A personal rapid transit/airport automated people mover comparison.
Advanced Search
Select up to three search categories and corresponding keywords using the fields to the right. Refer to the Help section for more detailed instructions.

Search our Collections & Repository

For very narrow results

When looking for a specific result

Best used for discovery & interchangable words

Recommended to be used in conjunction with other fields

Dates

to

Document Data
Library
People
Clear All
Clear All

For additional assistance using the Custom Query please check out our Help Page

i

A personal rapid transit/airport automated people mover comparison.

Filetype[PDF-303.79 KB]


English
Details You May Also Like

Details:

  • Creators:
    Muller, Peter J.
  • Corporate Creators:
    PRT Consulting, Inc.
  • Subject/TRT Terms:
  • Resource Type:
    Tech Report
  • Geographical Coverage:
  • Corporate Publisher:
    PRT Consulting, Inc.
  • Abstract:
    Airport automated people movers (AAPM) typically consist of driverless trains with

    up to about four cars each capable of carrying 20 to 100 passengers who are mostly

    standing. They have been successfully used for surface transportation in airports for

    over thirty years. A new category of automated people mover called personal rapid

    transit (PRT) is being implemented at London’s Heathrow International Airport.

    Although the Heathrow system will replace shuttle buses, it may be more pertinent to

    examine the differences between PRT and traditional AAPM.

    PRT uses small (3 to 4 passenger) vehicles (transportation pods or T-Pods) to

    automatically transport passengers and their luggage non-stop to their destinations

    along designated guideways. Trips are typically on-demand and T-Pods are often

    waiting at stations prior to the arrival of passengers. The resulting short wait and trip

    times combine with seated travel to provide an exceptionally high level of service.

    This paper compares AAPM systems to PRT systems similar to the type being

    installed at Heathrow Airport. Items compared include infrastructure items such as

    stations, guideways and tunnels; level of service items such as waiting, standing and

    trip times; cost items such as capital and operating costs; as well as safety and

    security issues. The paper discusses PRT viability and concludes with a brief

    discussion of the ability of PRT to facilitate solutions to common airport issues such

    as in-concourse transportation and curbside congestion.

    PRT is found to have many advantages over AAPM for transporting passengers and

    their luggage on airports. It is suggested that PRT alternatives should be included in

    airport planning projects.

  • Format:
    PDF
  • Collection(s):
  • Main Document Checksum:
  • Download URL:
  • File Type:

Supporting Files

  • No Additional Files
More +

You May Also Like

Checkout today's featured content at rosap.ntl.bts.gov