Trams Across America
Get ready, tram haters: Some locals want more—lots more.
July 2nd, 2008
Cover Story • Manhunter | Almost every state lets bounty hunters chase down its most wanted. Why doesn’t Oregon?63 comments
July 2nd, 2008
Bill Of Fair | Ex-restaurateur puts hopes of returning to Portland in a “widow’s bill.” 0 comments
July 2nd, 2008
Murmurs • Scoundrels seeking a refuge besides patriotism? You’re always welcome here.2 comments
July 2nd, 2008
Rogue of the Week • Legacy Good Samaritan | Please, go by streetcar20 comments
July 2nd, 2008
Broadcast Dues | While Portland Beavers go up to the major leagues, the team’s broadcaster soldiers on.1 comment
July 2nd, 2008
Blog Of War | Online chat about a Georgia weapons manufacturer ends in real-time Oregon court battle.10 comments
July 2nd, 2008
Textual Criticism | MSG FM CMSR SAM: WHR R U GOING? WATCH THE ROAD!!16 comments
July 2nd, 2008
The Reed Guard | A woman sues for alleged sex assault in another case involving the College’s security.16 comments
July 2nd, 2008
The Score • Escapees and exiles edition.0 comments
July 2nd, 2008
Letters to the Editor • Inbox5 comments
 |
[January 24th, 2007] In a seemingly sterile office building on Southeast McLoughlin Boulevard, tram fever has broken free of its South Waterfront petri dish and entered the fertile mind of ex-Boeing engineer Ben Missler.
While Portlanders await their chance this week to ride the tram to and from Oregon Health & Science University, Missler is brewing plans for more trams all across America.
Missler, a self-described 15-year veteran of the alternative energy movement, last year established a company designed to achieve his aims. Mass Tram America Inc. has three employees but is looking to hire grant writers and visionary engineers.
At 66, Missler aims to implement a revolutionary new transportation system across America by—you guessed it—hanging trams to create a highway in the sky. Among Missler's candidates for a new tram link: using it on the congested I-5 bridge between Washington and Oregon instead of building a costly new bridge.
"I'm projecting within three years we'll have a working prototype," Missler said during a recent meeting in Mass Tram America's business operations room, which was strewn with solar panels, plants and a K'Nex Pirate Ship Park assembly kit in the corner.
The bearded Missler, who kept pens in his shirt pocket and sported green cargo pants and brown Savior sandals over white socks, explained his plan like this:
Mass Tram America would strip decommissioned airplane fuselages of their wings, engines and tails to convert into tram cars.
The cars would be individually fitted with solar cells and hydrogen-cell battery storage to supply power to each car, which would then be attached by electric, motorized wheels to a rail system hanging 50 to 300 feet in the sky. Towers to support the rail system would be erected every 1,000 feet and be fitted with solar panels and wind turbines.
Missler says Mass Tram America has already identified a few companies to build the permanent magnetic electric motors for the cars, which would travel at 150 to 200 mph. But no contracts will be signed until design is complete.
Story continues below
advertisement
Unlike Portland's infamously over-budget tram, Missler says, the mass tram would be relatively easy and inexpensive to build because "all of its components utilize off-the-shelf technology." Missler, who first caught tram fever "in the mid-1980s while sitting in a Seattle traffic jam," concedes the hurdles may be high, given that the mass tram idea is the first of its kind.
After joking about old VW buses being cheaper than decommissioned fuselages and the benefits of dirigibles, Metro Council President David Bragdon got serious when asked about a new local tram. "If we're going to spend money inproving a transit bridge, it'll probably be a light rail," Bragdon responded.
Missler has completed Phase I of the project he calls "Highway in the Sky"—procuring an office and staff, developing a business plan and polishing off the preliminary designs.
He is now in Phase II, trying to raise $200,000 and contacting members of Congress like Reps. Peter DeFazio and David Wu (both D-Ore.).
"DeFazio was in Portland talking about the [OHSU] tram—talking about how great it was, nice view, etc.," Missler says. " He's on the transportation committee now, and David Wu—we're planning on talking to them."
Spokesmen for both congressmen weren't exactly gung-ho about the idea. Both declined comment.
Missler remains optimistic. A full-size prototype doesn't come into play until Phase III Mass Tram America has identified locales—like traffic-congested I-5 between Vancouver and Portland—in need of help.
