>>1008736I get that, but compare how much mass that monorail switch has to move, and how much mass a rail switch has to move. That means the motor will be bigger, consume more energy, need more maintenance, and so on.
In my city, both subways and trams have switches between each track every 2 or 3 stations. That way if there's a breakdown, there will never be more than 3 stations without service. With a monorail, this would require significant infrastructure: Extra supports for the heavy switching mechanism, space for a bit of track between each track, this in turn means the normal tracks need to be spaced apart in that section to leave space for the switch, so on, so on, so on.
I believe most monorails don't have any sort of switches like this along the line, only at branchings like to get to the depot, for this very reason.
The Wuppertal elevated monorail has no way for trains to change directions halfway along the line. If anything breaks down, the whole line will have to shut down. That's a definite disadvantage. Of course not enough to warrant it's closure since it's been in place for over a century, but shit like that is why monorails nowadays are impractical except in very specific situations.
