That the track is narrower? That it's elevated (chicago already has elevated trains)?
>>1985872I don't think they were ever considered futuristic. The idea has been around since the early 1900s or possibly even before, but it was always obvious that the technology sort of sucks for anything beyond a few niche applications. They never took off as a practical form of *mass* transportation because with single track rail, switching becomes a lot more complicated and annoying to figure out. However, that's also why they did work in some applications where they only needed a single track with most switching just being to go into maintenance or storage sidings. They really just don't have any purpose when normal rail exists, so they never took off. Why use a monorail when 2 rails works and is superior?Airports and amusement parks sometimes have them and they work there. A few world expositions did too - pic related, it's the one Brisbane, Australia in 1988. These are usually temporary though. Okinawa and Chongqing are examples of cities with pretty complex monorail systems, but they're also simple in terms of the route they take.Tl;dr they don't really serve a purpose when regular rail does the exact same thing. Maybe the only extremely unique use cases would be like...underground mining or similar operations, where suspending rails is easier.
>>1985876Mine monorails are pretty based btw. Just rare, because similarly why spend all that money on installing something like that in a mine which is finite, when you can just drive trucks and shit. The joke on The Simpsons is basically this. A snakeoil salesman came along, sold them on this cool new idea and it turned out to be a pointless waste of money, like basically all monorails.
for me it's vineyard monorails
there used to be a monorail at the mall where i live back in the 90s. it didn't last long because maintenance was a hassle and it didn't improve anyone's shopping experience. it was an attraction that lost its charm after a while.
'the lid came off my pudding can
EXIT LIGHTENTER NIGHTTAKE MY HAND>>1985919
>>1985872Well that's the joke of the episode, they're not, they just look cool and feature in a lot of futuristic, utopian fantasy images. I guess because the thinking was that when cities got denser in the future people would start pushing up in a bid for space.In this episode Marge originally wants to spend money on fixing potholes in the town's main street, it's meant to be an /n/ based episode where fixing the roads up is sensible and building a monorail is not, remember early Simpsons is based in the boomer mindset where all transport in small American towns relies on cars.
>I should never have stopped for that haircut.- absolute very best one-liner in the series imo
>>1985872>What was supposed to be so futuristic about the monorail?It's a mystery how a flying train was futuristic over a century ago. In the age of steam trains. In a time a car was futuristic as well. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EQs5VxNPhzk
>>1986302Time to post my favorite photo.
>>1986323kek, is he okay?
>>1986351The elephant was alright and lived for another couple of decades, a couple of journalists who were in the carriage got hurt because the passengers panicked when the elephant started getting unruly and looking for a way out.
>>1985872I think you've got to set it in the mindset of the 1950s. You've got trains, sure, but they're mostly dirty steam or diesel locos, you've got the elevated train but it's not exactly clean or quiet, and you're being told they're all on the way out because the car is the way of the future. Historical metal-track monorails are mostly a historical curosity, so the idea seems new when someone comes along and shows you a shiny, clean looking monorail that runs on a big concrete beam. Technologically it's just a weird bus, but aesthetically it's a world apart.Plus it's the 1950s-60s, it doesn't matter if you're selling bread, propeller planes, trains, or monorails, you're gonna hype it as the thing of the future, just like how in the 2020s if you're selling something you're going to try and give it vague political messaging. This was back when Cessna were promoting the suburb of the future where everyone'd park a plane in their garage, and some places like that even exist! But like the monorail or cities on the moon, things didn't play out like in the marketing material. The monorail is just one of those ideas that was much stronger aesthetically than practically, like Concorde it continues to capture the imagination far out of proportion to how successful the concept has actually been, mainly because it looks cool.
What the actual fuck is the point of hanging a Monorail upside down?It just seems like introducing another potential point of failure where the car could detach from the track and the occupants would be seriously injured/killed when it hits the ground.
>>1986323>this happened in 1950What the fuckThis is 1890s looney tunes shit
>>1986355>>1986351Also the photo is fake
>>1985925Not on your life my hindu friend
>>1985872>quieter>faster>smaller visual footprint, clean look>less real estateAnd probably was expected that all of the above would make making tracks everywhere cheap and simple allowing for fast, effective public transport that doesn't hog up roads making cities more futuristic.
>>1986609how do you know what be fake?
>>1985872The monorail is public transport that does away with gloomy tunnels (lunar and earth spirituality). Instead it elevates the riders above the earth and water. This elevation signifies the solar type. The lack of monorails in the West is simply a result of our cultural and spiritual decline.And with popular media being one of the vectors by which our spirit is degraded, it comes as no surprise that a show as the Simpsons makes fun of it.
>>1985872Quieter than rail.Mandatory grade separation so fewer homeless bums get killed.No tunnels so cheaper and no place for homeless bums to sleep (and get killed).
>>1987206>Ride the Monorail: A Survival Manual for the Aristocrats of the Soul
>>1988035So then how is a monorail better than an elevated/grade-separated metro or light rail system?
>>1985919honestly that episode kinda fucked up transit discussion, any gen x or millenial with no personality literally thinks that episode justifies why new transit systems are bad instead of don't fall for gadgetbahns and sheisters.