"We'd like to do it across the Columbia," Missler says. "It could be done on the existing bridge there." When asked about the likelihood of Mass Tram America getting to test its prototype on the bridge, Missler replied, "We've got a lot of work to do on that one."
This is typical Liberal "in 10 years we will [pick one: run out of oil/have a progressive revolution]" talk that's more about flapping their gums than actually producing anything practical or really meaningful ... much less true.
I'm just surprised nobody in the article actually said "Within 10 years..." Although they did mention specific pie-in-sky ideas like the I-5 bridge over the Columbia River (BTW, how would a tram be practical for people driving long distances intrastate? And if you think the tram over Columbia would be efficient for people commuting between Vancouver and N. Portland, well, what a joke)
Fiction. Pure and simple. The stuff of comic books written by 40-something engineers, not serious transit planners. Where this stuff works is deep within heavily populated mega-opolisis (see the NYC Tram over the East River, on the edge of Manhattan) ... not North Portland, for pete's sake.
I think you got an extra zero or two in there, Scotty.
Moving at 150 MPH to 200 MPH would be WARP SPEED on a tram, and stopping would inevitably snap a few necks on the short runs (like over the Columbia). 15-20 MPH even sounds a bit racy to me.
@PDXMan
First, how is this typical "in 10 years we will...?" Perhaps, in 10 years we will have more people and more traffic in the metro region? How about in 10 years, gas will be more expensive or, at best, no cheaper? I think we can agree on both of these. How about, RIGHT NOW, the rush hour commute between Vancouver and N Portland is as bad as the rush hour commute between Seattle and Portland? This is not hippy stuff, this is not stuff out of comic books. Portland's stellar public transit has already commited so much to the livability of this region. It played no small part in the redevelopment of a once blighted industrial/crack motel area into the Pearl, one of the wealthiest, most successful new districts in town. Second, I know so many people who work in downtown PDX and live in Vancouver. To save parking money, they drive into NORTH PORTLAND (which takes forever) and then take the max yellow line into town. Imagine, if you will, all of these peole off the road. They drive, bus, bicycle, or walk to the tram stop in Vancover, take the tram to N Portland, and take the rail the rest of the way into town. Imagine thousands of people not on the bridge everyday. Not only will this get the tram-taking Vancouverites into town quicker, I think the people in cars will appreciate the open roads. This is about livability, not pie-in-the-sky liberalism. You'd better hope, for the region's sake, that our population continues to grow. As our population grows we will need to do more to mitigate the stresses and dangers of an impacted urban area. The best way to mitigate it, as far as I'm concerned, is superb, innovative public transportation. Get with it or get out of the city.
CORRECTION: I meant to compare the commute between Vancouver and Portland to the commute between Tacoma and Seattle. I certainly did not mean to say that it takes just as long to get from Seattle to Portland as it does to get from Vancouver to Portland. I regret the error.
see my blogs,
beyondcongestionbetweenears.blogspo...
(re Chicago transportation issues)and
beyondshovingblind.blogspot.com/
(re beyond Chicago transportation issues)
for discussion of a monorail that uses linear induction motors to propel and suspend vehicles below a standard steel beam. The LIM creates magnetic forces along the line of travel and about ten times as much perpendicular to it. Since standing passengers can take an acceleration only about 1/10 gravity anyway, this works out well. Not quite pure maglev, it uses caster (training?) wheels to maintain about a 3/8" gap between LIM and beam. There is no wheel/rail traction involved for propulsion, and no moving parts.
LIMs have been used in industry for decades to move metals without intervening machinery. There is little more to a LIM than the grade school experiment in which a kid wraps wire around a nail to make an electromagnet. Figure you have several rotary induction motors around the house is in fans, blenders, maybe even an old-fashioned clock.
Figure high-speed rail cannot use the rights-of-way built over a century ago and new ones would be prohibitively expensive and disruptive. See any highway atlas for the distances between you favorite pairs of cities on expressways built in the past half-century or so, much straighter and more direct. Divide by 150 mph or 200 mph and see if that is not competitive with air travel. Put this sort of system over the medians, then, for freight and passenger traffic.
