[PRCo] skybus redux

[Fred Schneider]

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.   

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?   

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?

I remember that PATCO was built to operate at full speed in manual or ATCO … 70 mph or whatever.   BART, however, was up to 80 in ATO but road manual allowed only 25 mph.   I forget what yard manual was but I did have a chance to run a train in the Fremont Yard in 1974.   Damn … that was 40 years ago and I was only 34.   

fws


On Apr 3, 2014, at 12:06 PM, D Brashear wrote:

> http://nullspace2.blogspot.com/2014/04/sic-semper-skybus.html
> 
> the anonymous comment is mine, and i think those two tidbits are in fact
> interesting.
> 
> -- 
> D
> 
> 
> 
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: http://mailman.dementix.org/pipermail/pittsburgh-railways/attachments/20140403/96b54e6d/attachment.html 
> _______________________________________________
> Pittsburgh-railways mailing list
> Pittsburgh-railways at mailman.dementix.org
> https://mailman.dementix.org/mailman/listinfo/pittsburgh-railways