I attended the 11am group today to pay visit to the ULTra station. My camera's the good-old Canon EOS film model, so no pics online from me. Yet.
They are beautiful, the vehicles. Absolutely gorgeous, and they seem instantly to have a character to themselves. Sneaked the first sight through a door opening to their 'stables' and it made me feel to say something. To them. The feeling is gracious, and even more so when seeing them in action. They are whisper-silent (unlike the WRROOOOMING planes above us).
In my opinion, ATS has gone a good job on the vehicles. They are iconic, and I imagine driving them will be pure pleasure. Most likely people would like the journey to go on longer than the short trip from parking to T5.
We took some pictures, sat inside the vehicle for a while. Saw a video and moved on.
The only negative thing that I noticed is entering them. You enter from the side doors (there are doors on both sides, but I doubt that would be needed; 2GetThere vehciles are only having doors on one side) and while entering, it is difficult to see inside the vehicle, to make sure it's actually empty.
I bet most city-people have grown to doing that kind of check-my-back, at least in public transport. At least I instinctively check the people within a subway carriage for potential hazards (though they've never happened to me). I want to enter the vehicle seeing it all, and select my seating so that I can observe others. I don't want to have someone messy right behind my back.
Surely ULTra has cleared this (the phenomen even got a name in Dr. Paul Firmin's presentation later today; 'podlurking') but still it's important to feel confident about such new vehicles. If the doors opened more, or maybe with better lighting one can give a better view of the empty cabin for passangers about to enter.
As to Dr.Firmin, the presentation was a Thrill and would have deserved to be taped for Youtube. It was a nice mix of mad scientist, objective evaluation and nail-on criticism of the PRT concept, or implementations, or both. Nothing new, really, but rather stating the known hazards to be considered in implementations that are to-be. Social things, s.a. visual intrusion, possible criminal use of the pod network, etc. etc. (sorry Paul E. I don't remember them all).
Dr.Firmin had made a Google search on "PRT" and "social study" (or something) and said he'd only found the paper he'd prepared for this meeting! (Not sure if this is true; anyways he'd probably be delighted to get such studies for comparison so mention here if you know of any?).
The rest of the people are cruising river Thames. I'm at the hotel and intend to start making a JavaScript-based PRT simulator.
One more thing.
I saw through the Vectus presentation again just now, and truly, what's wrong with us PRT people? The concepts we're drawing are not believable. They don't convey a truthful and working image.
Please see through the video once now.
- Why only one vehicle? the tracks are clearly underutilized
- Too clean. Add dirt. Makes the video more believable (video games suffered from this a while back, but No More)
- Why does the camera dive into the vehicle over and over? I feel like crushing into it.
- Dark mask like Darth Vader's. Use some dummies inside.
- Narration: "..that turns a train into reality." I thought trains _were_ a reality?
- "Brave new world". Gosh. I'm sure the people hadn't read the book, since it's not really a world one would like to be in. At the least this gives mixed signals to people who've read it.
- 1. Vectus style. Don't start with design. That just needs to be there, but it's NOT a selling criteria. Like quality either. Both are expected, so keep shut. People will either realize your design is good, but saying it is is irrelevant.
I could go on and one and on. In my understanding, this kind of concept art only keeps PRTs further away from being reality in people's minds. One more thing I want to say about the video, though:
- At one point, there's a lot of cars in traffic jam and two lone Vectus pods supposedly providing a better service? Really? :) Don't they realize the mixed signal of this: if 6 lanes of cars can't take the people through, how could 2 pods. An easy fix would be simply to FILL THE TRACK with more pods. Make Things Realistic.
- "Aerodynamic Designed Vehicle". Really. That's not your selling argument, and actually you're not even aerodynamic (have a look at Porche and compare). So keep quiet about it.
- Use better background music. And remember: you're not selling to car shoppers, you're selling to architects and city planners. What convinces them of the benefits? Use numbers. Use sample cases. Be real. Please stop marketing Utopia.
If you're from Vectus, have a look at this:
13 Killer Differentiators: Strategies to Grow your Brand
Wednesday, April 22, 2009
Getting out of the airports
Today's conference focus will be on the role of PRT as a general trafficing alternative.
Will grab some breakfast now, and head for the sessions.
By the way. One thing which has surprised me positively is the overall analytical approach to traffic and PRTs. In many presentations (at least Frost & Sullivan and 2GetThere), it has been emphasized that PRT's are promising in certain areas but they are no one-does-it-all solution that will transform all traffic on Earth.
I absolute agree. It is about a (rather simple, actually) complementary service to existing modes of traffic. It will change the world, but so have the modes that came before it.