The vehicle could be essentially a skid that an ordinary bus drives on and off, whether intercity or intracity. Thus this technology could really put the rapid in Bus Rapid Transit, leaving the bus flexibility for collection and distribution. With computer matched riders, it could offer 30 mile, one seat trips in an hour or less.
Using this technology to move semis automatically, like the pneumatic tubes in an old-fashioned department store, truck drivers need only pick up and deliver in their immediate vicinities. Since most truck travel is at night and short-haul, about 250 mi average, and power plants have excess capacity at night, little or no new power construction would be needed.
Figure, too, the rapid transit in Chicago needs some $8 billion to be put in good shape. What if the car repair tells you it will take $80,000 to fix the old jalopy? But federally funded third rail is a fixture of the firmament in Chicago and something shocking is necessary to get things off dead-center.
See www.shytechtransport.us on an over-and-under version of this technology for moving freight, especially in cramped, congested ports.
See Mechanical Engineering, Feb 2000, for a discussion of essentially this same technology to launch satellites and catapult aircraft from carriers.
Not to get too 'Meta' about this, but:
LovesSky: We're not talking about InTERcity commuting (from one part within the city to another). The whole article is about InTRAcity (between two somewhat distant cities). You can't solve every commuting problem with LRTs or BRTs any more than we can solve every commuting problem with SUVs and HOVs. It takes a wholistic approach, but more than that it takes a REALISTIC approach.
Flash-Gordon style trams look and feel futuristic, and dang gone it it FEELS like we're thinking outside the box!, but due to current technical limitations unfortunately trams aren't any more practical -- yet -- than ray guns and rocket backpacks.
Us Wendt alluded to: Until a miraculous, as-yet undiscovered technological breakthrough (dylithium crystals? perpetual motion machines?) solves so many of the deal-breaking problems trams currently have, they'll remain practical only as a fun ride at Disney, or ubber-short needs such as downtown Manhattan.
Certainly NOT between the Pearl and the 'Couv.
Idealism is great, dear Liberal, but only to the point where we start blowing taxdollars on it.
Build it with you're money if you're so convinced it'll work.
Get Ready, Fellow Haters of Common Sense: Some people will actually ask tough questions (gasp!) about the feasibility of our beloved tram.
That's right: They won't rubber stamp our tram idea! What's wrong with them?! I'll bet they dislike the OHSU tram, too!
PDX Mn,
Thnks fr th "Dylthm Crystl" cmmnt. Md my dy. N dscssn f trnsprttn rlts s cmplt ntl th Wrp Drv s t th tbl.
Wht wth ffcl Klngn ntrprtrs nd Trkkr Stlkr W, t fts rght n t L'l Brt n tht Wllmtt.
Jst rmmbr, Sctty ws lwys hvng t rpr th Dylthm Crystls.
Whoa, PDX Man, cool your jets. First, at no point did I say "Hey, let's us taxpayers pay a bunch of money and get this thing built!" No, I was merely responding to your call for NO discussion with a call for discussion. And no, I'm not convinced this will work. I'm convinced this is an idea worth thinking about. And if you'd read the article you'd know that there is a man, right now, using his own capital just to study the feasibility of this project.
You seem to say that I am saying "Because it's futuristic, it must work!" That is not what I am saying. In fact, what you seem to be saying is, "Because it's futuristic, it's ridiculous. Let's not even discuss it."
If you want this idea off the table, let's hear an alternative. Traffic is bad and will get worse. Rebuilding the Interstate bridge is looking like it will go well into the billions. Building underground transit is idiotic on this coast on account of all the fault lines. So what do we do?
Look, your call for a rational discussion is right on. And, as someone who usually votes RIGHT of center and who lives in one of the most tax happy states in the country (we're still not Vermont, thank god) I'm loathe to spend any new tax dollars unless it's really worth it. But a rational discussion cannot happen without a discussion.
Finally, I'm confused by your distinction between inter- and intra-urban transport. Portland, Vancouver, Beaverton, Hillsboro, and Gresham are all relatively large towns and they are connecting. In other words, they make up one large urban area. We're not talking Portland to Seattle. We're talking a river or two and just a few miles.
Let's keep this conversation civil. I am NOT a liberal in the current political sense of the word. I'm just interested in solving problems.
In my opinion, there are elements within the "Tram across America" scheme that are workable, while a few elements need to be removed, with some others merely modified. The whole package needs better engineering.
