Maybe Saltzman will fly up and save you
The engineers say the possibility of a midair stall is remote. So remote, they prefer we don't talk about it. But, if it happens, you don't want to be up there unless you can grow wings or you don't mind a little rope burn.Can't wait to see them try that at night, in a 35-mile-an-hour wind and hard rain. Maybe it will only break down on sunny days.If it stalls, the tram's driver opens the door, hangs a rope from the frame out of the car and tosses it to firefighters on the ground. They climb up into the car by rope and help the passengers down one by one in a harness.
Remember, this is coming from the people who told you it would cost only $15 million to build.
And how much are we spending to train the firefighters for this one? Or are we just going to show them a video? (Image by Portland Freelancer.)
| Posted at 12:58 AM | Permalink |
|
Comments (1)
It's the only one in the world to span such a large distance between towers, and only the second "commuter tram" built in the U.S.
What could possibly go wrong?
Posted by: Mister Tee at August 27, 2006 03:01 AMHas anybody out there heard yet what the annual operating cost of this clunker is supposed to be?
Posted by: Jack Bog at August 27, 2006 03:44 AMIn real dollars, or Monopoly Money?
Posted by: Mister Tee at August 27, 2006 06:27 AMThe 1996 floods soaked us, and the tram's South Waterfront station is just a few blocks from the river. Could flooding shut this thing down?
Not unless it passes the 100-year flood line.
Fortunately for OHSU, those 100 year floods occur on clockwork cycles, and we had one in 1996. So......it would be very unusual to get on in the next 50 years ("useful life") the Tram is in operation.
Nothing to see here, kids: move along.
Posted by: Jennifer at August 27, 2006 06:51 AMAnd what about those big ice storms we get about two times a winter?
Posted by: Anne at August 27, 2006 08:29 AMThe trams around the world do NOT work when the wires get ice on them; neither does our infamous MAX line or the street car.
I also do not consider OHSU a particularly high draw tourist destination for riders.
What if it stalls out over I-5? Shut the whole freeway down, have firefighters climb several hundred feet up a rope ladder? That is sheer madness.
Posted by: Dave J. at August 27, 2006 08:42 AMHA! A piece of rope?
Posted by: Charlie at August 27, 2006 09:30 AMHave these brainiacs considered the possibility of a fire?
65 bungee cords and harnesses?
The operator could then detach each bungee from it's base hook, attaching it to a winch that will lower each (of 65 passengers) to the pristine, level, non-forested surface, below.
How fast is that fire burning?
Posted by: Mister Tee at August 27, 2006 09:36 AMjack you may know that we addresed this months ago on the talk show. the portland fire bureau told us that it will take about 15 minutes per passenger to unload the car...and with a max load more than 60 passengers...well...you do the math
Posted by: lars at August 27, 2006 09:51 AMlars
The artical in the Oregonian explained that the rope was the third option behind two backup deisel generatores if the power goes out. Accepting that that there will be a tram, how would you make the system better?
Posted by: Will at August 27, 2006 10:13 AMWhen the big quake hits pill hill there should be enough slack in the cable to allow a rescue of tram riders with a step-ladder.
Its the tram ride during the quake that should be a winner!
Posted by: Abe at August 27, 2006 11:13 AMAccepting that that there will be a tram
No.
Posted by: Jack Bog at August 27, 2006 11:39 AMThe Roosevelt Island Tram can be approached by another car in emergencies. This rope idea is a major loser. We would be better off stretching out the tarp the city council paid all that money for, and have the tram riders jump for it.
Posted by: Bill McDonald at August 27, 2006 11:46 AMBy the way, thanks for using the Dan Saltzman illustration. It was based on the Oregonian's ridiculous editorial after Dan flipped his vote on the tram. They noted the steel Dan has in him, so that led to the Man of Steel- Superman bit. Lately though, I've had second thoughts. Given all the cables and the rope, I think this would be a better job for Spider-Man.