Pioneer Martin Lowson (the man behind the ULTra) had a very enlightening slide on this, showing the following traffic modes on a timeline (as to when their construction in UK had occurred):
- water channels (ca. 1700)
- railroads (1800's)
- regular car-ready roads (early 1900's to 1960's, most of them)
- motorways (peaks in 1960-1980 I think)
The timeline shows a clear pattern, and he had even placed the inventions leading to the next wave on the timeline. They seemed to be at the peaks of the earlier modes. Like steam engine was invented at the peak of the channel building.
His point was that we _already_ have the next mode of traffic invented (whatever that is). And that the usage of that mode won't go well together with the earlier mode (motorways). It will get a wave of its own, and transform the society just like the earlier waves have done.
I will ask Martin for that slide. It really tells it far better than I tried here. :)
Will grab some breakfast now, and head for the sessions.
By the way. One thing which has surprised me positively is the overall analytical approach to traffic and PRTs. In many presentations (at least Frost & Sullivan and 2GetThere), it has been emphasized that PRT's are promising in certain areas but they are no one-does-it-all solution that will transform all traffic on Earth.
I absolute agree. It is about a (rather simple, actually) complementary service to existing modes of traffic. It will change the world, but so have the modes that came before it.
Pioneer Martin Lowson (the man behind the ULTra) had a very enlightening slide on this, showing the following traffic modes on a timeline (as to when their construction in UK had occurred):
- water channels (ca. 1700)
- railroads (1800's)
- regular car-ready roads (early 1900's to 1960's, most of them)
- motorways (peaks in 1960-1980 I think)
The timeline shows a clear pattern, and he had even placed the inventions leading to the next wave on the timeline. They seemed to be at the peaks of the earlier modes. Like steam engine was invented at the peak of the channel building.
His point was that we _already_ have the next mode of traffic invented (whatever that is). And that the usage of that mode won't go well together with the earlier mode (motorways). It will get a wave of its own, and transform the society just like the earlier waves have done.
I will ask Martin for that slide. It really tells it far better than I tried here. :)
Intensive care
Now, that was an intensive day!
10am to 10pm, with a short break after the official sessions.
It feels daunting to make a fair summary of all the day's speeches and presentations. Let me phrase out what stayed topmost in my mind.
ULTra was presented in fair detail, and it seems like a wonderful system, indeed (special cleaning vehicles are used for shoveling snow if needed; an issue that always made me wonder on their design). However, the track still looks heavy and the "safety fences" are told to remain there even after construction is done. Not a delight.
Frost & Sullivan had a commercial look into the PRT business. That was interesting. They're estimating it to start booming around 2016-2020, with essential growth already in 2012 (estimated at 30 000 M$ year if I remember right). They split potential customers to various categories, biggest of which were airports, eco cities and tourist destinations (I may be a bit vague on the details here).
Vectus was presented as a "step down from regular rail". At least that was the feeling I received, and the presenter himself had worked in regular rail construction before coming to PRTs. I'm sure there's a market area for it, too, like feeding real train or subway lines. However, I fail to see why I would ride such a 4 person vehicle all by myself. For some reason it feels much bigger than the other two.
Dutch 2GetThere (Robbert Lohmann) presented their Masdar case, which seems far further than I guess most of us expected. It will be (should be) ready by the end of this year! (only one part of the track, but still)
This was the day's last presentation, and I'm sure I wasn't the only one weary at its start. But it was the most energizing one. One could notice the silence and concentration of the audience. Before that, there had been ample presentations of Heathrow, ULTra and one on Vectus. But now, it felt different. These people are all over the work itself, not doing prestudies or safety surveys.
Some details:
- By its look and measures 2GetThere's Masdar vehicle resembles ULTra
- Designed by Italian car designer (because the customer wanted so)
- Traffic in original ground level; the whole city will be elevated one story up leaving original ground level as "basement". Pedestrian level is above it and no unauthorized access to the basement level is allowed.
- 3-4 lanes wide system, with sniffer modules in the road and "leaking cable" communication from above the vehicles
- 3rd and 4th lane are used for speeding up/slowing down traffic
- rubber tires on concrete (or similar) floor
- li-ion batteries worth 60-70km (recharge in 1h)
- speed 40km/h
The use of a full "level" of transportation allowing for the wide lanes makes this a completely different kind of case as a PRT that would be confined to poles or tunnels. The authorities will use special "emergency mode" to clear the road of pods if needed and the system would be seen to carry as well freight (about 20% of vehicles) as passangers. A curiosity is having two levels of pods; regular and "vip", which would be having more expensive finishing and equipment.
