TI new products...

[Phil Hobbs]

Clifford Heath wrote:

On 9/5/22 12:26 pm, Phil Hobbs wrote:
whit3rd wrote:
On Thursday, May 5, 2022 at 11:17:45 AM UTC-7, Phil Hobbs wrote:

I have no idea why anybody would use a monorail for anything real.

Why?   Because the ones you\'ve seen are small?   Hero\'s steam turbine
was small, too.

No, because in order to get static stability your one track has to be
huge and therefore expensive.

Only if the train rides on the track, instead of under it.

Sure, and running it upside down like a chairlift will be so much
cheaper than train tracks.

Fanboi alert.

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

--
Dr Philip C D Hobbs
Principal Consultant
ElectroOptical Innovations LLC / Hobbs ElectroOptics
Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics
Briarcliff Manor NY 10510

http://electrooptical.net
http://hobbs-eo.com

 

[server]

On Mon, 9 May 2022 11:10:25 -0400, Phil Hobbs
<pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:

whit3rd wrote:
rOn Sunday, May 8, 2022 at 7:26:44 PM UTC-7, Phil Hobbs wrote:
whit3rd wrote:
On Thursday, May 5, 2022 at 11:17:45 AM UTC-7, Phil Hobbs wrote:

I have no idea why anybody would use a monorail for anything
real.

Why? Because the ones you\'ve seen are small? Hero\'s steam turbine
was small, too.

No, because in order to get static stability your one track has to
be huge and therefore expensive.

Following that reasoning, we\'d expect funiculars for intraurban
transit.

Do tell. Cable suspension and all those towers are cheaper than train
tracks? And funiculars are as fast as trains?

The rigid elevated systems use less airspace than a guyed tower
(there\'s HUGE lateral cable-tension loads in a funicular). A
dovetail monorail is practical and less derail-able than standard
twin-track.

Most derailments are caused by maintenance failures, IIRC. With the
same standard of maintenance, your dovetail gizmos are less likely to
fail, and/or easier to repair?

Don\'t think so.

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

I think our underground systems, MUNI and BART, should tear up their
tracks and pave the tubes and run electric busses in them.



--

Anybody can count to one.

- Robert Widlar

 

[Anthony William Sloman]

On Tuesday, May 10, 2022 at 1:43:36 AM UTC+10, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

On Mon, 9 May 2022 11:10:25 -0400, Phil Hobbs <pcdhSpamM...@electrooptical.net> wrote:
whit3rd wrote:
On Sunday, May 8, 2022 at 7:26:44 PM UTC-7, Phil Hobbs wrote:
whit3rd wrote:
On Thursday, May 5, 2022 at 11:17:45 AM UTC-7, Phil Hobbs wrote:

I think our underground systems, MUNI and BART, should tear up their tracks and pave the tubes and run electric busses in them.

Bus systems move rather fewer passengers per driver, and you can get many more people on and off a train in thirty seconds than you can with a bus.
For some reason, trains have a lot more door per unit length than a bus does, and it is easier to step off onto a platform than it is to step up into a bus, or down again to get off it

Train, trams. and light rail can shift a lot more people along the same area of track as a bus system.

You were deliberately joking? You didn\'t signal it all that well.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[whit3rd]

On Monday, May 9, 2022 at 8:10:38 AM UTC-7, Phil Hobbs wrote:

whit3rd wrote:

Following that reasoning, we\'d expect funiculars for intraurban
transit.

Do tell. Cable suspension and all those towers are cheaper than train
tracks? And funiculars are as fast as trains?

This is about INTRAURBAN transit; real estate for more roads (or surface rail) is
completely unavailable, but the inner cities need traffic to flow.

So, tracked vehicles are added either in tunnels, or overhead.
Neither of those solutions works well for individual passenger cars.

The rigid elevated systems use less airspace than a guyed tower
(there\'s HUGE lateral cable-tension loads in a funicular). A
dovetail monorail is practical and less derail-able than standard
twin-track.

Most derailments are caused by maintenance failures, IIRC. With the
same standard of maintenance, your dovetail gizmos are less likely to
fail, and/or easier to repair?

Huh? To the best of my knowledge, the monorail here in Seattle has had some
cars in need of maintenance, but the track has been in continuous use since
half a century ago. For mechanical stability, classic two-track rail allows derailment,
but a monorail on a dovetail track cannot lift off (though it can still be removed in a
maintenance bay). The suspension of a train depends critically on track spacing, the
suspension of a monorail has lots of allowed variation (wide tires) and lower
contact forces (rubber on concrete, not steel-on-steel). Track maintenance for
concrete... well, the Pantheon is made of concrete.

 

[Clifford Heath]

On 10/5/22 1:11 am, Phil Hobbs wrote:

Clifford Heath wrote:
On 9/5/22 12:26 pm, Phil Hobbs wrote:
whit3rd wrote:
On Thursday, May 5, 2022 at 11:17:45 AM UTC-7, Phil Hobbs wrote:

I have no idea why anybody would use a monorail for anything real.

