Post Number: 852
|Posted on Friday, June 01, 2007 - 11:59 am: || |
Detroit Metro airport hopes to add a monorail to rental car companies
Quote: Detroit Metro Airport director Lester Robinson said the facility is looking to add a monorail and to move all vehicle rental agencies north of I-94.... The monorail would link the relocated rental agencies with the terminals, he said, and would be compatible with any plan for a light-rail route between Ann Arbor and Detroit.
http://www.detnews.com/apps/pb cs.dll/article?AID=/20070601/U PDATE/706010440/1003
Interesting, even though this is just a study (and of course any AA to Detroit line would not be light rail). How would such a "monorail" or people mover be configured? It would be great to a connecting rail link between the proposed DTW AA to Detroit station and the actual airport (especially if the line would serve car rental customers, i.e. making the line more viable from a cost perspective).
Post Number: 875
|Posted on Friday, June 01, 2007 - 12:04 pm: || |
What would happen to the shuttle bus drivers?
Post Number: 248
|Posted on Friday, June 01, 2007 - 12:46 pm: || |
screw the shuttle, no we'll use the shuttle till the train is built
Post Number: 1333
|Posted on Friday, June 01, 2007 - 12:48 pm: || |
"What would happen to the shuttle bus drivers?"
Obstructionist says what?
Post Number: 853
|Posted on Friday, June 01, 2007 - 1:04 pm: || |
Of note, Toronto's Pearson International Airport has recently opened a rail shuttle service (automated people mover) that runs between the airport's two major terminals, an airport hotel, and a parking garage.
It would make DTW very convenient if they could link the 2 major terminals, some parking, the car rental facilities and an commuter rail station.
Post Number: 1203
|Posted on Friday, June 01, 2007 - 1:19 pm: || |
Post Number: 1052
|Posted on Friday, June 01, 2007 - 1:20 pm: || |
This is certainly a good idea and will be needed to better connect the airport to the AA-DET line, however, it seems to me that it would be somewhat difficult to run a monorail all the way down between the north terminal and McNamara terminal. At least up Merriman Road to Michigan Ave, there aren't too many existing things to go around.
Post Number: 877
|Posted on Friday, June 01, 2007 - 1:32 pm: || |
>Obstructionist says what?
I didn't call him an obstructionist. I could think of a word or two a lot more colorful than that...
Post Number: 683
|Posted on Friday, June 01, 2007 - 3:57 pm: || |
I don't really care much since I don't rent cars at DTW. I do rent them at several other airports and my view is based on how I'd feel if I were an incoming rental car customer.
This is just another pie-in-the-sky make-work- let's-spend-a-lot-of-money scheme. Let the contract graft and corruption begin.
Who do you think would pay for such a make-work project? Business people coming into Detroit, the kind of people we should be trying to impress.
Based on the cost of American Airline's new inter-terminal system which cost almost $2 billion, I'd say constructing a both-way system all the way across I-94 would cost at least that.
Do any other major airports have such a system? None that I know of. Both ORD and DFW are several times larger than DTW, with thousands more daily rental car customers tha DTW, and they don't have them.
It will take measurably longer to get to the lots by rail than by bus, even w/ a loop system (several trains going out to the lots and returning on a parallel track). There would have to be several stops, one at each rental car company.
Those idiots running DTW can't keep toilet paper and hand towels in the johns so one can only imagine how they's screw up a light rail system to serve the car rental companies.
The car rental companies must cringe when they read this stuff. Lester just goes up to Mackinaw w/ these harebrained schemes just to get a place at the podium to hear himself talk and get his name in the paper.
Post Number: 832
|Posted on Friday, June 01, 2007 - 4:52 pm: || |
O'hare (ORD) does have an automated "transit" line, it runs between all terminals and out to rental cars and long-term parking lots.
I bet the auto rental companies actually would applaud this; it reduces their overhead; no more drivers or vans to maintain, fill w/ fuel, etc.
The landscape around the current auto rental lots is dismal, with busted up streets, cruddy old buildings, and it's sort of a bitch to get to if you aren't familiar with the area. Not real inviting to visitors.
