AGT development The publication of the
HUD reports in the US in 1968 led to a wave of developments in the mass transit world. Dozens of companies around the world started development of AGT systems from large to small, hoping to cash in on what was predicted to be an enormous buildout of AGT systems. The majority of these systems were essentially smaller versions of rubber-wheeled metros, sometimes operating as a single car, but often in small trains. On the simpler end were systems like the
Vought Airtrans and Bendix
Dashaveyor, while more complex systems include the
Alden staRRcar and
Cabinentaxi which were true
personal rapid transit systems (PRTs). By the early 1970s many of these systems were developed to the point of being ready for deployment. In an effort to drum up business, the
Urban Mass Transit Administration provided $1.5 million to four companies to bring their systems to the
Transpo '72 show in
Washington, DC where they were arranged as the central exhibit. Expecting numerous orders to follow, both the companies and Congress were dismayed to find a lack of interest on the part of city planners, for whom the systems had been designed and funded. This was generally blamed on the hesitations on the part of the mayors to deploy a system that was not already in use elsewhere.
Transurban Krauss-Maffei (K-M) started development of the Transurban system in 1970. Full funding for a five-year development process was granted on 1 October 1971, part of a wider funding project by the German Ministry of Research and Technology. Many companies in Germany received funding to develop AGT systems, and maglev systems in particular. K-M won funding for both their AGT system, as well as their inter-city high-speed
Transrapid maglev. K-M partnered with
Standard Elektrik Lorenz to provide the automated control system. Their system was based on attractive maglev (as opposed to repulsive) because they calculated it would require half as much power. K-M also noted that maglev in general would have a wide array of advantages over traditional designs, including no contact with the running surface (eliminating wear), no noise or vibration and thus very little sound, low drag, and a low-profile vehicle because there was no "undercarriage". Each car held 12 seated and 6 standing.
GO-Urban When Toronto announced its
GO-Urban system in 1972, there was enormous interest on the part of industry, who were all clamouring to win a contract and thereby be the first to be able to offer an operational system to future customers. Unlike the small Heidelberg system, GO-Urban featured three major lines covering the entire Toronto area as well as neighboring cities and providing service to the distant
Malton Airport. Eighteen proposals were sent in for the Phase I selection process, including all of the major US developments, several European designs, and the
Minitram system from
Hawker-Siddeley Canada. Most of these were rubber-wheeled systems, but there were several
hovercraft, along with the maglevs from Krauss-Maffei and the US
ROMAG. The initial selection left fourteen systems under consideration, then nine for the year-long detailed inspection. All but three were left after that process.
Ford's
ACT system was the least-advanced of the selectees, based on a 20-person rubber-wheeled vehicle. Its primary point of interest was that it used a single track for most rights of way, with smaller double-tracked areas allowing vehicles to pass each other. Hawker-Siddeley's entry also survived. It was based on smaller vehicles that switched onto separate lines at the stations, allowing other traffic to pass by at full speed. Like the Transurban, sets of cars could be connected and disconnected on the fly to form larger trains to increase capacity in denser areas. Krauss-Maffei's system immediately caught the interest of the selection board. It had a number of advantages over the competition due to its use of a maglev and
linear induction motor. The drive system had no physical contact between the train and "rails", so snow and ice would not affect its operations in the winter. Since it was expected to be almost silent in operation, the routes could be slotted into subdivisions close to houses (a major issue with most
elevated railways). A major part of the contract negotiations required the winning system to be built in Ontario. This was no problem for Hawker-Siddeley and Krauss-Maffei, who agreed to allow construction for any system sold to North America to be handled from Ontario. Ford could not meet this requirement, and withdrew from the contest, although there were also technical requirements the slower ACT could not meet. With only Hawker-Siddeley and Krauss-Maffei left, the 1 May 1973 announcement that the Transurban design had won the contest was unsurprising. K-M had not yet built a full-scale Transurban test system, and agreed to help fund development of a test track in Ontario. Unlike most systems, which built test tracks at their industrial sites, Transurban's test system was intended to be built in downtown
Toronto on the
Exhibition Place (the Ex) fairgrounds. When testing was complete, the system would be used in production for moving passengers around the site, In November 1974, the German government announced a major shake-up of their maglev development funding. Krauss-Maffei's funding was dramatically reduced in favour of competing systems from
MBB. The loss of funding was a severe blow to the project. Although K-M offered to move the entire project to Ontario if development funding was picked up there, no further money was forthcoming from the GO-Urban system, and development ended. During the period of negotiations, several technical issues had cropped up too. The system used a complex system of mechanical switches to move the trains from one track to another, and these proved to easily ice up in cold weather. Today known as the
Bombardier Advanced Rapid Transit (ART), the ICTS is the basis for several mass transit systems around the world. ==Description==