Tom Anderson wrote:
On Thu, 1 Jul 2004, John Rowland wrote:


http://www.reuters.co.uk/newsPackage...7&section=news


http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/a...ing%20Standard

I'll believe that when I see it!

There's at least one picture of it in the architecture gallery at
the RA summer exhibition (which has some good stuff this year -
worth a visit for the architecture and the drawings by
non-artists, even if the real art is the usual twee toss).

Presumably it's one of the pictures that's already available on the web.
According to articles in The Wharf, the freesheet that circulates around
Canary Wharf, it "will achieve speeds of around 30 miles per hour in
town" (less than the tubes), and "would carry as many as 20,000
passengers an hour to and from Liverpool St [from Canary Wharf] in under
12 minutes". Note that Crossrail would carry up to 24,000 passsengers
an hour to Liverpool Street in 7 minutes (from Isle of Dogs, aka west
India Quay), would also relieve congestion on other routes, and would
not blight the street scene in the process.

Ken Livingstone provided the following response to a question from a GLA
member in January 2002, when Monometro was called Dragonfly MonoMetro:
"All monorail systems have common problems and failings which make them
difficult to justify. Monorails have operational drawbacks; are
incompatible with existing systems; have great difficulty in providing
safe evacuation routes and meeting the requirements of the Disability
Discrimination Act. All elevated monorails also have the disadvantage of
intrusive and unattractive structures. From the material shown to TfL
officers they have concluded that Dragonfly concept has not yet produced
any new ideas that overcome the basic drawbacks of monorails."

--
Richard J.
(to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address)