Why Monorails Are A Terrible Idea
109,529
Published 2020-04-30
Monorail, Monorail, Monorail!
A monorail by definition is a train that uses a single rail track. Some monorail systems use magnets to levitate the monorail car but many others use rubber tires to make contact with the rail. Funnily this latter design actually has more wheels than normal trains, requiring one to power the train and another two on either side to keep the car connected to the track.
So why build one? A monorail has several advantages over a typical duo railway line.
Monorails actually have the least visual impact of all elevated rail options. With a single track, they can seemly glide aloft those city streets and still let in plenty of sunlight compared to older overhead rail found in Cities like Chicago and New york.
Plus less material is needed to make a monorail and therefore it can be cheaper.
The monorail is one of the most efficient systems in the world, hardly breaking down and able to maintain around 99% uptime. It is also less expensive to operate than standard rail. This might have to do with many of the monorail systems being privately owned enterprises, subsidized by the tourist attractions they are affiliated with, rather than public government departments.
Alas… for as fresh and cool as they are, monorails have some pretty steep disadvantages.
In order to achieve stability, the “rail” IN monorail tends to be both significantly wider and taller than you would think based solely on the name.
Compared to regular duo rail, the loading gauge of the monorail cars is essentially the same, and thus there is not a massive benefit in slightly reducing the footprint of the railbed. The mass of the vehicles carrying the passengers, if the same as two-wheeled designs, will impact around the same amount of force and will require the same amount of construction.
This means the same depth for the pylons and the same weight-bearing pillars.
And bad news for Suspended monorails, that requires even more space to place their rail infrastructure.
Plus think about leveled crossings and movement at the ground & underground level. A monorail structure requires at least some elevation at all times, while duorails can crossroads with less than a foot depth required.
Despite appearances, when underground a monorail requires more superstructure than standard duo rail.
Again, suspended monorails are even worst in all three scenarios.
Monorails make sense if the line is elevated nearly 100% of the track, but beyond that, there are very few transport corridors that make sense. Even at Disney World, they used a monorail to connect between different resorts, but when it came to its Hong Kong park, they opted for duo rail due to an underground section and connection with existing other rails.
And there is the technical challenge of switching tracks. On a duo-rail system, because of the way the train sits on top of the tracks, they can criss-cross over each other to let other trains pass or to swap out engines. On a monorail, because the monorail cars wrap around the entire tracks, you can't entirely use the same techniques.
Cross over tracks for monorails are not impossible... they are just really slow and costly to build. Plus, it is yet another component that can break down.
Monorails got really popular around the middle of the last century, with cities building the retro-futurism transport options to make a statement...
But by the 1970s and 1980s, a monorail was seen as a failed and disappointing public transport system and it was beaten out by cheaper alternatives, such as buses, trams, and existing trains. There where only a few places where a monorail made sense over other options, and they were built there more as a stunt than an actual public transport option... like at theme parks or tourist areas.
In fact, in the last few years, cities around the world went out their way to get rid of monorail programs.
In summary, to answer the question why did monorails not take off, and why did they never really become the transport of the world of tomorrow?
They are a niche transportation mode, much more expensive than light rail or streetcars, much more visible than subways, much less flexible than buses, much more difficult to engineer than two-rail based systems and while better than elevated trains in terms of blocking out the sky, they still block out the sky.
But don't despair, plenty of monorails are still slowly being built around the world today in China, Istanbul, and Malaysia.
China’s BYD and Canada’s Bombardier plan to add 295 miles of new track by the end of 2020, and to put that into perspective, since 1900 only 254 miles of track has been built globally.
Speaking to media, LA mayor Mayor Eric Garcetti said “With a small footprint, with electric motors, safety for both earthquakes and access, it could be on the table.
All Comments (21)
-
I ride a monorail almost on a daily basis. I live in Wuppertal. And not only does it work, it's has been the most important means of transport here for the last 120 years, with a daily ridership of over 80,000 people a day. Just recently the transport company here had bought 31 new trains to replace the old ones to increase the service from 3-4 minutes to a service every 2 minutes during rush hour. So it's pretty safe to say that the suspended monorail here won't stop service anytime soon.
