<div dir="ltr"><br><div class="gmail_extra"><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 4:13 PM, Fred Schneider <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:fwschneider@comcast.net" target="_blank">fwschneider@comcast.net</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Nice but self serving advertising. I also remember all the arguments against … how long it takes to throw a switch; the fact that the line has to be taken out of service to fix potholes in the winter; people being stuck in a car without an employee in an emergency. Westinghouse was for it because they had a vested interest. An acquaintance at another firm sent me tons of items against it.<br>
<br>
The tires we have today might work well but I shudder to think about how well the tires in 1970 would have held up. Imagine climbing up on the guideway to fix a flat?<br>
<br>
That was an era when we were experimenting with automatic train operation, then called ATO. I can think of three early operations: (1) the Times Square-Grand Central Shuttle, (2) PATCO from Philadelphia to Lindenwold, and (3) BART. There were, of course, airport operations built since then that are totally automatic. However, I am not sure if there were any other mass transit applications. Anyone want to jump in on that?<br>
</blockquote><div><br></div><div class="h5">What about Vancouver Skytrain?<br>
<br></div></div></div></div>