I suspect that the Airport Authority would actually like the current rental lot property for further hanger & taxi-way development, which I would assume brings a higher land value.
Chances are, when they complete the new terminal and demo Smith, they will have to construct some sort of conveyance to link the two terminals anyway; why not extend it north to cover the car rental lots, in a new north of I-94 location or the present. I don't know how many vehicles get rented at DTW a year, but a couple dollar surcharge per vehicle and some kick in from the rental companies (due to the overhead savings) could go a ways to help pay the bonds required to build this thing.
Post Number: 308
|Posted on Friday, June 01, 2007 - 5:32 pm: || |
Not quite. Use the San Fran Airport as an example. It has a monorail that connects the airport with the rental car parking garages and also the greater San Fran Metrorail. Note that each rental car company in several large cities doesn't have a separate facility but rather share a parking garage with different levels for different companies. Madison, Washington Reagan and San Fran are all examples off the top of my head. Sometimes I think the people who post all these naysaying remarks don't often frequent urban cities outside Michigan and see how communities with mass transit truly operate. By sharing one monorail - each individual company doesn't have to pay drivers/buses/upkeep/insurance and thus absorb additional incremental costs.
Post Number: 915
|Posted on Friday, June 01, 2007 - 5:42 pm: || |
It makes sense and by tieing it to the AA-Det line... it makes more sense.
Post Number: 277
|Posted on Friday, June 01, 2007 - 5:53 pm: || |
Orlando has the people-mover technology connecting its 3 terminals.
Post Number: 684
|Posted on Friday, June 01, 2007 - 6:06 pm: || |
RlrRD does have an "automated"(read "antiquated") "transit" line that runs around the airport. It DOES NOT stop at the rental car lots; it's 150 feet above ground as it passes that area. I'm in ORD at least twice a month and I have NEVER seen a person in one of those little automated (toy) cars (out as far as the rental lots.)
Belleislerunner: I was on 78 flights last year, and 31 so far this year, w/ 4 to 6 more coming up before the end of the month. Not one was w/i MI.
I am frequently in ORD and DFW, with other flights to Anchorage, Seattle, NYC, and FL among occasional others. There may be rail lines to rental car lots that I'm not aware of, such as San Fran as you claim. (The last time I flew into SF (5 years ago, and I went to a separate lot, not a central garage as Belleislerunner claims.) We were bussed to the rental car lot, and it took us 40+ minutes after picking up the car to get out of the airport in mid-afternoon; the traffic was that bad. I'll never go there again. Life's too short.
As far as having all the rental car operators in one building, that's the worst thing that can happen. (Hertz at ORD has almost 4000 cars.) Try flying into Midway. All rental cars must be returned to one central garage. Try returning a car on a Sunday evening. The line to get into the garage can be a mile long, backed way up Cicero Ave. The last time I tried it I made a dangerous U-turn, drove a mile south on Cicero, made a U-turn and parked my Hertz car in a public parking garage. I ran down, handed the guy the ticket, and said "go and get 'er." (I use Hertz a lot so got no flack.) I made my flight, which had been was fully booked, but 15 or more people did not make the flight. The gate agent said it's typical during high volume periods that many people miss their flights because they can't return their rental cars as easily as they think they can. It was the last flight of the day too.
We'll see what happens in Detroit.
[How did that Face replace the "O" in ORD? I did not do it. Gremlins.]
(Message edited by 3rdworldcity on June 01, 2007)
Post Number: 3254
|Posted on Friday, June 01, 2007 - 6:13 pm: || |
ORD--as in the old ORcharD that was there previously...
Post Number: 1022
|Posted on Friday, June 01, 2007 - 7:09 pm: || |
Livernoisyard, not exactly. During WWII when it opened, it was called Orchard Place Airport. This is where ORD comes from--but it took until the 60s for ORD to take over "busiest airport in the country" from MDW.
On a side note, can you imagine that? Chicago Midway was the busiest airport in the world? Yikes.