-
as some one who used to work with the Yui rail in Okinawa, Japan. the benefits of monorail are that it is runs quieter than other forms of elevated rail, its useful when obtaining right of way is limited/difficult, has good ability to climb hills, blocks less of the skyline, and for tourists, offers a great view of the city. the scenarios where monorails can be justified are few, but they do exist.
-
Ive been on monorails in canada and japan. There, they are fully integrated into the public transport system. I understand that it has its disadvantages as you pointed out however, it really depends where you place them really. Monorails were not intended to replace the duorail and such but to give riders/commuters options. In dense cities like those in japan, commuters are provided monorails that hover rivers, creeks, roads as well as duorails that can go highspeed underground. The monorail idea is not a failure, the government is.
-
The Sydney Monorail was NOT built for the 2000 Olympics, it opened in 1988 before Sydney even decided to bid for the Olympics. It was built to link the new Darling Harbour development with the city centre. It was meant to link up with city train stations like Circular Quay, however it’s construction was opposed by the opposition party, and when they gained government although they could not terminate the construction contract, they sabotaged the route preventing it connecting as much of the city as originally planned.
-
They aren't terrible. It's a niche market, thus it depends on the city.
-
I think this video should be renamed "why monorails are a terrible idea in AMERICA". 4:34 Conventional rail is usually designed as one big slab track not separate which blocks more light compared to monorail. Support beams are also smaller on monorail as less concrete is used. 5:08 Tunnel size should be around the same to accommodate ventilation systems and overhead power lines used in most rail lines. 5:47 Hong Kong used normal rail since MTR could just convert their existing M-stock to save cost. 6:19 Interesting fact the Tokyo monorail switch at hamamatsucho has operated for over 50 years without a single fault. 6:35 Those switches on the Osaka monorail has also operated flawlessly every 3 minutes thus with proper maintenance I don't see why it's a problem. 7:10 Monorails only failed in America because they don't go to places people want to go. Eg. Seattle (short line and failed expansion proposals) and Las Vegas which does not even link to the nearby airport. 7:40 The Sydney monorail was actually built in 1988 as a link to darling harbour. It failed as it was a single-directional loop with low capacity and high running costs. Sydney actually replaced the monorail with light rail costing a whopping $3 billion despite being plagued by breakdowns and slow running speeds. Overall monorails do actually work in cities as a means of transport if planned properly (Chongqing, Japan, Sao Paulo, South Korea) not like in America where the monorail lines don't serve any effective means as mass transportation.
-
The primary reason that monorail proposals have failed in America is because railroad construction planners and road construction planners come into the bidding process and underbid monorail, and then later down the line run into massive construction costs which put the projects way over cost. You don't see this issue happening in other countries where transportation is heavily regulated at the federal level. Many cities are short-sighted when it comes to considering monorail for construction. Los Angeles famously rejected a monorail project from Alweg (who built the Seattle and Disney systems), who offered to build it for free in exchange for revenue, and would then turn it over to the city when the revenue paid off the construction costs. LA decided to build more freeways, and we see how that worked out. Seattle looked at expanding the monorail there a decade ago, it was rejected in favor of a light rail project which ended up over-budget, tied up the city for years, is not making a profit, and has added to congestion. Las Vegas has a nice monorail, but the company has had to fight with the city for years to get permission to expand, as well as facing never-ending objection from taxi cab companies. Currently LV Monorail is the only proposed public transportation extension to the new Allegiant Stadium. When you look at the rest of the world, however, you will notice what sets all of them apart from Sydney. That would be integration into the public transportation network. Only in Sydney did the city not do this. They expected that the downtown monorail would be a tourist attraction that would fetch additional tourist revenue. But when buses are 3x cheaper and go to all the same places as the monorail, it was a no-brainer for tourists. Despite calls for it to be re-developed into a connector for downtown employees, no proposal was ever put forward. Everywhere else, monorail systems tie into public transportation that links to buses, metro trains, light rail, trams, subways, seaports and airports. Almost all of them use the same integrated fare and ticketing systems as the rest of the public transport systems. Further compounding Sydney's issue was the fact that the company which designed it, Von Roll, historically had only worked on amusement park rides and essentially used the same vehicle, which was ill-suited for public transportation. The company eventually went bankrupt and it became impossible to obtain spare parts for when the vehicles prematurely broke down. Public transportation systems in Japan were developed by Mitsubishi and Hitachi. In Korea they were developed by Samsung, in Japan by BYD and CRCC - all licensing Hitachi technology, which itself was developed from Alweg. When you look at the long history of monorail, Sydney is the only city that has ever dismantled its monorail network. Everywhere else it has been built, it has worked, it has been profitable, and it boasts impressive safety records and uptime. To me, that doesn't speak to failure.
