21
Jul

2011

High Speed Rail in China – Lessons for the cable industry? (Part 2)

Yesterday’s post High Speed Rail in China – Theft or Innovation? (Part 1) looked at ownership of ideas and innovation, specifically in terms of China’s role in the the advancement of HSR technologies. Following that train of thought (couldn’t help myself!) today I’ll look at what this means for the CPT industry, starting the discussion on the future of CPT transit and innovations.

Traditionally HSR manufacturers focused on incremental innovation. Today, however, Chinese manufacturers are pursuing large-scale disruptive innovations. Disruptive technologies tend to thrive in high growth markets where owners of existing technologies are slow to innovate — at least beyond the pace set by sustainable innovations which are in demand by a pre-existing customer base. Where as incremental innovation generally involves low cost and low risk, disruptive innovation means high cost and high risk since it requires significantly more R&D.

MARKET: As we’ve seen with HSR, and as discussed in yesterday’s post, if a growing market is not being effectively provided for by an existing technology, someone will find a way to improve upon that technology in order to satisfy the market need. While CPT has not yet experienced the same growth as HSR, it has certainly been fielding greater interest. With an increasing number of urban installations and proposed high profile systems the market does appears to be growing. Since all signs indicate that this growth will continue I would argue that CPT will be subject to the same market threats as HSR.

INNOVATION: In the instance of HST, Chinese engineers took a highly advanced technology and (in most cases) improved upon it through genuine innovation. One could argue that gondolas are also a highly advanced technology. While HSR had four major manufacturers, there are only two major ropeway manufacturers. Whether less competition has resulted in less innovation, that is a matter of speculation! Still, it is well known that competition in a growing market drives innovation and technology benefits from offering a faster, cheaper, more capable products. Is there room for significant innovation in the cable industry? I would think so, especially for urban applications.

COST: The Chinese have already dramatically decreased the price of HSR, which was originally being built for around US$100-200 per kilometre. According to Wikipedia the Chinese have completed 250km/h to 350km/h HSR lines for  US$6-32. Further investigation is required into these surprisingly low figures and what factors are attributed to these vast price disparates. Constructing anything at 70% the cost of your competitors would definitely be considered a competitive advantage. At less than 25% of the cost per kilometre, that’s a game changer!

Should the ropeway industry be concerned? I would think so. Is it helpless? Definitely not! What it can do about it is a post for another day.

What is your opinion?

 

This post was written by Ryan O’Connor. A planning and transportation professional based in Wellington, New Zealand. Ryan has been involved with Creative Urban Projects since March 2010.



Want more? Purchase Cable Car Confidential: The Essential Guide to Cable Cars, Urban Gondolas & Cable Propelled Transit and start learning about the world's fastest growing transportation technologies.

22
Jul

2011

Forum Fridays: INTRODUCTIONS

Hello all and welcome to Forum Fridays. As Steven mentioned here, Fridays are now be dedicated to the Gondola Project Forum.

For starters I’d like to tell everyone that yes! the Gondola Project has a forum. It’s still fairly new and despite some of the rather lengthy and epic conversations that often appear in the comments section of this blog, the forum is still generally quite underutilized. Ideally the forum will grow to be an information hub and a place to talk, argue, battle, opinionate, educate and share.

So now, drum roll please … I’d like to direct everyone’s attention to said forum. (It can also be found following the link “Cable Forum” at the top of this page.)

This week, instead of diving right into the nitty gritty details of a single topic or gondola line, we will be dedicating FF to introductions. So, please, if you haven’t already registered on the forum, I encourage you to do so. I’ve started a topic called Introductions so we can all say hello to each other. This is a great place to talk about who you are or why you’re interested in the gondola project, maybe tell us a good  joke, or offer suggestions for future forum topics.

Next week I will highlight the newest forum topics launched from this week’s discussion and of course feature the best joke (extra points if it is cable or transit related).

 



Want more? Purchase Cable Car Confidential: The Essential Guide to Cable Cars, Urban Gondolas & Cable Propelled Transit and start learning about the world's fastest growing transportation technologies.

25
Jul

2011

Cablegraphs: Vertical London

A quick comparison of existing heights in London and the proposed London Cable Car’s tallest tower.

click image for larger version

*this is a new (revised) version of a previous image



Want more? Purchase Cable Car Confidential: The Essential Guide to Cable Cars, Urban Gondolas & Cable Propelled Transit and start learning about the world's fastest growing transportation technologies.

29
Jul

2011

Forum Fridays: Homemade Cable Systems

Would you go for a ride with the Flying Men of Yungas Valley?