Posted by: Bill McDonald at August 27, 2006 12:25 PMFotunately, there will likely be only a couple of doctors aboard when it stalls, so it's a 30-minute rescue operation, tops. Still, likely enough to mess up the tee-time.
Posted by: Max at August 27, 2006 07:05 PMAccepting that there will be a tram...... no
There is a point in some people's lives when they turn into an old sorehead. You've reached it.
You are picking and choosing your points and misrepresenting the facts.
It dilutes some of the legitamate points you make in your blog.
Will
Posted by: Will at August 27, 2006 10:11 PMYou are picking and choosing your points and misrepresenting the facts.
What are the facts? The fact is there is no plan for rescuing people from a stalled car. Especially in inclement weather. YOU seem to believe that because Jack has been a bit of a curmudgeon on the subject, it's his responsibility to come up with a solution to overcome the designers' failure to plan. Much as you don't want to think about it, this thing IS going to break down. And when it does, the city and OHSU are going to have some serious explaining to do.
Posted by: Chris Snethen at August 28, 2006 09:00 AMThe fact is there is no plan for traffic caused by SoWa.
Yet the Tram, streetcar and eventual light rail serving the area are being pushed as if they address traffic.
It's pure fraud IMO as the traffic nightmares only worsen with practical jokes such as the island curb and signal at the I-ramp on North Macadam.
PDOT has no plan for increased traffic, or effects on existing area traffic while claiming 40% of SoWa transportation will be by way of alternative modes at SoWa build out.
There is no plan for affordable housing and now they want to throw 30% of UR spending at it while at the same time nearly all of the public improvement projects are far over budget, underfunded or unfunded and way behind schedule.
The SoWa plan deemed "feasible" by planners and approved by council in 1999 has all but collapsed
in every conceavable way.
Apparently it matters not because the wrong headed planners and their advocates only need claim it it stopping sprawl to avoid all accountabilty and consequences for their failures.
The fiscal calamity caused by this reckless high density/rail at all costs agenda leaving city budgets and basic services in perpetual crisis.
Who's to blame?
Mr. Nobody.
Posted by: Steve Schopp at August 28, 2006 10:27 AMRe What are the facts
Well, it seems to me, a rescue plan was discribed. If power goes out, the tram stops, a generator kicks in to power the tram to the station. If the that generator fails, a second generator is available to power the tram to the station. So there is a double backup. If both fail and there is no power, a rescue is possible, but so remote they did not even want to mention it. And now we know why - because the ol' soreheads would latch onto the rope option and say it reflect the rediculous other aspects of the tram. Well, the rescue plan isn't rediculous, it is pretty well thought out.
Posted by: will at August 28, 2006 03:05 PMYou guys are just ol' soreheads who like to hear each other complain. It is fine to complain, but if you do, have a solution to make things better.
We had a solution: Don't waste tens of millions of dollars on an aerial tram; buy nice shuttle buses, or even limos. We offered that solution for about three years, but you weren't around.
Posted by: Jack Bog at August 28, 2006 03:09 PMI don't think I'm a sorehead about the aerial tram but if patients in wheelchairs or who are being transported on gurneys are stuck in the tram will they just be lowered in ropes too? Some of those folks are not in such great shape for such an adventure.
Posted by: Sadie at August 28, 2006 03:42 PMThere you go again, changing the subject, taking chip shots. Your proposal as to whether there is an adequate rescue plan is "They should've never built the thing in the first place. Just never admit that someone did a good job. But that wouldn't maintain your own idea of your image. What an old sorehead. Face it, the tram's rescue plan is just fine, regardless of whether it should've been built, or that the initial budget was a pipedream, or even that the City mismanaged it by not designing to engineering. Next you'll complain that the cars are the wrong color.
Posted by: will at August 28, 2006 03:49 PMI'm amazed that you guys still have the energy to complain about the Tram even when it's practically done. If your proposed solution is more shuttle busses, then I have to ask if you've ever tried to drive down or up the hill. Because if you did, you'd know it would take at least 15 minutes.