Recently I attempted to commute daily from SE Portland to Hillsboro's Evergreen Blvd and Cornelius Pass Road. This is trip by car that only takes about 40 minutes. Using TriMet it takes just over 2 hours, that’s only if I am lucky with making the connections.
The Bus Trip from SE to Downtown Portland was uneventful, but one can be waiting for more than 15 or 20 minutes if the bus arrives at the wrong time for transfer onto MAX. Then there is the MAX ride to Orenco Station where the only part of the trip where one is going toward the destination faster than a car, is the commuter "showcase" parallel run beside Highway 26 near the Sunset Station. Upon arriving at Orenco Station Hillsboro, during many mornings, one can see the Bus #47 stopped there. Then as one strides toward the bus, it pulls away before getting there, prompting another 25 minute wait. Total trip time is over 2 hours. TriMet ticket transfers tend to expire before completion of the trip.
Lessons?
A. Mass Transit only works better than a car for those who do not transfer to other mass transit elements during their trip destinations. It is convenient for those who commute from near MAX stations or near the bus routes.
B. The trip time increases exponentially with each connection transfer, because of the dead time waiting for the next connection.
C. Contrary to popular myth, long trips on Mass Transit only work best for those who are physically fit. Those who ride bicycles, can walk, run, or stand for extended periods while carrying personal gear (backpacks, computers, weather clothing, etc) do well. This is counter to the Baby Boom demographic of aging people. In addition, often this means exposure to weather conditions while waiting, sometimes arriving at work soaking wet.
D. MAX doesn't seem to make provisions for public restrooms for long trips.
E. Time is already a premium. Since long trips on Mass Transit can easily double or even triple the trip time, most people do not have this time to spare during an already time compressed day.
Conclusions. Before we introduce a new system we need to be aware of the shortcomings related to MAX.
What is appealing about the concept renderings of "Tram across America" are the suspension of vehicles above the ground. MAX conflicts with and impedes ground traffic, as rails cross or use roads. The slippery steel tracks are a hazard for bicyclists, motorscooters and motorcycles (sometimes a hazard for wheelchairs), particularly during Oregon's wet rain seasons.
Therefore, like "Tram across America", I think we do need some type of Monorail that is elevated and can cross over obstacles and right of ways with direct routing that can even go diagonal, unlike on roads.
We need more visionary thinking about the transit options of the future. I am personally tired of the boring, warmed over boilerplate options and requirements descending down from high government. I have traveled all over the world, I have used the fastest trains in the world, the TGV in France, the Bullet trains in Japan. I have been on the subways of London, New York, Tokyo and Paris. MAX and Light Rail do not solve the problems that other options can do better.
We will see during the next few years that light rail systems such as MAX will ultimately deliver significantly less than we were told, if not an empediment. Meanwhile, millions in tax payer dollars will have been wasted.
When I was growing up during the 1960s, and you asked me then what I thought 2007 would be like, I would have told of Monorails, Flying Cars, etc. So far the actual journey into the future has been a Science Fiction let down.
Sure, we certainly have more computing power and escapist entertainment options than was imagined then. But as far as our physical environment? It is only marginally better, if that, than it was during the 1960s. A person being released from a 30 year Life Sentence onto the streets of America today, would see an America that has on the one hand changed in many ways, but on the other the basic elements are still there in a very disappointing way.
For example, our Cars are the same, running on Otto Cycle explosion engines, only they are merely more refined, using the computer power to control these intrinsically primitive engines for emissions and fuel economy when many of these emissions and fuel economy issues can be solved by completely changing the basic engine.
This example can be used as analogy to describe many other modern elements in the beginning of our 21st Century.
What the article doesn't say is that he has been working on this project for over 2 years. He has gotten money from people and there is nothing to show for it. There are no drawings, there are no contacts to procure materials, there are not any feasible cost estimates or prototype plans. In addition, how would you like to ride in a decommissioned airplane fuselage at 150-200 mph 100 ft above the ground! Basically he is taking money from people who believe in green energy alternatives and deceiving them just so he can live without really working. Don't be fooled by him. He doesn't even pay his bills on time or if at all!
When visiting other countries, I try to use all forms of transit. I visit meetings at the Mass Tram office. Hospitality is offered, and questions are openly asked and answered. Having listened closely for a couple months now, I returned to read this, and I think Kyle's article is a good introduction.