The track layout has no crossings, only loops, and will eventually cover 40-50km and have 50-100 vehicles.
Freight vehicles are based on the same parts as the passanger ones; only tougher. They can carry 2 containers each 800kg in weight.
10am to 10pm, with a short break after the official sessions.
It feels daunting to make a fair summary of all the day's speeches and presentations. Let me phrase out what stayed topmost in my mind.
ULTra was presented in fair detail, and it seems like a wonderful system, indeed (special cleaning vehicles are used for shoveling snow if needed; an issue that always made me wonder on their design). However, the track still looks heavy and the "safety fences" are told to remain there even after construction is done. Not a delight.
Frost & Sullivan had a commercial look into the PRT business. That was interesting. They're estimating it to start booming around 2016-2020, with essential growth already in 2012 (estimated at 30 000 M$ year if I remember right). They split potential customers to various categories, biggest of which were airports, eco cities and tourist destinations (I may be a bit vague on the details here).
Vectus was presented as a "step down from regular rail". At least that was the feeling I received, and the presenter himself had worked in regular rail construction before coming to PRTs. I'm sure there's a market area for it, too, like feeding real train or subway lines. However, I fail to see why I would ride such a 4 person vehicle all by myself. For some reason it feels much bigger than the other two.
Dutch 2GetThere (Robbert Lohmann) presented their Masdar case, which seems far further than I guess most of us expected. It will be (should be) ready by the end of this year! (only one part of the track, but still)
This was the day's last presentation, and I'm sure I wasn't the only one weary at its start. But it was the most energizing one. One could notice the silence and concentration of the audience. Before that, there had been ample presentations of Heathrow, ULTra and one on Vectus. But now, it felt different. These people are all over the work itself, not doing prestudies or safety surveys.
Some details:
- By its look and measures 2GetThere's Masdar vehicle resembles ULTra
- Designed by Italian car designer (because the customer wanted so)
- Traffic in original ground level; the whole city will be elevated one story up leaving original ground level as "basement". Pedestrian level is above it and no unauthorized access to the basement level is allowed.
- 3-4 lanes wide system, with sniffer modules in the road and "leaking cable" communication from above the vehicles
- 3rd and 4th lane are used for speeding up/slowing down traffic
- rubber tires on concrete (or similar) floor
- li-ion batteries worth 60-70km (recharge in 1h)
- speed 40km/h
The use of a full "level" of transportation allowing for the wide lanes makes this a completely different kind of case as a PRT that would be confined to poles or tunnels. The authorities will use special "emergency mode" to clear the road of pods if needed and the system would be seen to carry as well freight (about 20% of vehicles) as passangers. A curiosity is having two levels of pods; regular and "vip", which would be having more expensive finishing and equipment.
The track layout has no crossings, only loops, and will eventually cover 40-50km and have 50-100 vehicles.
Freight vehicles are based on the same parts as the passanger ones; only tougher. They can carry 2 containers each 800kg in weight.
Monday, April 20, 2009
Arrived in London
Descending to the airport, I got the first glimpse of this PRT track that we're about to be shown during the conference. Is THAT it? After looking at the rather beautiful city (no smog this time of the year, or maybe pollution has been decreased) from the air, and trying to grasp the magnitude of it, here's a teeny tiny fenced bridge of concrete. Curves to the left, curves to the right. Looks actually rather hidious, due to the security fences on both sides. I just wish this is not going to be the future of Heathrow!
The first impression was that of a dog farm. The second that of a concentration camp. It's actually not the track, but those fences on both sides of it. Not good.
Outside of the hotel, the signs of climate change are clearly being visible. McDonalds' has palm-like plants on its front lawn, like in California. Cute. But.. this should be rainy England. Maybe it's actually better this way? :)
Edit: here is a video showing the track.
The first impression was that of a dog farm. The second that of a concentration camp. It's actually not the track, but those fences on both sides of it. Not good.
Outside of the hotel, the signs of climate change are clearly being visible. McDonalds' has palm-like plants on its front lawn, like in California. Cute. But.. this should be rainy England. Maybe it's actually better this way? :)
Edit: here is a video showing the track.
Sunday, April 19, 2009
Going to the PRT conference in Heathrow, UK
I got interested in the emerging world of PRT's (public rapid transport) in October. What follows is a three-day trip to London, to the PRT@LHR conference.
http://www.prtatheathrow.com
My intention is to report the proceedings and findings during the days on this blog. The conference has an entry fee and most likely attendants are mainly from 'big' companies. In the spirit of citizen engineering, it would be welcome for everyone to know what is being planned to save our common future.