But let's put all that aside. It's somewhat ridiculous to argue that the Tram shouldn't be built because of all the things that could potentially happen. Things which aren't even likely. That's like saying we shouldn't build airplanes because hey, they might get hijacked. We shouldn't build space shuttles, because hey, they might crash! People could die! Let's also get rid of cars - do you know how many people die each year because of automobile accidents?!! Ban them!
I'm nothing if not pragmatic, but you guys are so dead set against the Tram that you're now having to invent outlandish reasons for why you're against it.
Posted by: hahn at August 28, 2006 04:53 PMThe issue isn't loving the tram, its whether public money should be used to subsidize it, when it is almost exclusively used to transport OHSU traffic.
Basicly it is a sexy enclosed esculator for connecting the OHSU buildings. COP didn't pay for the elevators in the building or the bridge, but good old Senator Hatfield isn't around any more to help out with earmarks either.
It all boils down to choices, in how the limited tax pool of money is spent, and the public was so grossly misled about the costs.
Most folks in this blog have would have little issue if Providence Hospital wanted to build a new campus across I-84 in Hollywood and connect it with a TRAM, if they paid for it themselves and not with public money.
Please don't point out the shell game of tax money, if they could modify Measure 47 in the legislature to exempt Urban Renewal and the Fire and Police disability fund, they could fix the school funding.
Posted by: John Capradoe at August 28, 2006 05:56 PMWhile I am not an expert, the "multiple redundancies" seems to refer exclusively to the controls and power source.
What if the drive mechanism (similar to the transmission on an automobile) fails, or gets flooded? It seems quite possible that you could have an equipment failure that has NOTHING TO DO WITH THE POWER SOURCE. What if there's a fire in the lower station, and the redundant power sources are all compromised?
Elected officials and OHSU decided not to purchase a "rescue gondola" like was recently deployed by the FDNY and NYPD to rescue the passengers on the Roosevelt Tram.
What if somebody refuses to be evacuated by rope? What if, what if, what if...What's plan B?
I have an emergency ladder to get down from the 2nd floor of my house if there's a fire that prevents us from going downstairs. If OHSU and the CoP were taking these risks seriously, they would have come up with some kind of rescue option that is more ambitious than fireman assisted rappelling.
Posted by: Mister Tee at August 28, 2006 08:43 PMAs I have posted in the past years, the tram issue is a "civic lesson" that will continue. We will be learning more as time continues. The "complaining" is beneficial to examine what has and will happen concerning the tram and NM.
I know if I was a cancer patient having just had radiation/chemo therapy and traveling on the tram, my trip on the tram would be unpleasant; and I don't want to imagine a rope evacuation.
Posted by: Jerry at August 28, 2006 09:08 PMRe: Multiple redundancies ... drive mechanism failure.
The question that was asked was what would happen if there is a power failure - the backup generators were the response. A failed drive mechanism is a different question which was neither asked nor answered.
Re: The issue isn't loving the tram, it's wether public money should be used to subsidize it.
The larger question was whether OHSU was going to expand to property in Hillsboro or to the Portland waterfront. The City wanted to keep the jobs in Portland. Who knew who and scratched whose back and is making what in the process - Jack has identified pretty well. I guess that's all part of pristine , Portland politics that the local newspaper fails to shed light on in a timely manner or at all.
Posted by: Will at August 28, 2006 10:31 PM
Posted by: John Capradoe at August 28, 2006 10:50 PMSeriously, think about it, if the Docs need the TRAM to whiz them back and forth to the research center, and can't tolerate the ride up the hill in a shuttle, do you seriously think they would commute to and fro out to the westside ala HWY 26 or spend a half hour on light rail. The "move" was a smoke screen.
[Posted as indicated; restored later.]
Posted by Blog restoration | August 14, 2007 12:55 PM