Why?   Because the ones you\'ve seen are small?   Hero\'s steam
turbine was small, too.

No, because in order to get static stability your one track has to be
huge and therefore expensive.

Only if the train rides on the track, instead of under it.

Sure, and running it upside down like a chairlift will be so much
cheaper than train tracks.

Fanboi alert.

Not at all a fan of monorails, they have all kinds of problems. Just
pointing out that your statement assumed the train rides on top of a
rail. Not that much extra strength is needed to support a rail it can
hang from, and if you use one pillar each side, you can still run a road
underneath

 

[rbowman]

On 05/09/2022 09:43 AM, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

On Mon, 9 May 2022 11:10:25 -0400, Phil Hobbs
pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:

whit3rd wrote:
rOn Sunday, May 8, 2022 at 7:26:44 PM UTC-7, Phil Hobbs wrote:
whit3rd wrote:
On Thursday, May 5, 2022 at 11:17:45 AM UTC-7, Phil Hobbs wrote:

I have no idea why anybody would use a monorail for anything
real.

Why? Because the ones you\'ve seen are small? Hero\'s steam turbine
was small, too.

No, because in order to get static stability your one track has to
be huge and therefore expensive.

Following that reasoning, we\'d expect funiculars for intraurban
transit.

Do tell. Cable suspension and all those towers are cheaper than train
tracks? And funiculars are as fast as trains?

The rigid elevated systems use less airspace than a guyed tower
(there\'s HUGE lateral cable-tension loads in a funicular). A
dovetail monorail is practical and less derail-able than standard
twin-track.

Most derailments are caused by maintenance failures, IIRC. With the
same standard of maintenance, your dovetail gizmos are less likely to
fail, and/or easier to repair?

Don\'t think so.

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

I think our underground systems, MUNI and BART, should tear up their
tracks and pave the tubes and run electric busses in them.

I only rode BART once back in the \'80s but it seemed rather nice
compared to NYC or Boston. Boston\'s Green Line is the oldest subway in
the US and it looks it.

The local bus company is phasing in electric buses.

https://mountainline.com/introduces-new-electric-buses

One of these days I\'ll have to go for a ride. They\'re zero fare so it
will be a cheap date. I\'ve got to admit I\'d rather be behind one of them
on a motorcycle than the aging diesel models. For me, the problem is
getting into town. If I arrive by car, motorcycle, or bicycle there\'s
little incentive to switch to a bus.

 

[Ricky]

On Monday, May 9, 2022 at 11:43:36 AM UTC-4, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

On Mon, 9 May 2022 11:10:25 -0400, Phil Hobbs
pcdhSpamM...@electrooptical.net> wrote:

whit3rd wrote:
rOn Sunday, May 8, 2022 at 7:26:44 PM UTC-7, Phil Hobbs wrote:
whit3rd wrote:
On Thursday, May 5, 2022 at 11:17:45 AM UTC-7, Phil Hobbs wrote:

I have no idea why anybody would use a monorail for anything
real.

Why? Because the ones you\'ve seen are small? Hero\'s steam turbine
was small, too.

No, because in order to get static stability your one track has to
be huge and therefore expensive.

Following that reasoning, we\'d expect funiculars for intraurban
transit.

Do tell. Cable suspension and all those towers are cheaper than train
tracks? And funiculars are as fast as trains?

The rigid elevated systems use less airspace than a guyed tower
(there\'s HUGE lateral cable-tension loads in a funicular). A
dovetail monorail is practical and less derail-able than standard
twin-track.

Most derailments are caused by maintenance failures, IIRC. With the
same standard of maintenance, your dovetail gizmos are less likely to
fail, and/or easier to repair?

Don\'t think so.

Cheers

Phil Hobbs
I think our underground systems, MUNI and BART, should tear up their
tracks and pave the tubes and run electric busses in them.

Isn\'t that Elon Musk\'s idea? The Boring Company.

--

Rick C.

--+- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
--+- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

 

[rbowman]

On 05/09/2022 10:44 PM, Ricky wrote:

On Monday, May 9, 2022 at 11:43:36 AM UTC-4, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Mon, 9 May 2022 11:10:25 -0400, Phil Hobbs
pcdhSpamM...@electrooptical.net> wrote:

whit3rd wrote:
rOn Sunday, May 8, 2022 at 7:26:44 PM UTC-7, Phil Hobbs wrote:
whit3rd wrote:
On Thursday, May 5, 2022 at 11:17:45 AM UTC-7, Phil Hobbs wrote:

I have no idea why anybody would use a monorail for anything
real.

Why? Because the ones you\'ve seen are small? Hero\'s steam turbine
was small, too.

No, because in order to get static stability your one track has to
be huge and therefore expensive.

Following that reasoning, we\'d expect funiculars for intraurban
transit.

Do tell. Cable suspension and all those towers are cheaper than train
tracks? And funiculars are as fast as trains?

The rigid elevated systems use less airspace than a guyed tower
(there\'s HUGE lateral cable-tension loads in a funicular). A
dovetail monorail is practical and less derail-able than standard
twin-track.

