Vectus PRT

In 2007, the first prototype Vectus 'Personal Rapid Transport' (PRT) vehicles were demonstrated at a bespoke test track in Uppsala, Sweden. They were designed by TDI working in conjunction with WGH Engineering who developed the track infrastructure. The Vectus concept is based on fully automated (driverless) vehicles intelligently navigating a network of interconnecting tracks . Off-line stations, on-demand operation, point-to-point travel and 'taxi' style comfort and convenience are all features of the system. The use of smaller vehicles allows for less expensive infrastructure, which is also elevated to reduce ground take and obviate the need to relocate existing in-ground services.
Despite their relatively small scale, Vectus vehicles offer high transport capacity because they can run with short headways, typically 3 seconds. System capacity can be optimised through the provision of different vehicle sizes ranging from six passenger (typical PRT style) to sixty passenger (Group Rapid Transit style), potentially all operating within the same network. In operation, Vectus can typically halve the travel time for passengers, compared to bus and light rail services with similar line capacity, at a lower operating cost.

[@johnderenge]

I attended college at West Virginia University (WVU) in Morgantown, WV. I attended college there from 1992-1999. Morgantown Personal Rapid Transit (WVU PRT), is a Personal Rapid Transit system in Morgantown, WV, USA connects the three Morgantown Campuses (Downtown, Evansdale, and Medical) of West Virginia University (WVU), as well as the downtown area of Morgantown, WV. The Morgantown Personal Rapid Transit (WVU PRT) that was built in 1970, by a consortium led by Boeing Vertol as a government-funded experiment in the Personal Rapid Transit (PRT) systems. The system entered operation in 1975 and, except for a short closure for major expansion, had operated continuously with 98.5% reliability for over thirty years as of 2005.

[@josephmahiya5197]

I'm attending now and it's still running

[@johnwang9914]

RiggintheDubVee The Vectus system uses Linear Motors ( those rectangles in the centre of the track ), these motors are often used in modern high tech elevators. Traction would not be a factor, those cars could probably climb a vertical cliff provided that sufficient power was available. Linear motors are also often used on amusement park rides. I doubt a mountain would be a problem except for the cost of the track as every segment has a linear motor hence you don't really want long runs with such a system but only from a cost perspective.

[@detlefmann7433]

This system is really practise for connecting suburbs to lightrail- or subway- stations.

[@johnwang9914]

I like the Vectus system and I hope they do well with their current project in Korea. However the Vectus system embeds the linear motor in the track itself ( the rectangles in the centre of the track ), the cars themselves only have permanent magnets or an aluminum bar for the induced magnetic forces. This makes for a very expensive track with a lot of control wiring, it's little like taking the engines out of cars and putting multiple engines in the road to toss the car from one motor to the next. Wouldn't it be better to have the linear motor in the car itself and just have a aluminum bar in the track? Wouldn't the savings in the number of linear motors outweigh the complexity of delivering power and control signals to the cars? My understanding is that the Vectus cars are self switching so some communications and power are already delivered to the cars so what's wrong with placing the motors on the cars such that fewer motors would be needed and they could be brought in for maintenance.

[@user-ko9qg7jo3m]

The best vechicle in advanced cities

[@detlefmann7433]

I think, it's practice for connecting suburbs with subway- or other railway- stations.

[@Kojects]

Oh wow, the Vectus PRT came a long way from the first models in the video to the SkyCube PRT in Suncheon, Korea (short preview in the end of the video).

[@ambe5179]

PRT is less than a well structured light rail or bus network. By optimizing travel times on these transports, you manage to save several minutes! I wonder how they are going to be able to manage breakdowns and technical incidents as well as infrastructure costs, we are trying to make transport as cheap as possible, to the detriment of increasing capacity.

[@My-Opinion-Doesnt-Matter]

PRT saves you several minutes on every station you pass by, and tens of minutes of waiting for a bus/tram/rail in off peak hours. "Breakdowns and technical incidents" are managed the same as for rail/trams, and infrastructure costs for dedicated lines with a right of way are lower than any other transport solution because of the smaller vehicles.

[@9255223]

I'm sure they could but the point of the system shown here is to be separated from city streets. The reason being is that motorists do NOT want to give up their lanes/RoW or yield to public transit, especially trams/streetcars/trolleys.

[@maxchong9651]

So cute

[@RiggintheDubVee]

system looks cool, but how would it deal with elevation changes. everything shown has been a flat running area. What about area's in the mountains or large hills?

[@mjt777x8]

RiggintheDubVee well it might have tracks that can survive heights

[@jamwithmates123]

I don't think Vectus is aiming to run through mountainous areas as such, they will probably be needed more in dense cities with traffic issues. But if it was facing elevation problems bridges and tunnels could be built if necessary.

[@StoicKitty]

I want one

[@bastek.]

PRT is OK!

[@MrSquareart]

Is there a full system that is going to be built soon?

[@johnwang9914]

+MrSquareart The Morgantown system has been operating for over 40 years. The problem with these systems is that conventional public transit advocates try to sabotage the projects such as increasing the cabin size of Morgantown's system and requiring the Raytheon 2000 system to only use proven LRT components and of course automobile manufacturers which prefer to push semi-autonomous vehicles as autonomous vehicles which could be summoned perhaps by your cell phone would reduce car ownership from over 2 cars per family to perhaps less than one car per family.

[@sasconstantin]

Foarte ecologic.

[@SIAMSEARCH]

เมืองไทยควรมี

[@iankravitz5723]

My only question is accommodating those in assistive mobility devices, such as electric wheelchairs or electric scooters. From what I see, it doesn't handle them, and should.

[@bushyconn]

Is this the system now in use at London Heathrow Airport?

[@lohphat]

+bushyconn No. The system at T5 @ LHR are 4-wheeled rubber tyres running on flat guideways using laser tracking to keep pod away from the side guides. They're battery powered and require nightly full recharging and quick charges while waiting at stops.

[@liesdamnlies3372]

It's worth adding that because of Heathrow's schedule (which is to say that it doesn't run flights during the night for the sake of residents), it's much less of an issue. (Plus I'd bet that if you wanted to run 24/7 service you could just add some vehicles and have them swap-out for full charging as required, while still maintaining the same capacity. The ULTra vehicles are dirt cheap in comparison to most comparable vehicles so it's not that big a deal.)

[@nb117]

The problem is that PRT would put conventional transportation out of business and the politicians would loose to much PAC money.

[@ambe5179]

They consider it much safer to create conventional means of transport such as light rail, buses or trains.

[@jlafunk]

Why do you assume liberalism is about liberalism? This is about "progress." sort of like highways and trains and side-walks.

[@stephenxz2009]

Great idea but good for Europe and so, not in Asia.

[@nb117]

PRT could be adapted down to the consumer level and you could even own your own and it would park in your garage. Imagine going in your garage and pushing a few buttons then you are at the mall or grocery store or anywhere you wanted to be without having to drive there. Obviously it would take some time to get the track to all those destination but new developments would come standard with the guide ways. Image ordering something in California and having it delivered in Boston in a few hours instead of a few weeks at half the cost? The biggest opponents are Transportation companies who would not be able to complete unless they adapted. They could but it is easier just to POO POO the idea as unrealistic or visually unappealing or not cost effective or a million other reasons. The real reason. GREED.....

[@yadgar1969]

Really cool would be personal cars docked to modular apartments as additional rooms when not used for travelling!