Post Number: 833
|Posted on Friday, June 01, 2007 - 7:17 pm: || |
Yes, you are correct, the ORD tram does not stop at the rental car lots, only the last stop for extended parking (I've had the unfortunate opportunity to park in these god-forsaken lots when their deck was full and had to ride this jerky mess of a train).
You must be a glutton for punishment to go through ORD that often. So much as a bird shits on the runway and the whole traffic schedule at the place gets thrown out of whack. Has to be the worst airport in the country to fly in/out of. Period.
Post Number: 1107
|Posted on Friday, June 01, 2007 - 7:21 pm: || |
quote: The last time I flew into SF was earlier this year. It is exactly as Belleislerunner claims.
(The last time I flew into SF (5 years ago, and I went to a separate lot, not a central garage as Belleislerunner claims.)
Post Number: 3256
|Posted on Friday, June 01, 2007 - 8:43 pm: || |
Before there was any airport at O'Hare, there were orchards. How do you think the original community and airport were named? As the place got bigger and bigger, the orchards got smaller and eventually vanished.
The early pilots and controllers often referred to the place as the orchard in their abbreviated-speak.
Those three-letter designations were the names given to the long-wave omnidirectional beacons or the Adcock ranges used for navigational purposes sixty years ago. Their identifiers were sent out repeatedly in very slow speed International Morse code.
The type of emission used back then and now was classified as A2 by the FCC. A1 is keyed unmodulated continuous-wave (CW--typical radiotelegraph), A2 is keyed amplitute modulation (AM), and A3 is the AM used in typical AM broadcasting.
(Message edited by Livernoisyard on June 01, 2007)
Post Number: 686
|Posted on Friday, June 01, 2007 - 8:44 pm: || |
So, they've changed it since I was there.
My 2nd flight was into MDW when I was 14 yrs old. It was at Christmas, at night, and those old prop planes came in low and slow. It was quite a sight.
I never knew how they came up w/ ORD. Live and learn.
It was named "O'Hare" after a young Chicago fighter pilot who was the first Chicago native to be killed in WW II. His father was a high profile criminal defense lawyer who was Capone's lawyer of choice.
Also, they're preparing a $7 BILLION expansion of the airport, w/ one new runway.
Rrl, bet you can't wait. Bigger and better, right? [I agree with you, it can be a difficult place, but once you get into the terminal (always American Airlines or Alaska for me) I like it quite a bit. And it's much better than MDW in my opinion.
Post Number: 2843
|Posted on Friday, June 01, 2007 - 9:06 pm: || |
The idea of a transportation hub across the highway from DTW is a great one. The fact that they are thinking ahead to making this compatible with the commuter rail stop shows the priority that the DTW people are placing on this rail idea, and enhances my belief that the line will be a success in the long run.
Post Number: 687
|Posted on Friday, June 01, 2007 - 9:30 pm: || |
Well, Mackinaw, maybe you're right. But, I don't agree. We'll see.
Anyway, do you think it is wise to announce something still in the investigation stage before acquiring the necessary land? Sounds like a Dennis Archer blunder. If people take them seriously, the price of playing poker just went way up.
I can't picture where they would put it.Everything on both sides of Merriman is pretty well developed.
Post Number: 34
|Posted on Friday, June 01, 2007 - 10:01 pm: || |
For the amount of "concession fee recovery" and extra tax paid on renting cars whenever visiting Detroit, one might expect a gold plated low rider shuttle ride out to the rental car lots.
Instead, visitors are treated to pot hole hell as shuttle buses bounce over the East Service Road and Goddard. It's been that bad for years.
An "AirTrain" like they have between the terminals, garages and rental car lots in SFO would be great for visitors, but I'd like it only if it connected with the commuter rail stop (for locals to take advantage of it) there as well. That's where AirTrain falls short in San Fran.
As for acquiring land, isn't all the Metro Airport land south of 94 between Middlebelt & Vining already owned by the state / county / city? I don't see any issues there.
p.s. they really should fix that shameful East Service Road in the immediate future.