Most derailments are caused by maintenance failures, IIRC. With the
same standard of maintenance, your dovetail gizmos are less likely to
fail, and/or easier to repair?

Don\'t think so.

Cheers

Phil Hobbs
I think our underground systems, MUNI and BART, should tear up their
tracks and pave the tubes and run electric busses in them.

Isn\'t that Elon Musk\'s idea? The Boring Company.

Teslas in Tunnels.

 

[John Larkin]

On Mon, 9 May 2022 23:11:17 -0600, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:

On 05/09/2022 10:44 PM, Ricky wrote:
On Monday, May 9, 2022 at 11:43:36 AM UTC-4, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Mon, 9 May 2022 11:10:25 -0400, Phil Hobbs
pcdhSpamM...@electrooptical.net> wrote:

whit3rd wrote:
rOn Sunday, May 8, 2022 at 7:26:44 PM UTC-7, Phil Hobbs wrote:
whit3rd wrote:
On Thursday, May 5, 2022 at 11:17:45 AM UTC-7, Phil Hobbs wrote:

I have no idea why anybody would use a monorail for anything
real.

Why? Because the ones you\'ve seen are small? Hero\'s steam turbine
was small, too.

No, because in order to get static stability your one track has to
be huge and therefore expensive.

Following that reasoning, we\'d expect funiculars for intraurban
transit.

Do tell. Cable suspension and all those towers are cheaper than train
tracks? And funiculars are as fast as trains?

The rigid elevated systems use less airspace than a guyed tower
(there\'s HUGE lateral cable-tension loads in a funicular). A
dovetail monorail is practical and less derail-able than standard
twin-track.

Most derailments are caused by maintenance failures, IIRC. With the
same standard of maintenance, your dovetail gizmos are less likely to
fail, and/or easier to repair?

Don\'t think so.

Cheers

Phil Hobbs
I think our underground systems, MUNI and BART, should tear up their
tracks and pave the tubes and run electric busses in them.

Isn\'t that Elon Musk\'s idea? The Boring Company.


Teslas in Tunnels.

Boring emphasizes speed but needs gigabuck tunnels to get that speed.
It probably won\'t happen.

Most public transport emphasizes giant vehicles, like 20-car BART
trains with a few hard-to-access stations. Public transport tends to
emphasize bigness, to trade latency for speed.

I can drive to work in 12 minutes or spend an hour or more on public
transit. Just waiting for a giant BART train on the platform kills
about 12 minutes.

San Francisco used to have hundreds of private jitneys that would pick
people up and drop them off everywhere. The city outlawed them to
force people onto gigabuck public transport full of union labor.


--

If a man will begin with certainties, he shall end with doubts,
but if he will be content to begin with doubts he shall end in certainties.
Francis Bacon

 

[Tabby]

On Tuesday, 10 May 2022 at 17:49:57 UTC+1, John Larkin wrote:

On Mon, 9 May 2022 23:11:17 -0600, rbowman <bow...@montana.com> wrote:

On 05/09/2022 10:44 PM, Ricky wrote:
On Monday, May 9, 2022 at 11:43:36 AM UTC-4, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Mon, 9 May 2022 11:10:25 -0400, Phil Hobbs
pcdhSpamM...@electrooptical.net> wrote:

whit3rd wrote:
rOn Sunday, May 8, 2022 at 7:26:44 PM UTC-7, Phil Hobbs wrote:
whit3rd wrote:
On Thursday, May 5, 2022 at 11:17:45 AM UTC-7, Phil Hobbs wrote:

I have no idea why anybody would use a monorail for anything
real.

Why? Because the ones you\'ve seen are small? Hero\'s steam turbine
was small, too.

No, because in order to get static stability your one track has to
be huge and therefore expensive.

Following that reasoning, we\'d expect funiculars for intraurban
transit.

Do tell. Cable suspension and all those towers are cheaper than train
tracks? And funiculars are as fast as trains?

The rigid elevated systems use less airspace than a guyed tower
(there\'s HUGE lateral cable-tension loads in a funicular). A
dovetail monorail is practical and less derail-able than standard
twin-track.

Most derailments are caused by maintenance failures, IIRC. With the
same standard of maintenance, your dovetail gizmos are less likely to
fail, and/or easier to repair?

Don\'t think so.

Cheers

Phil Hobbs
I think our underground systems, MUNI and BART, should tear up their
tracks and pave the tubes and run electric busses in them.

Isn\'t that Elon Musk\'s idea? The Boring Company.


Teslas in Tunnels.
Boring emphasizes speed but needs gigabuck tunnels to get that speed.
It probably won\'t happen.

Most public transport emphasizes giant vehicles, like 20-car BART
trains with a few hard-to-access stations. Public transport tends to
emphasize bigness, to trade latency for speed.

I can drive to work in 12 minutes or spend an hour or more on public
transit. Just waiting for a giant BART train on the platform kills
about 12 minutes.

San Francisco used to have hundreds of private jitneys that would pick
people up and drop them off everywhere. The city outlawed them to
force people onto gigabuck public transport full of union labor.

Bring back the electrobats!