Gondolas « The Gondola Project

Posts Tagged: Gondolas

31
Mar

2010

Cable Transit In Edinburgh?

Please take the time to visit Maria Mysliborska’s wonderful Master’s Thesis Page. It’s a beautiful page that suggests how academic theses will likely be developed and submitted in the future.

Maria’s plan is an elegant redevelopment of Edinburgh’s derelict waterfront. Among the highlights of the plan are a local public transit circulator using (you guessed it) an urban gondola. Her unique configuration imagines a rectangular, closed-loop system. Does that mean a single line running in a single direction, or a dual system running in both directions? It’s hard to say.

Nevertheless, it makes for an inspiring read. Check it out.

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.

Urban Planning & Design

Comments

23
Mar

2010

Medellin/Caracas, Part 6

Two weeks ago I travelled to Medellin, Colombia and Caracas, Venezuela to tour five of the most important CPT systems in the world. This is Part 6 where I discuss the technological innovations of the Caracas Metocable. Image by Steven Dale.

Like the Medellin Metrocable, the Caracas Metrocable is a MDG system, the most basic of aerial Cable Propelled Transit technologies. It is fully-integrated into the local Metro system, has a maximum operating speed of 18 km/hr, a capacity of 3,000 pphpd and is 1.8 km long. Vehicles can carry 8 sitters and 2 standees. The system has 2 terminals and 3 intermediary stations; a total of 5 stations. Unlike the Medellin systems, which were built by the French-Italian consortium of Poma-Leitner, the Caracas Metrocable was built by the Austrian-Swiss partnership of Doppelmayr/Garaventa.

The most important aspect of the Caracas Metrocable is its alignment. The Caracas Metrocable’s alignment includes two extreme 90 degree turns. That this was the first aerial cable system in known history to implement a 90 degree turn is impressive, that the designers had the guts to attempt two 90 degree turns is all the more so. With this single act, the cable transit industry has demonstrated their ability to adapt, innovate and improve upon their technology within the public transit market.

What’s more, engineers did not utilize a separate drive wheel at each angle station as is common in most corner-turning applications. Instead, engineers used a single, passive deflection bullwheel at the two 90 degree stations, dramatically reducing complexity, size and cost of the system. Only at the middle station is a second drive wheel utilized. This, in essence, means that the Caracas Metrocable is made up of two separate lines where vehicles switch automatically from one line to the second at the middle station.

A graphical representation of the Caracas Metrocable system. Notice how the system is made up of two separate lines (represented by two different shades of blue). If one line fails, vehicles can be re-routed back onto the original line. Image by Steven Dale.

Additionally, a mechanism was designed into the middle station that allows operators to divert vehicles such that they do not automatically switch onto the new line, returning instead from whence they came. This configuration creates enormous additional benefit from an operations perspective. In the even that either of the two lines were to experience mechanical difficulties, the second of the two lines would be able to continue operations.

This simple feature debunks the common (but provably misinformed) opinion that with cable technology when one part of the system goes down, the whole system goes down.

A passive deflection wheel at angle stations allow vehicles to make sharp, 90 degree turns. Image by Steven Dale.

Vehicles enter and depart one of two 90 degree turning stations. Image by Steven Dale.

Image by Steven Dale.

Further features add to the Metrocable's appeal: Two way intercoms are located in each vehicle to assist with safety and emergency situations. Image by Steven Dale.

Sylish wooden benches in each vehicle are a charmingly casual (though somewhat Spartan) method of dealing with seating. Image by Steven Dale.

8 spots on the floor cue passengers where to stand and how to cue up. It's a unique and incredibly cost-effective design feature that speeds loading and disembarking times. Image by Steven Dale.

Return to Part 5.

Move on to Part 7.

Comments

14
Mar

2010

Medellin/Caracas, Part 3

Last week I travelled to Medellin, Colombia and Caracas, Venezuela to tour five of the most important CPT systems in the world. This is Part 3 where I discuss the Medellin Metrocable's Linea J. Image by Steven Dale.

LINEA J

Unlike Linea K of the Medellin Metrocable, Linea J is much more actively involved in Transit Oriented Development (TOD). Linea K served an existing and extremely dense neighborhood lacking in transit. Linea J serves the barrio of Vallejuelos and the La Aurora development that is in the process of building and expanding.