Post Number: 5568
|Posted on Friday, June 01, 2007 - 10:21 pm: || |
The article already says that "and would be compatible with any plan for a light-rail route between Ann Arbor and Detroit."
Post Number: 688
|Posted on Friday, June 01, 2007 - 10:35 pm: || |
They want to put it NORTH of I-94. "Where" is the question.
Post Number: 108
|Posted on Friday, June 01, 2007 - 11:25 pm: || |
I think that this project is a great idea and is somewhat realistic because there is a measurable benefit related to it. Linking the blue deck/new terminal with the McNamara terminal is something I was hoping they would do. Linking the airport to the AA-DET commuter rail is something they must do to make that successful (ie high ridership consistently). Linking all of that with an off-site car rental city doesn't much matter to me but benefits the rental companies (see previous posts), the airport (extra land on the airport, etc), and the travelers (convenience, another new clean facility, and common rental lot area). This is a slam dunk, and the sheer number of passengers (and car renters? not sure) would make even a $2Billion project absorbable over a decade.
There is a LOT of land north of I-94. I think this would be a great project... with all the rentals shared at one facility/"stop" on the train. Would make all the naysayers for the AA-DET communter rail who always say first "yeah but no one is going to want to take a cab from Wayne train stop to the airport" to shutup (hopefully!)
Post Number: 2845
|Posted on Friday, June 01, 2007 - 11:32 pm: || |
There was just a story about the purchase of some Ford Motor Co. property. Don't know exactly where it is. At first glance, though, there is massive empty land (at least on a map that's a year old) where the train tracks hit Merriman on the east side of the road.
Post Number: 5569
|Posted on Saturday, June 02, 2007 - 12:13 am: || |
The land that SEMCOG is seeking to buy (or have donated to them) for the commuter station is the huge lot at Michigan and Merriman, southeast corner.
The lot is large enough, I'd think for quite a few rental car companies and the commuter station, which I imagine to be small, anyway. Even if not, there is tons of land along, or near, Merriman between Michigan and 94.
Post Number: 2849
|Posted on Saturday, June 02, 2007 - 12:22 am: || |
Yep that's what I was looking at on the map. Makes a ton of sense to me. In addition, you're right on Michigan Ave. near a lot of population in the City of Wayne which might utilize commuter rail to go to Detroit or Ann Arbor.
Post Number: 407
|Posted on Saturday, June 02, 2007 - 12:29 am: || |
If I read your post correctly, A2 is still in use? I had got the impression that Morse was dead everywhere. No longer even a requirement for an Amateur Radio license.
Formerly .-- -... ..--- --- .... ...
Post Number: 3258
|Posted on Saturday, June 02, 2007 - 1:45 am: || |
A2 (keyed AM) is still used for LW radio beacons unless they were obsoleted recently. I was first a ham in 1957 (eighth grade) and first had my FCC 1st Class radiotelephone license back while a HS senior. A1 is the typical CW--International Morse code used world-wide.
Back in high school, I had worked some 300+ countries via CW and nearly that number using conventional AM (high-level plate modulation) or SSB A3.
One of the advantages of being the chief engineer of a 10KW AM daytimer back while I was a 22 year-old college senior was using the three towers (now two towers) of 1510 WAUK (plus 20 KW FM) and pumping my homebrew 4 KW ham rig (a tad bit overpowered!) on 160, 80, or 75 meters. The towers were 5/8 wavelength high (long) on 75 meters--the ideal height. I even built my own ham rig power divider in the transmitter building and the directional phasors in the dog houses for the individual towers--giving some 5 db gain in certain beamed directions.
Using meter spades, large battery clamps and copper straps, and such, it only required about five minutes to switch WAUK from daytime AM broadcast to short-wave ham use at night and back again.
Calling CQ on 75 SSB would land me LAs in Argentina really easily, among others, whereas they would often mention that I was the only American that they could hear.
