly door" from an "Anti-climber", or a "Bear trap" from a "juice jack." Somewhere along the line you made a decision not to discuss or consider any other view at at that point your mind must have snapped shut like a steel trap. It's really sad because for awhile I thought you were serious and we were having an open discussion of ideas, facts and figures.   

OCKLAWAHA

More sarcasm on my part.  As to accepting other views, I would say I am no more strident in my opinion than you or many others are in theirs.  Where is it written that we MUST convince one another to change our views.  I respect the views of you, Lake, and others who are informed and reasonable, but that doesn't require me to agree with you.  Nor, obviously, you with I.

To summarize, I actually think we have an overlap, if I get your drift properly.  We seem to be agreeing that other mass transit priorities are needed to make a properly functioning mass transit system for Jax.  Where I believe we differ, is that I don't support ANY expansion of the $ky-high-way for any reason and I am looking for its gradual phase out as other, better alternatives are implemented to supplant it.  You seem to view these other alternatives, not as replacements for the $ky-high-way, but adjuncts to it and its expansion.  We also appear to disagree as to the impact of an expansion of the $ky-high-way as to the funding and timing of other mass transit projects.  I feel it will lead to more deferrals, you don't.  So be it.  We agree to disagree.  Each of us will, I am sure, continue the advocacy of our positions.  That's also OK by me.

Now...let's get ready to ruuuummmble again!

[stjr]

stjr... To use your very own words...

I can only roll my eyes at the persistent misconceptions and distortions

...that you attribute to others.  You have consistantly and without justification misrepresented the positions of anybody who offer a differing opinion than your own.  We get it stjr... you hate the skyway in all forms and want it dismantled or better yet imploded with dynamite in a made for TV event... we get it.  Your position however is a wishful fantasy and not grounded in reality...

Bridge, please show me a position that I "consistently and without justification" misrepresented or distorted.  Are you sure you aren't guilty of this yourself by making this accusation of me?

You are correct, I would love to take you up on your suggestion for the TV event.  Is it a crime to want to see the $ky-high-way dismantled?  I think my reasons for this have been made clear.  Is this any more a fantasy than that of many to expand it to the far corners of town?  Just reread the many threads on the $ky-high-way to see the multitude of "pro-expansion" fantasies.  Is my "fantasy" somehow less valid because it's not yours?  Just wondering....

[Ocklawaha]

1909 - Brennan Monorail
Louis Brennan patented his invention for a gyroscopically-balanced car in 1903. A full scale demonstration was presented to the press on November 10, 1909 at Gillingham, England. It was built primarily as a military vehicle due to the high speed at which track could be laid. Even with passengers all on one side of the vehicle, the two onboard gyroscopes were strong enough to keep the car level. Despite a series of successful demonstrations to scientists, engineers and military officers, the fear that the gyroscopes might fail prevented Brennan's invention from ever being used for transportation.

1: The cost of buying air rights or the small strip of property necessary to build an elevated railway is nowhere NEAR the cost of razing the 100ft wide swath you'd need for a traditional multi-track railway. It would be NOWHERE CLOSE.

There is nothing to buy for Light Rail, Streetcar or Skyway expansion, the rights-of-ways are already owned by the city.

2: Like every other elevated railway, except for Disney and Jacksonville (LOL!) Chicago's is part of a larger rail system. In areas where land is easier to obtain, it runs on the ground. Where land is scarce, it's elevated to minimize it's footprint. That's the whole point. I see no reason why we couldn't design a dual-purpose train that can run on an elevated as well as ground tracks. Trains can go uphill you know...

The Magnesium Monorail: 1924
Probably the last Lartigue monorail was built in the Mojave Desert, USA, by the Sierra Salt Corporation in California. It carried magnesium salts from their mine in the Crystal Hills to the railhead at Trona, across difficult terrain in the Salinas Valley. (Inyo County) The line was successful but only lasted 2 years before modern developments in magnesium extraction put the mine out of business.


There would be no need to reinvent the wheel here. Most any off the shelf train equipment could climb a grade onto an elevated structure, but the costs become astronomical. Rather than some hi-tech modern transit cure-all, the monorail concept â€" as William D. Middleton's Metropolitan Railways: Rapid Transit in America reveals â€" predates electric street railways, the predecessor of light rail, by at least ten years. The fact that streetcars, light rail, interurbans, and other conventional forms of dual-rail urban transit (subways, elevated, etc.) proliferated everywhere in the world beginning in the late nineteenth century to the present day, while monorail systems remain few and far between, says a great deal about the relative versatility, suitability, reliability, and cost-effectiveness of traditional dual steel-rail technology.

3: I know what the current trains are, and that's why I've already said we need new ones. You could easily mount steel rails to the existing elevated cement rail lines, at a minimal cost. The main cost is pouring all that concrete. Redesign the trains, and add tracks if you want. That prolly wouldn't be that expensive.

History has shown that Monorail can't really compete with steel wheel on steel rail at grade. If Monorail could compete in costs, speeds, capacity, we would have built a nation wide Monorail system rather then a steel wheel/rail system. Why?

This is the reason we need to complete the Skyway to logical end points using a rather simple formula. Locate the dense residential, office, factory's, employers, restaurants, entertainment places and lay out the Skyway extensions so that each leg has some of each of those elements. People travel for a different experience then the one they are experiencing at the present moment in the space time continuum. A teen might travel from Condo to Candy Shop to School each day. But that same teen is not highly likely to go from School to School, Office to Office, etc...


1876 - Philadelphia Centennial
General Le-Roy Stone's steam driven monorail was first demonstrated at the United States Centennial Exposition in 1876. The ornately designed double-decker vehicle had two main wheels, the rear one driven by a rotary steam engine.

4: The whole point of this thread is asking for opinions on what would make the skyway viable. I gave my opinion. Nothing I have said is at all impossible. It's all perfectly feasible, and already exists exactly as I'm describing it in other cities, as I've pointed out and given examples, like Seattle.

Actually the whole point of this thread is to see where we can get, NAME, ADDRESS, TYPE OF BUSINESS, VENUE, RESIDENCE. Only then can we at MJ offer to help JTA plan short logical extensions of the Skyway that would convert it from running from a Garage to a Bus Stop, into a real destination grabber. Name a building, help build a list, let's pool our knowledge... I think we got hijacked!

In order to enhance our opportunity to regain the "GATEWAY CITY" status we had for so long, we cannot afford NOT to expand the Skyway, build streetcars, and add bus routes, fareless entry and transfers to distribute those Amtrak riders to locations throughout downtown. 

5: I got your point, I just disagreed with it. That doesn't mean I don't understand it.

No problem man. Elevated rail and subways are the most expensive types of railroad construction. Likewise JTA's original BRT-Quickway designs we're even more expensive then elevated or subway rail, and when all was said and done, all we would have to show for it was a few more miles of highways, and a handful of new buses. Not exactly the stuff dreams are made of.

OCKLAWAHA