The PRT@LHR site claims:
"CONFERENCE TO MARK THE WORLD'S
FIRST PERSONAL RAPID TRANSIT
(PRT) SYSTEM"
This, of course, is not quite true. What Heathrow currently has is a (being built; ready later in 2009) point-to-point track between Terminal 5 and VIP parking lot. That hardy qualifies as a PRT track, more like automated golf carts I would say.
This is not to say Heathrow couldn't _grow_ to be a true PRT; only this time it won't be it, yet. It also shows how eager these companies are to declare something to be the first. Meaning: the following projects won't be first. Virgin problem here, eh?
My estimate is that Abu Dhabi will be the real first. Hopefully, I will learn more of that during the conference as well.
http://www.prtatheathrow.com
My intention is to report the proceedings and findings during the days on this blog. The conference has an entry fee and most likely attendants are mainly from 'big' companies. In the spirit of citizen engineering, it would be welcome for everyone to know what is being planned to save our common future.
The PRT@LHR site claims:
"CONFERENCE TO MARK THE WORLD'S
FIRST PERSONAL RAPID TRANSIT
(PRT) SYSTEM"
This, of course, is not quite true. What Heathrow currently has is a (being built; ready later in 2009) point-to-point track between Terminal 5 and VIP parking lot. That hardy qualifies as a PRT track, more like automated golf carts I would say.
This is not to say Heathrow couldn't _grow_ to be a true PRT; only this time it won't be it, yet. It also shows how eager these companies are to declare something to be the first. Meaning: the following projects won't be first. Virgin problem here, eh?
My estimate is that Abu Dhabi will be the real first. Hopefully, I will learn more of that during the conference as well.
Sunday, February 4, 2007
Thoughts on Next Windows
Sent the following feedback to Mary Jo Foley's article on "Windows 7" at http://redmondmag.com/columns/article.asp?editorialsid=1623
Thanks for the column,
I especially liked the realization that "Microsoft is currently facing some of the same problems with Vista it has been experiencing with Office for a couple of years now."
This is in my opinion very true, and gives hope that the Redmond Co can actually pull itself back into fondness and innovation camp, if it truly wants.
What I'd already have done, if I were their head of OS development:
- Handle Win32 compatibility via sanboxes and emulation (each app getting its own image of Windows, unable to mess up the underlying OS at all)
I _thought_ they were into this, when they purchased Connectix (Virtual PC) a few years back. Basically, they should have made Virtual PC an essential part of Windows itself.
What this allows, is re-making the actual OS on _any_ architecture they like. All C# or something like that. Transition from C/C++ to higher languages was promised by them ("managed code") but has it happened...?
- Split the company. For their Own Good.
They could make old-style Windows support into a separate, limited resources company. One of their problems (and I've seen this in other big, succesful sw houses) is that they're plain too big. Software development does not have an economy of masses. Car production has. For sw, innovation and effeciency works in small groups, tied together by a flexible integration framework. This is what Windows lacks, and maybe cannot ever really be given. Virtualization/sandboxing would place technical limits to the "weight of compatibility" they carry along, splitting the company in parts would do the same at an organizational level.
- Learn from the XBox 360
Rather, make the New Windows around it. Allow XBox 360 to run the SAME os as next-gen Windows PC's (maybe even the games, being DirectX based always was the promise they had on the XBox line).
Granted, the CPU differences (x86 vs. PowerPC x3) are huge, but that's where the virtualization helps. XBox 360 can surely run Virtual PC, they've just not released such a product.
APIs and "binaries" of the new OS would anyways be non-native (think Python/Ruby/C#/Lua bytecode) so having different hw backgrounds no longer is an issue like it used to be.
--
Asko Kauppi, Finland
Thanks for the column,
I especially liked the realization that "Microsoft is currently facing some of the same problems with Vista it has been experiencing with Office for a couple of years now."
This is in my opinion very true, and gives hope that the Redmond Co can actually pull itself back into fondness and innovation camp, if it truly wants.
What I'd already have done, if I were their head of OS development:
- Handle Win32 compatibility via sanboxes and emulation (each app getting its own image of Windows, unable to mess up the underlying OS at all)
I _thought_ they were into this, when they purchased Connectix (Virtual PC) a few years back. Basically, they should have made Virtual PC an essential part of Windows itself.
What this allows, is re-making the actual OS on _any_ architecture they like. All C# or something like that. Transition from C/C++ to higher languages was promised by them ("managed code") but has it happened...?
- Split the company. For their Own Good.