This means that Linea J does not suffer from the overcrowding common to Linea K. Queues for vehicles are rare, and even when they do occur in rush hours, they are usually voided within a few minutes. Like Linea K, stations are enormous due to topographical, social and security concerns.

Compared to Linea K, Linea J is something of a let-down. Stations are sparsely populated and overall impact on the community is less than that of Linea K. That is, however, somewhat unfair a judgement. Linea K brought transit to one of the most dense, impoverished and least serviced areas of all of Medellin. Linea K was about servicing a crisis, whereas Linea J is about planning for the future.

Linea K is also 2 years older than Linea J. People need time to adapt. Linea K was also the first, dramatic incursion of cable transit into a city. Linea J has an almost “been there, done that” feel to it. It’s simply impossible to impress in the way that Linea K does. There’s only one “first.”

Nevertheless, one has to look upon Linea J as a success. Splashes of colour pepper along Linea J’s route, a sure sign of progress that is dramatically apparent on Linea K. Stations – while underutilized – feel safe and at a length of 2.7 kms, one has to be impressed by the sizable increase in scale Linea J has accomplished over its predecessor, Linea K’s more modest 1.8 kms.

The views, however, are far more dramatic:

Image by Steven Dale.

A vehicle departs a Linea J Metrocable station. Image by Steven Dale.

Linea J serves the less dense barrio of Vallejeulos, resulting in less over-crowding. Image by Steven Dale.

Linea J serves the sprawling hill-top barrio of Vallejuelos. As the barrio does not have the population of other more notorious areas, overcrowding on Linea J is rare. Image by Steven Dale.

Like Linea K before it, Linea J is being used to stimulate local investment, infrastructure and construction in the long-abandoned barrios along its route. Image by Steven Dale.

The La Aurora Metrocable station (foreground) and development (background). Metrocable Linea J is seen as more than just transit. It is an act of city-building and Transit Oriented Development. Image by Steven Dale.

Rush hour queues are rare on Linea J. Image by Steven Dale.

Due to a lack of population density, much of the social infrastructure designed into the Linea J Metrocable stations (such as this plaza) sits unused. Image by Steven Dale.

Image by Steven Dale.

Like Linea K before it, Linea J is inspiring civic pride in barrios around which the Metrocable plies its route. Decorative murals and colour are becoming more common a sight to see. Image by Steven Dale.

Image by Steven Dale.

Notice how the few splashes of colour that exist within the barrio gently mirror the route of the Metrocable. This was a similar phenomenon observed in Santo Domingo along Linea K's route. Image by Steven Dale.

An unanticipated consequence of the Metrocable's success: An increasingly severe Gringo problem.

Return to Part 2.

Move on to Part 4.

Gondola / Medellin MetroCable / Urban Planning & Design

Comment

10
Mar

2010

Is CPT PRT-Able?

David asks:

PRT is getting some buzz lately what with Heathrow’s system going live soon and Masdar in the works. Do you know of any systems or engineering solutions that allow overhead gondolas to work the same way? IE: Swap to a different cable at a junction? Is CPT PRT-able?

Swapping to a different cable at a junction is possible as the industry has already developed and implemented automatic sortation devices for their systems. That technology could be adapted to a configuration like you’re talking about.

The important thing to remember is that while cable technology is old, it’s application to urban transit is quite new. The industry is just now learning about public transit and what their technology can do.

A great example is Medellin, Colombia. When their first CPT system opened in 2006, it could carry 3,000 pphpd. At the time, that was the maximum capacity any modern cable system had carried.

The day it opened, however, it was over capacity by almost double. The cable industry had never dealt with numbers like that. A direct result of that experience, has been the industry’s development of new technologies that allow 6,000 (aerial) and 10,000 (terrestrial).

For CPT to catch on, it’s important for people to ask questions like this so that the industry can develop solutions to problems it doesn’t know it has.

CPT is in an adolescent phase. It’s basically a teenager. It has all this potential and numerous accomplishments, but needs help being pushed in the right direction for it to fully realize its potential. You can be certain if the market begins to demand line-switching or very high capacity systems or very long line lengths, the industry will develop that.

