Quantcast

Something Monorail This Way Comes

la-times-skytrain.jpg
Ray Bradbury has written an editorial in the LA Times begging the city to build a monorail. In a year. A note from Seattlest to LAist: welcome to hell.

Mr. Bradbury is renowned for writing some of the most imaginative and unpredictable science fiction ever. Here is one example of his prowess at constructing alternate realities:

The monorail is extraordinary in that it can be built elsewhere and then carried in and installed in mid-street with little confusion and no destruction of businesses...Anyone who has ridden the Disneyland or Seattle monorails knows how quietly they move.

Ah yes, how quietly the monorail moves in Seattle. So slient, you don't know it is there. Oh wait, it isn't. Shit.

Research not being top of the list for fiction writers, Bradbury goes on to pontificate on the safety of monorails.

They also have been virtually accident-free. The history of the monorail shows few collisions or fatalities.

We'll give him "few" as an accurate qualifier, but ask that he include sudden fire infernos in his argument. Really, if you're going to use the Seattle monorail to build your case for why LA should construct one, wouldn't you want to confirm, just in case, that the Seattle monorail is actually running?

Contact the author of this article or email tips@seattlest.com with further questions, comments or tips.
By Courtney in on February 13, 2006 10:28 AM

Comments [rss]

  • jk1

    Based on everything I've read, monorail probably is the safest, most cost effective way to construct rapid transit. It has a light footprint, is quieter and causes less disruption while being built than either light rail or traditional subways/elevated trains. Additionally, aside the Seattle fire, monorails seem to have fewer accidents per mile than other forms of RT. In fact, compared to systems that run at street level and therefore come into conflict with automobiles, monorails are amazingly safe. Of course, public transit in general is far safer than other forms of transportation to begin with. In the end, as ever, Bradbury's science is less important than his ideas.

  • That sounds like a Shelbyville kind of idea.

  • Courtney Nash

    Hey Kevin, I voted for the monorail. Every. Single. Time. I'm a fan of the monorail or any (in theory) scalable public transportation, and I'm a huge fan of Bradbury's science fiction. Both are irrelevant to the point I was making: Wouldn't Bradbury's argument go over a wee bit better, when using Seattle as an example, if we had both 1) a working monorail and 2) not driven further monorail development into the ground as a city? We're not exactly the best example for him to use as a model city in comparision with LA.

  • Kevin

    Wow, wow, wow, wow, wow. Low, loooow blows there. If this was boxing you'd be banned in Nevada. Or, if you worked in the Bush Administration you'd get a promotion.



    Both accidents are not because of inherent monorail designs, its because of bad design and shoestring maintenance. You take any kind train and put the rails too close together without a proper signal and it'll happen. As for quiet, I've lived near the BART, I've lived with MUNI light rail, monorail noise is nonexistant compared to those two screechers.

  • Matt Silvie

    I met Ray Bradbury at the San Diego Comicon of 2002. He was a very sweet old man in a wheelchair, he insisted on paying for things even though everyone there gave him everything he wanted for free. His personal assistant was also evidently older than anyone at the convention. If Ray Bradbury says the monorail works in Seattle, then, by God, the monorail works in Seattle! Let's build one from his house to the all comic book stores on the West Coast.

  • g.raf

    this comes from a man who refuse to even drive a car

blog comments powered by Disqus
Home

send a tip

tips@seattlest.com

about

staff / advertising / contact / archive

contribute