They could make old-style Windows support into a separate, limited resources company. One of their problems (and I've seen this in other big, succesful sw houses) is that they're plain too big. Software development does not have an economy of masses. Car production has. For sw, innovation and effeciency works in small groups, tied together by a flexible integration framework. This is what Windows lacks, and maybe cannot ever really be given. Virtualization/sandboxing would place technical limits to the "weight of compatibility" they carry along, splitting the company in parts would do the same at an organizational level.
- Learn from the XBox 360
Rather, make the New Windows around it. Allow XBox 360 to run the SAME os as next-gen Windows PC's (maybe even the games, being DirectX based always was the promise they had on the XBox line).
Granted, the CPU differences (x86 vs. PowerPC x3) are huge, but that's where the virtualization helps. XBox 360 can surely run Virtual PC, they've just not released such a product.
APIs and "binaries" of the new OS would anyways be non-native (think Python/Ruby/C#/Lua bytecode) so having different hw backgrounds no longer is an issue like it used to be.
--
Asko Kauppi, Finland
Thursday, February 1, 2007
Out of This Age!
National Games Village, Bangalore
Coming back from a 2-day Safari to the Kabini Resort at Rajiv Gandhi National Park.
This time, the culture shock of riksha's, left/right/center-sided traffic and overall boiling-potness of India is more than when first arriving here. This time, I was not prepared.
The 2 days at Kabini Jungle Lodges were plain fabulous. Early wakeups, jeeping, paddling or boating among wildlife. Clear, 360 degree starry skies with a full moon. Moonshine ahead of the boat, sunset behind it. Just Too Good.
Nearby the Resort are villages, which is just okay. But the conflict between these two is seemingly there. We observed a bunch of wild dogs ("rare sighting" the driver said) approaching a field where cows pastured. Anyone's guess, what would happen...
Apart from the pure amaze about the animals, and a magnitude of pictures taking a day to uncover :), there remains a question about what the next 20 years will bring. Trip back from Kabini to Mysore takes about an hour or so, on more or less bumpy roads. If they make the roads better, more people will come, and more villagers, too. The big question is how to integrate the Park and the Villagers together, into mutual benefit. I don't know, how.
Another concern would be tourism. Currently, Kabini is clearly a hidden treasure (which this Blog entry helps to erode!) but will it remain so. It has 6 tents (cheaper huts(, 6 cabins (very good quality) and has a Maharajan feeling to it. All is genuine, the guides are clearly having a heart for the park and nature, and the food is plain excellent! But this place is incapable of serving several busloads of either Indian or foreign tourists.
Perhaps Green Tourism is exactly this; hidden treasures worth hunting, with practically no advertisement but for the mouth-to-mouth rumours. Perhaps Green Tourism can not be branded, duplicated and utilized to maximum benefit. If future 20 years from now is such, and Kabini still is what it is today, I'll be willing to join the Future!
Coming back from a 2-day Safari to the Kabini Resort at Rajiv Gandhi National Park.
This time, the culture shock of riksha's, left/right/center-sided traffic and overall boiling-potness of India is more than when first arriving here. This time, I was not prepared.
The 2 days at Kabini Jungle Lodges were plain fabulous. Early wakeups, jeeping, paddling or boating among wildlife. Clear, 360 degree starry skies with a full moon. Moonshine ahead of the boat, sunset behind it. Just Too Good.
Nearby the Resort are villages, which is just okay. But the conflict between these two is seemingly there. We observed a bunch of wild dogs ("rare sighting" the driver said) approaching a field where cows pastured. Anyone's guess, what would happen...
Apart from the pure amaze about the animals, and a magnitude of pictures taking a day to uncover :), there remains a question about what the next 20 years will bring. Trip back from Kabini to Mysore takes about an hour or so, on more or less bumpy roads. If they make the roads better, more people will come, and more villagers, too. The big question is how to integrate the Park and the Villagers together, into mutual benefit. I don't know, how.
Another concern would be tourism. Currently, Kabini is clearly a hidden treasure (which this Blog entry helps to erode!) but will it remain so. It has 6 tents (cheaper huts(, 6 cabins (very good quality) and has a Maharajan feeling to it. All is genuine, the guides are clearly having a heart for the park and nature, and the food is plain excellent! But this place is incapable of serving several busloads of either Indian or foreign tourists.
Perhaps Green Tourism is exactly this; hidden treasures worth hunting, with practically no advertisement but for the mouth-to-mouth rumours. Perhaps Green Tourism can not be branded, duplicated and utilized to maximum benefit. If future 20 years from now is such, and Kabini still is what it is today, I'll be willing to join the Future!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)