Post Number: 5570
|Posted on Saturday, June 02, 2007 - 1:51 am: || |
Mackinaw, that it really wouldn't matter if it were near a population center or not, as the main stop, here, is the airport. It's going to get used, anyway, as one of the major spots (if not the major spot) along the commuter line.
Post Number: 409
|Posted on Saturday, June 02, 2007 - 2:33 am: || |
Great story - I never heard of anybody co-opting a radio station's towers for ham use. I was a Heathkit baby myself, and am a bit younger than you. I never graduated to voice because I was interested in long-distance conversations and collecting locations, and CW was better suited to that.
I read in the papers a year or two ago that the US military, the Navy I believe specifically, had decommissioned its last CW station. It's only since earlier this year that the FCC does not require Morse Code for any class of radio license whatsoever.
In July of 1999, Globe Wireless sent what they claim is the final commercial Morse Code maritime message to ever emanate from this continent. To be cute about it, they sent "What hath God wrought". This is the actual message, for the record:
"CQ DE KFS
THIS IS THE FINAL CW TRANSMISSION FROM STATION KFS - THE LAST
COMMERCIAL RADIOTELEGRAPH STATION IN NORTH AMERICA.
APPROPRIATELY, WE CLOSE CW AND EMBARK ON A NEW ERA OF
COMMUNICATION WITH SAMUEL F.B. MORSE'S WORDS OF 155 YEARS AGO
BT NW CL 73 BT
WHAT HATH GOD WROUGHT BT DE KFS SK"
Post Number: 2853
|Posted on Saturday, June 02, 2007 - 8:41 am: || |
Lmich, I was just talking about a possibility. True commuter rail will also have some daily riders going point-to-point. There have got to be people from Dearborn who work in Ann Arbor, and people from Wayne who work at the Fisher Building or Henry Ford Hospital, as an example. That land by Merriman is large enough to also build a park and ride garage.
True commuter rail really would take off if they can build a station downtown. The possibility has been mentioned by Amtrak.
The thing that still sticks in my mind as a concern, after trudging through Detroit at 15 mph on Amtrak just yesterday, is how they are going to get these trains to move fast on these old tracks with so many freight trains also passing through in the city?
(Message edited by mackinaw on June 02, 2007)
Post Number: 1080
|Posted on Saturday, June 02, 2007 - 8:59 am: || |
I can answer that question, Mackinaw. The line between Detroit and Dearborn used to be owned by Conrail. Since Conrail was bought by CSX, NS, and I think one other company. This is also the area where the line switches from NS to CN. Therefore, Amtrak has slow orders from about Trumbull to Livernois Yard. Henceforth, it's a slow ride, even if the tracks were in good repair. Not much can be done, unless Amtrak got a direct route between Dearborn and Detroit.
Post Number: 2855
|Posted on Saturday, June 02, 2007 - 9:41 am: || |
There are a ton of switches, and a lot of slowing down to wait for other freight trains to pass through the switch-junctions. Here's another problem: a lot of times the Amtrak trains have to wait for each other to pass. There is a long stretch in/near A2 with only one set of tracks. While my eastbound train proceeded east from A2 last night, we had to keep the west bound train waiting east of Ypsi for a decent amount of time before we passed. They'd have to orchestrate things just right in terms of timing to avoid this with a commuter line. There will be the cost effectiveness, and the convenience/peace of mind, but a lot of people won't feel good when a so-called commuter line has to stop on the tracks or slow down to a crawl. People will second-guess their decision and whether it would be wiser to just take the highway.
Post Number: 1081
|Posted on Saturday, June 02, 2007 - 1:10 pm: || |
That is the exact same problem in western Michigan where Amtrak is single-tracked with very few sidings. However, I would be more worried about the area between Detroit and Dearborn. Too slow for that short of a distance.
Post Number: 1474
|Posted on Saturday, June 02, 2007 - 3:08 pm: || |
My guess is that if this becomes reality (which it looks like it will) they will add sidings and possibly connectors so these problems do not happen. This is what they were going to do when they were doing the proposal for the Detroit-Lansing-AA line that really has turned into they Detroit to AA line. They were going to construct a connector. If can get our act together, there is federal money for this construction. And I'm sure NS, CN would not complain about improvements being paid for by someone else.