The Mass Tram America design seems most useful to cross vast spaces safely, in all weather, without polluting. Prototype routes need to be planned and built, and lessons learned from other systems incorporated all along the way.
Like many Oregonians, I vote, and participate in local planning and policy meetings, and care about metro-area challenges and concerns. I hope to help create solutions. One does not need to be a visionary or hippie to see that an above-the-road multi-modal link (using proven ultra-strong cable and sturdy electric motor technologies) is worth considering. I've begun imagining a rapid link from the Hillsboro Airport/MAX area, all the way to Newberg, the doorway to vineyards, the coast, and Spirit Mountain. I think the Tram can meet local commuter and industry needs, improve local livability, bring in tourists, help run 2-way freight, prevent road-wear, accidents and traffic hassles, with a light foot-print and lower cost than anything else that has been mentioned.
A local test can combine federal, local, and private funds with renewable energy incentives to prove that the suspension-bridge-informed Tram design can efficiently haul freight, brake safely, and relieve road-building pressure at a lower operating cost than alternatives.
I'd also love to see a line extend from Portland to Astoria, and along the coast to California. Great views and visits are possible all along the way! I want to take a bike aboard, or rent one at wonderful places everywhere, and that fits great with Mass Tram America's view of healthy travel, to that supports welcoming, sustainable communities.
Towns and counties and regional governments who want landings can involve citizens to collaborate in planning something that fits long-held local dreams.
If Oregon products (think agriculture get to market faster, fresher and more safely by above-road travel, and do it less expensively than flying, while reducing traffic, pollution, and while providing passengers faster access to the Oregon coast, Ashland or mountains, no matter what the weather or road conditions, than I'm all for it!
Arriving fast, safe, with no engine noise, gas stops or driver fatigue, is a good thing. More time and energy for life will result. Oregon can lead in another livability innovation.
So I asked: How can I help?
Every proposal starts small. Early planning and relationships often face challenges, and all can be improved. (The above comment right above this one seems to expect more from a Phase 1 Public Works design process than is possible) Multiple design drawings DO exist. Primary components have been sourced, and some key supplier contacts made. Route partnerships are in early stages, it is not yet time to begin procurement of materials, especially since cost of solar panels is expected to come down in coming years, and more clean power innovations are expected.
Local Engineers, Steelworkers and the metals industry could benefit by partnering for the success of this multi-year project. If successful it can create jobs in a big way, and bring visitors to Oregon. Heck, it could allow Californians to go to Seattle fast, without stopping. (heh, just kidding!) The Tram could help households moving between cities to reduce exisitng outrageous moving costs. (Companies charge over $3,000 to move your property by truck..and Amtrak only takes certain items) The system could move Mail and parcel goods, and help Teamsters complete some of their transport agreements more quickly and safely than highways, avoiding diesel pollution, travel fatigue, or weather challenges. Drivers can remain with, and be responsible for loads, without sitting in traffic to deliver cargo between major points. UPS and Fed-Ex could be major user of the system to reduce city-to-city costs.
The first comment above was sort of funny, but also ageist and disrespectful. (I'm curious how things really are for ThatsHowItIs) Citizen mechanics, quirky Inventors, and all sorts of Americans make huge contributions...and we pay highway taxes and support schools for other people's kids. Flaming does not help address design components, or objectives of the system that is being proposed for public benefit.
The Mass Tram Inventor was a former Boeing Engineer, who also ran a manufacturing business for years, providing a freight-moving solution. The Mass Tram is still in early stages, but interest has been expressed in the system, from Belize, to Houston, Canada and the UK. Worthy professionals will be hired to build and manage the system.
The idea to use proven electric motors, with regenerative braking, Solar and Wind power along the route, integrated into system design, is to me, simply a wonderful innovation. Major private Investment now flows around the world for clean power and transportation innovation. It is not just a granola or tax-fed idea. Re-use of jetliner fuselage (already proven for rapid air travel carrying cargo and passengers) is an innovation that meets public policy objectives - and reduces system cost.
Imagine getting to Chicago, Vancouver BC, the east Coast, or even Mexico, without sitting in traffic, or at a series of Amtrak stations, or airports, especially in winter. I want to get to Ashland, Seattle or Bend quickly without being stuck on roads. The Mass Tram can make it possible to safely get to and enjoy America's snowy places and scenery. Use the Tram to link Ski Resorts, and in places where it is difficult to carry cars, bikes, your boat, whatever makes your trip a higher quality one.
