"The transportation system of the new century (2000) will be safe and sustainable but also international in reach, intermodal in form, intelligent in character and inclusive in service" (from a strategic plan introduced by the U.S. Department of Transportation). The Plan outlines the steps to "create a climate of innovation to bring such a system into being" and rededicates the Department to be "visionary and vigilant" in addressing emerging transportation needs. On a separate page we have discussed the prospects of competing with air travel. The actual transport in the air is without competition on ground, when it comes to quick transportation. But, as noted on that page, unless you can afford to have your own private plane, there are drawbacks as well: It´s expensive, and it will likely become even more expensive after the September 11th 2001 events. Door-to-door travel time is often considerably longer than the time spent in the air. As many as 25% of the average population experience some degree of discomfort when flying, ranging from claustrofobia to downright fear of flying. A rather astonishing figure. Maybe man wasn´t meant to fly, after all!?

A while ago, a friend noted that it took him 11 hours to travel from his house in London, England, to his house outside Stockholm, Sweden. The actual air trip took only about three hours, the rest was waiting time at airports, transfer between trains and buses, etc. That was before the September 11th 2001 events. Since then, increased security checks at airports can well have added to that time. So; what really consumes time during this kind of travel is the tedious waiting for transfer, and the travel itself, to and from airports. How far would he have gotten in those 11 hours, if he had been able to board a beamcar outside his house in London, a car which could have taken him all the way to Stockholm (thru the tunnel under the English Channel) at an uninterrupted average speed of about 120 km/hour?

Well, not quite the whole way. Such a trip would be about 1600 km long, depending on the route the car would have to take, and would require about 13-14 hours. But it´s a good guess that he would have opted for that solution anyhow, had it been available. And, even without MagLev and magnetic propulsion, the speed could well top 200 km/hour, resulting in a travel time of just 8 hours. Figure 1

The advantages of choosing a beamcar for this trip are clear: It would have been cheaper, since it consumes less energy. It would have been considerably safer. He could have travelled by himself, instead of being bunched together with strangers. Most important of all, he could have relaxed all the time, maybe catching up on his sleep, instead of the tedious airport transfers, checking luggage and waiting for transfers and delayed flights. And, had he been one of those 25% who do not like flying, he might have taken the train, no matter what. The point here is to show that beamcarried traffic is not only for cities. It could be a really attractive and economic way to travel long-distance as well. And, as this example shows, beamcarried automatic traffic could really compete with air transport, even if it takes two, three or mayby four times as long time to travel by beamcar as door-to-door air travel would have taken. Such transports could also be done at night, if the cars are equipped to enable passengers to sleep. Such travel time is not "wasted", provided that sleeping conditions are comfortable. The beamcar trip would be un-interrupted, in contrast to the waiting and changing of transports to airports, that rarely lets you relax. Taxicabs make airport transfers easier, but they come at a price. Figure 2

Thus, a very sensible development on the passenger side of automated beamcar travel would be a 4-tier beam network, as shown in figure 2 above, consisting of: Central city networks, with relatively low speed and short distances between stops. It would reach narrow alleys and other hard-to-get-at places, and replace most buses. Suburban networks with fast-speed cars, transporting commuters between suburbs and central city areas, and directly between adjacent suburbs. It would complement local train service and replace most private motorist traffic. Inter-city fast-speed cars, tying nearby cities and satellite communities together. Food and toilet-facilities could conceivably be made available on larger cars. Would obviate the need for most motorists to take their cars, and would combine the comforts of train-travel with door-to-door service. Long-distance travel, as described above, replacing the need for air travel over reasonably long distances. These beamcars could have both toilet and sleeping facilities, if desired. This would ease the pressure on crowded airports and make more room in the air for those air transports that are still in traffic.

Figure 3: A view from Stockholm, as it might have looked... The big difference here, compared to today´s collective transport services, is of course that these four networks tie into each other. You should never have to switch vehicle during the whole trip. Want to go overnight from Paris to Hamburg? A beamcar with sleeping facilities will be waiting at your nearest beam traffic station at any time you desire.