Also: Some might disagree with me, but the Heathrow system is not PRT. It is simply small automated vehicles in a linear arrangement with off-line stops. One of the major components of PRT (in theory) is the complex network component. The Heathrow system simply does not have that component.

In fact, no system that calls itself PRT has ever had that component. I’m not saying it won’t happen, and there are rumors that it may be added in later at Heathrow, but as of right now, it’s nothing more than a people mover. As for Masdar, I honestly don’t know enough about that installation.

So . . . long answer to a short question: Theoretically CPT is PRT-able. At the same time, PRT is theoretically PRT-able, yet ironically, PRT has never demonstrated itself to be PRT-able.

Are you as confused as I am now?

Speaking of Medellin, tune in tomorrow for the start of The Gondola Project’s first photo essay on the MetroCable systems in Medellin, Colombia and Caracas, Venezuela. Tell your friends!

Analysis / Gondola / Other Transit Techs / Urban Planning & Design

Comments

08
Mar

2010

Medellin/Caracas!!!

Image by Steven Dale

Tune in Wednesday for the start of The Gondola Project’s first photo essay: Medellin/Caracas.

I’ve just returned from Medellin, Colombia and Caracas, Venezuela where I toured five of the most important systems in all of cable transit. Two of them just opened mere weeks ago. There’s so much to say, this series could go on for a while. To be honest, I don’t know how long, but I suspect at least a couple of weeks.

Cable transit’s here . . . in a big way. See you Wednesday!

Caracas Metrocable / Gondola / Medellin MetroCable

Comments

09
Feb

2010

Spokane Falls Skyride

I’m in transit today, traveling back to Toronto and it’s lovely minus 10 degree February temperatures. In the meantime, check out the Spokane Falls Skyride (video below).

Given its urban/natural setting, this should be a fascinating system to discover more about. Any information on this installation would be greatly appreciated!

Gondola / Installations / Urban Planning & Design

Comments

01
Feb

2010

Aerial Technologies, Lesson 3: BDG

The Ngong Ping 360 is a high profile example of bicable technology.

Note: This post was updated on May 30, 2011. These revisions reflect the most current and available knowledge we have but do not guarantee the validity of the claims made. As always, it’s best to use the information contained herein as a guide.

Bicable Detachable Gondolas (BDG) are a less common form of gondola than Monocables (MDG). Originally, BDGs were a superior technology to the MDG, but advancements in MDG technology have rendered the BDG obsolete in all but the most specific of situations.

The difference between MDG and BDG is straightforward. Whereas Monocable systems are both propelled and suspended by the same cable, Bicable systems provide those two separate functions with two separate cables.

One cable is stationary and doesn’t move. It’s this cable that gives the gondola support. This cable acts much like a rail would for a traditional transit vehicle. A wheeled bogey attached to the gripping mechanism of the gondola runs along this cable much as train’s wheels would run along rails.

The second cable is not stationary. It runs in a loop and is powered by bullwheels at the terminals. The gondola grips attach and detach from this moving cable, thereby providing propulsion.

BDG Stats:

Maximum Speed: 27 km/hr (revised upwards from 24 km/hr).
Maximum Capacity: ~4,000 pphpd (revised downwards from 6,000 pphpd).
Vehicle Capacity: Up to 17.
Wind Stability: Operational in winds up to 70 km/hr.
Maximum Span Between Towers: Up to 1,000 meters (conditional on capacity).
Cost: $15 – 25 million (US) / kilometre. (estimate).

While Bicable systems are more expensive than Monocable systems, this added cost is not really justified. The only two real advantages of a Bicable as compared to an MDG are as follows:

Bicables can travel at greater maximum speeds than the MDG. This speed premium, however, amounts to only 5.4 km/hr.
Longer spans without need of intermediary stations. Like above, this premium is modest. Whereas an MDG can span 700 meters without need of an intermediary tower, the BDG can span 1,000 meters.

These modest advantages are offset by the following:

Higher capital cost
Larger station size
Larger tower profile.

Because of their higher capital costs as compared to an MDG, with little real advantage, Bicables are increasingly becoming an abandoned technology in the cable transit world.