In a local demonstration, freight could get from Troutdale to Gresham simply, without building the expensive truck road past the Edgefield that has been debated for years. The Tram can help tourism and local enjoyment, as the McMenamin's proposed, sharing the rail route from Portland to Hood River, reducing the volume of vehicles along I-5, local gorge highways, and I-84.
Economic development from increased tourism is likely everywhere the Mass Tram goes. The design makes new travel routes possible with minimal disruption to the environment or wildlife migration routes along the way. We zip along quietly, 100-300 feet above.
Jet fuselage can carry TONS of weight. Reducing diesel emissions is a national goal which sets this concept and design apart from other air/rail systems, proposed or built. Add to that the value of bulk-purchase community-scale renewable power coming to rural areas, and proposed landing developments providing local revenue, and helping to finance the sytem, and reduce operating cost. Towns can participate in designs, and invite retail, and leverage housing or office development tailored to local need and opportunity.
The design projects to save a huge amount of money normally required per mile of road building. Overhead travel will reduce rush-hour bottlenecks, traffic accidents, and congestion (as in the Terwilliger curves) and reduce pressure at bridges and intersections. Of course, travel speed would be reduced near stops; and regenerative braking is aldready in motors that will propel the passenger and freight cars.
Projections say a million more people are coming to Portland. A Fall 2006 survey indicated that metro area residents feel that rush hour/bridge congestion is a major problem, yet over 60% DID NOT want a rushed solution. Let's get information, and test a prototype before any bridge is torn down, and before big money is committed to ugly roads leading to/through the same bottlenecked intersecting points and a more expensive replacement bridge, built in the same spot.
If this Tram, or an adaptation, can address major transit and pollution problems, reasonable folks will consider a working demo, to decide feasibility as a wider solution. We can grow an OREGON company, that seeks to help move freight and passengers faster and safer, while avoiding emissions and reduding stress on roads. Killing an idea that might achieve benefits like this would be really, really dumb. We have the expertise in the Portland area to evaluate, improve, and build the Mass Tram as a model. Can we begin by helping assess what local needs might be met in a local prototype route?
Note to people who say they don't like light rail: this one seeks to leverage major private investment, and reduce the amount of tax money going in, and to have lower operational/maintenance cost than roads buses and rail. If you prefer your personal car for trips, great. Bring your vehicle aboad for fast long-distance trips, with fewer gas station visits. EV/PHEV and freight-carrier charging will be available using clean energy. Get on board to help make the design work...since it can also carry your car. Imagine getting to far-off places fast, so you can drive your personal vehicle almost anywhere, without having to spend days en route to that place.
More time with family and friends during holidays, with the benefit of cheaper travel city-to city. What's not to like? Major public works projects never belong to just one person. I say, get busy to offer practical improvements, propose routes and landing designs to address local needs. Those who remain open and supportive during the prototype and partnership development Phase, and help apply lessons learned, just might help make something truly worthy happen. These projects require many professional skills. Competent people, major employers, businesses who need to move freight, travelers,local economic development, tourism and transit planners - all are needed to strengthen and participate during Phase II and III of Mass Tram America's solution development.
I see some renewed interest by the media in the mass tram project since the Troutdale Mayor was on the channel 8 news in support of using the City of Troutdale as a gateway to the Mt. Hood recreation area. My only resistance to the Tram idea in that it is not too well thought out. It is too expensive and can't travel at up to 200 mph. I thnk a well marked Highway system is more practical, possibly a bus ride from Troutdale, or a train ride from Hood River, or a tram ride from Milwaukie or Clackamas Town Square and maybe all three. I think a 'copter ride from the Hillsboro, Portland, and Troutdale Airports would make more sense. Has anyone compared the cost of various modes of transportation?
JOHN POLING
This is just the typical precocious Portland lived-at-home-through-their-30s beating off in a closet who thinks politicians actually represent them and will now actually listen to their crazy bs idea because they are of the "wise elder" age. Portland's elderly progressives have the same problem only they substitute moral zealotry and hedonism for the wierd living-at-home reading Popular Mechanics phase.