Thanks to everyone who visited and posted on the forum this past week. Introductions were made however no jokes were submitted so this week instead of featuring the best joke I’d like to post a new discussion topic:

As we’ve seen on the gondola project site in the past, there are many instances around the world of people using make-shift cable systems for moving both people and goods. Of course these are made with materials at hand and not engineered with the same safety measures or under the type of regulations seen with a professionally built system. Yet they can be very effective for their purpose, often saving people hours of difficult (and potentially equally dangerous) labor and travel.

So my question for you is, are homemade cable systems a good or bad influence on the urban cable market and why?

Check out the FORUM to see what others have to say about this and all things cable.

As an example of a the type of system I’m talking about, check out this video The flying men of Yungas valley – Programmes – Al Jazeera English.



Want more? Purchase Cable Car Confidential: The Essential Guide to Cable Cars, Urban Gondolas & Cable Propelled Transit and start learning about the world's fastest growing transportation technologies.

01
Aug

2011

Cablegraphs: Car-plosion



Want more? Purchase Cable Car Confidential: The Essential Guide to Cable Cars, Urban Gondolas & Cable Propelled Transit and start learning about the world's fastest growing transportation technologies.

04
Aug

2011

Transit Oriented Development and CPT (Part 1 of 3)

Most readers understand the concept of Transit Oriented Development (TOD) – a planning approach that encourages transit ridership through increased development around transit stations. TODs are designed to create higher density, mixed use, walkable communities. In this way the day-to-day needs met by shops, cafes, and entertainment venues are located within the neighbourhood (usually near the station), and access to a rapid public transport network is maximised. Despite mixed successes, TODs are often touted as one of the great solutions to urban mobility.

TOD designs tend to occur within 800 metres of the transit station, which is considered the distance that people are willing to walk or cycle to reach public transport. However, depending on the transport mode and the ‘walking culture’ of the area, this distance can vary between 400-1200 metres.

Typically, TODs are associated with streetcars, LRT and heavy rail, although the developing world has implemented successful BRT TODs as well. A few examples of CPT and TOD also exist. The Metrocable in Medellin, Columbia utilises elements of TOD for the Linea L & J lines. The Metrocable in Caracas, Venezuela integrates retail, commercial and social services into customised CPT stations, although it appears that no coordinated development has occurred outside of these stations.

What is important to remember is that (for the most part) efficient public transport spurs development regardless of TOD plans. TODs simply try to offer an assurance that development will occur in a planned, coordinated way over a shorter timeframe (often determined by investors.) TODs can be master planned or guided redevelopment. Planning regulations are often tweaked to allow different land uses and higher densities. Property developers demand certainty to the type of development that is expected in order to reduce business risk. TODs usually involve a number of stakeholders and in some instances are implemented via innovative PPP arrangements. However, TODs are not always successful as there are multiple internal and external factors at play.

It is also frustrating that the very factor that make TODs possible – rapid transport systems – can also significantly hinder their success and have negative impacts on the adjoining land and people. Basically, ‘at grade’ transit presents a problem to the urban form; it bisects it, it divides it, it makes it unsafe for pedestrians. Tracks takes up valuable land. Buses are noisy and generate pollutants. Heavy rail is even noisier (unless underground) and produces vibration effects. These nuisances impact properties adjoining the infrastructure and can compromise the whole TOD model – which values land close to public transport.

TRB research finds that property prices are compromised as close as 200 metres from a transit line. For this reason, the 200-400 metre quadrant (from the transit station) in a TOD tends to be the most sought after by residents and therefore most valued. What should be the most desirable, useful and practical land – that closest to the transport station – is not maximised to its full potential. This is a serious issue and one that compromises the very outcomes TOD seek to achieve – liveability and sustainability.

What opportunities exist for CPT and TODs? I will tackle this issue next week in Part 2 of TODs and CPT.

This post was written by Ryan O’Connor, a planning and transportation professional based in Wellington, New Zealand. Ryan has been involved with Creative Urban Projects since March 2010.



Want more? Purchase Cable Car Confidential: The Essential Guide to Cable Cars, Urban Gondolas & Cable Propelled Transit and start learning about the world's fastest growing transportation technologies.

05
Aug

2011

FORUM FRIDAYS: birds and the future of aerial transit

 

I could recap what’s been happening on the Gondola Project Forum this week … or I could show you this cool Ted Talk about flying like a bird. I pick door 2:

[ted id=1195]

and because it wont embed, check it out the intended video here: A robot that flies like a bird

 

Which leads me to this week’s exciting debate: What is the future of aerial transit? Currently the options include gondolas for short distances, planes for long distances, and helicopters for the wealthy, but technology never really stands still… does it?

 

 

 

Have you checked out the forum this week?



Want more? Purchase Cable Car Confidential: The Essential Guide to Cable Cars, Urban Gondolas & Cable Propelled Transit and start learning about the world's fastest growing transportation technologies.