Nothing, that was the joke, public transit worshippers are poor lefty luddites
>>1988823Monorail rolling stock is much lighter, thus the support structure can be much lighter and slender compared to elevated light rail. Thus cheaper and less intrusive.
>>1988918monorails are expensive to build
>>1989141Don't forget problems with evacuations in the event of emergencies or unusual circumstances. Conventional rail is just better in 99% of instances.
>>1989141It's the cheapest form of grade separated public transport. >>198914499% less chance of accidents makes that point moot. Regardless, the evacuation question can be solved if it would be deemed necessary after risk analysis.
>>1985872i dont know if this counts as a monorailbut moving at high speeds without touching the rail?
>>1989189>99% less chance of accidents99% less than what?>Regardless, the evacuation question can be solved if it would be deemed necessary after risk analysisOr you could just run conventional rail and not have to worry about that
>>1989221>99% less than what?fish. Isn't that obvious.>Or you could just run conventional rail>why bother with digging tunnels. Just use streetcars insteadThis is how retarded you sound.
>>1989271>Non-argument followed by non-argumentGood work anon
>>1989325Thanks. Now, for a more detailed response. If you look at fatalities involving trains, the overwhelming majority involves level crossings, unauthorized people on the track, and suicides. Note that trains tracks are usually hard to reach, outside of the level crossings and platforms. Streetcars on the other hand are essentially one long level crossings, with light rail being slightly better. By grade separating you remove the biggest cause of accidents in rail vehicles. Japan has both railways and monorails and if you check the incident/accident list for the past 20 years, there is a single accident with a monorail, due to a hardware issue, material damage, but no fatalities.
>>1989342>Japan has both railways and monorailsWhat's the mileage ratio between those?You still haven't solved the evacuation problem either.
>>1989348I don't need to solve it, the evacuation problem is already solved. If an evacuation system is required, various options exist, like escape chutes, your local fire department or another train. See pic related. >milage ratio20 years of operation with a combined daily ridership of 500,000 and zero fatalities puts a monorail in the "better than airplane" category from a passenger point of view. And far superior to a train from a non-passenger point of view.
>>1989376>I don't need to solve it, the evacuation problem is already solved.Just use the escape chute bro. Oh you're disabled? That stinks.Your monorail isn't equipped with one? Ah, too bad.https://www.monorails.org/tMspages/KimEd3.html>20 years of operationNo, I asked for a ratio of monorail mileage in Japan to conventional rail mileage.Just saying "it's safe because a disaster hasn't happened" is inviting disaster.
>>1989377>No, I asked for a ratio of monorail mileage in Japan to conventional rail mileage.Calculate it yourself if you want. But it is not relevant. If you think it is some kind of own because they have more trains than monorails your are dumb and don't understand how safety figures works. >Oh you're disabled?If 99% percent of the passengers can escape you just made the system 99% safer. You can't design these systems around inane scenarios. And nothing prevents a disabled person from getting help form other people.>https://www.monorails.org/tMspages/KimEd3.html>1985>A flat foam-filled guide tire was determined to be the cause of Silver's fire, heated by the friction>2015>suffered a similar tire firePoor safety practices by the industry to be honest. Suspended monorails, preferably of the Wuppertal type, are superior in that regard because all electronics are situated above the passenger compartment and the drive mechanism is much less complicated. And the Bangkok monorail has a walkway between the two tracks witch is also a solution.
>>1986576There's a variant with a scissor lift mechanism that allows the monorail car to be set down on the ground. This makes creating stations easy and temporary stations for special events can be little more a rope and someone collecting fares.
>>1986576>upside down monorailsIt's mechanically more stable than regular monorail riding on a beam.They naturally tilt as well thus give a comfy ride.
>2024>I am forgotten
You have to admit this is pretty kino
>>1991694It's so gross in the city. They pack them in like goyim. They don't understand the danger of jumpers falling onto their heads. We're in hell.
>>1991702that's interesting, what else did the voices say today?
>>1986604>This is 1890s looney tunes shitMate Looney Tunes (and Merrie Melodies) were contemporary to the 50s, though their heyday was the late 30s - 40s.
>>1991694There's something about DisneyWorld and similarly universal theme parks that rub me the wrong way, but one exception is the layout and ambience of the 70s-80s high end resorts, and in particular the Contemporary.Ironically that "contemporary style" has slowly evolved into a sort of neo-futurism at this point as both monorails and that style of concrete high-rise complex has fallen out of use in new construction.
>>1991721she'll be alright. just pop a purple and blue filter on it, add a few palmtree clipart jpegs and use a generic supermarket Muzak clip as background music
>>1991733I'm confused which problem would be solved by ersatzing it.I think the Contemporary is alright in the contemporary as it is, unlike most stuff at didneywhurlAlso your description made me recall this video I haven't seen in years, enjoy (or not):https://files.catbox.moe/idagbg.mp4
>>1985877The question is why is it cool and new
>>1989391Which line is bangkok is monorail
>>1991810Yellow Line