-
"If you've ever ridden a monorail, let me know..." Just remember, you asked for it. I drove Mark VI's at Walt Disney World for seven years. I've driven the Mark V's at Disneyland, the red ALWEG train in Seattle, and one of the repurposed Mark IV trains in Las Vegas as well as the new model that they currently operate. I've ridden trains at Miami Metro Zoo (now Zoo Miami), Monorail Safari at Dallas Zoo, Wild Asia Monorail at Bronx Zoo, Skytrail at Minneapolis Zoological Gardens, Pearlridge Center Monorail, Carowinds Monorail, Capital Blue Cross Monorail at HersheyPark, Dutch Wonderland Monorail, Philadelphia Zoo Safari Monorail, Geauga Lake Park Parkview Express Monorail, Riverside Park Monorail, California State Fair and Exposition, Six Flags Magic Mountain Metro, Bumble Bee Monorail at Santa's Village, Minirail at La Ronde, The Veldt Monorail at Busch Gardens Tampa, the Jacksonville Skyway, the Tampa International Airport Monorail, the Newark International Airport AirTrain, and the Wild Animal Safari Monorail at King's Island. For stories about "out of service" systems, I've traveled to the sites of the Luxor-Excalibur Monorail, the State Fair of Oklahoma Monorail, the Forest Flight Monorail at Rainbow Springs, Miami Sequarium SpaceRail, and the 1964 New York World's Fair AMF Monorail. There may be more. I can't remember them all right now.
-
For future reference Bombardier is French so it is pronounced "Bom-bar-dee-ay" not "Bom-ba-deer"
-
"Monorail sucks. Why build monorails when you can build duorails?" Because you CAN'T build duorails in some places! Underground is not your free real estate. Things are down there
-
You can find a number in Japan integrated into public transport. Likely the first thing you ride when you arrive in Haneda Airport.
-
According to Chongqing, monorail's rubber tracks makes then quieter. With the line going through and near buildings, it would make sense.
-
An advantage not mentioned is THE VIEW. It sure beats a subway in this category. It also beats surface rail as it allows you to see over a lot of buildings and trees. I’ve taken monorails in Seattle and Las Vegas and this is definitely my favorite thing about the experience.
-
7:47 - Genuinely thought the side of that train said Monofail for a moment!
-
Suspended monorails are even more niche, and the only place I know where it was built not for a publicity stunt, but because of the surrounding terrain is Wuppertal, Germany
-
Monorails remain among the most effective, inexpensive, and space-efficient way to integrate mass transit into developed cities with minimal disruption to existing structures. (Trams are nearly as good, except they disrupt car traffic and hit pedestrians.) Their efficiency is likely exactly why city developers hate monorails: no excuse to engage in massive tear-downs followed by lucrative, subsidized redevelopment projects.
-
In the Philippines they makes sense because our population density and space problem is not a option for more conventional trains like have you seen are cities manila in one of the top 10 most populated density in the world in rush hours.
-
Thanks for all the views! I'll be making a video each week on a very cool topic. So subscribe to see more :) If you have any ideas - Post them below!
-
The case wasn't really made that they were "so bad." I saw one technical challenge that could be solved: oligarchical production, and one actual inherent problem: rail-changing, and one non-issue: pylon footprints. The advantages of almost never breaking down and being faster offer compensation for its drawback of rail changing challenges. I feel like someone has already figured out a better solution to rail-changing, but I'll never hear about it since monorails are so marginal and niche now.
-
I do not miss the Sydney Monorail. Its design of compartmentalised cars was inefficient and it connected poorly with other public transport options. A monorail designed with standing room and interconnected cars would have been a lot more efficient and profitable.