Post Number: 1082
|Posted on Saturday, June 02, 2007 - 4:55 pm: || |
NS is actually trying (supposedly), to spin off their line between Kalamazoo and Yipsi.
http://www.mlive.com/news/kzga zette/index.ssf?/base/news-23/ 118071142978320.xml&coll=7
That could make things interesting.
Post Number: 898
|Posted on Saturday, June 02, 2007 - 10:51 pm: || |
There were some negative comments above about the management of DTW. DTW is a rising star and widely rated one of the best run airport operations in the country. I have a great deal of confidence in the aiport's managment. If they think the rental car tram makes financial and operation sense, I would support them.
What would be great is to continue the NW train to the north terminal; someone who works for the airport told me this was considered and dismissed for security reasons.
Post Number: 81
|Posted on Saturday, June 02, 2007 - 11:41 pm: || |
Extending the NW train to the north terminal would be either excessively expensive or practically unfeasible. The train would have to be below ground before it got out of the McNamara terminal in order to allow planes to traverse taxiways and tarmac (not to mention the need to cross a runway).
Because of the runway thing, a monorail probably would originate at or below ground level at the McNamara terminal, and probably would run next to the access road to avoid cutting off tarmac space around the north terminal (depending on how they arrange things after tearing down the Smith terminal). Anything else would require looping south around the outside of the airport property, which would be much too far of a detour.
Post Number: 3341
|Posted on Sunday, June 03, 2007 - 2:50 am: || |
The McNamara terminal train is just a horizontal elevator, pulled back & forth by a steel cable and maintained by folks from Otis Elevator. Even if it had a straight shot, I doubt it could be extended to the north terminal.
Post Number: 5577
|Posted on Sunday, June 03, 2007 - 3:31 am: || |
Why would you doubt it could be extended to the North Terminal if the two were connected/enclosed? If anything, the system sounds even more simple to expand than a more complicated one.
Post Number: 340
|Posted on Sunday, June 03, 2007 - 5:03 pm: || |
Miken, you are absolutely right about the NW tram. located at the north end of the terminal is one massive wheel that operates the tram, if the tram were to be extended to the rental parking lots across 94, the wheel would probably have a diameter of the base of the Ren Cen. <313>
Post Number: 1713
|Posted on Sunday, June 03, 2007 - 5:39 pm: || |
Maybe it's for the best that the little indoor cable train in the NW terminal was never extended to the other terminal, as it's probably better to start over with a longer-distance system which can reach the commuter rail stop as well as the other terminal. Getting the car rental companies along the same line would be a nice bonus, and would help justify the cost.
Just the fact that the airport people are talking about this is great news.
Post Number: 1715
|Posted on Sunday, June 03, 2007 - 10:51 pm: || |
I also wonder if the people working on the "Aerotropolis" concept are behind this idea, or are at least working together with the airport people on the plans.
http://www.crainsdetroit.com/a pps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/2007 0601/REG/70601007/1039
Post Number: 5581
|Posted on Sunday, June 03, 2007 - 11:09 pm: || |
I can't imagine that they wouldn't be working in conjunction with this plan.
Post Number: 630
|Posted on Sunday, June 03, 2007 - 11:12 pm: || |
3rdworldcity - That 7 billion dollar expansion is alot more than adding one runway.. They are doing ALOT.. Reconfiguring the whole airport.. Here's the site link..
Post Number: 692
|Posted on Monday, June 04, 2007 - 10:55 am: || |
You are of course correct. I just pointed out(at least was trying to, but not very well) that for all that money, one would think they'd build two new ones, which everyone says they need.
And, it appears from link you posted that indeed they are going to build the second new one by 2011; I hadn't known that.
I think the terminals themselves are great, but the infrastructure (roads drop-off points etc) is terrible and hopefully some of the $7 B will be used for those purposes.
Thanks for posting the link.
[I'm posting this from DFW, between planes; it's my favorite airport.]