Hubbry Logo
People moverPeople moverMain
Open search
People mover
Community hub
People mover
logo
8 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
People mover
People mover
People mover
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia
A BART Cable Liner people mover at Oakland International Airport
Automated track-bound traffic
Automatic train operation
Lists of automated train systems
Related topics
Morgantown Personal Rapid Transit

A people mover or automated people mover (APM) is a type of small-scale automated guideway transit system. The term is generally used only to describe systems serving relatively small areas such as airports, downtown districts or theme parks.

The term was originally applied to three different systems, developed roughly at the same time. One was Skybus, an automated mass transit system prototyped by the Westinghouse Electric Corporation beginning in 1964.[1][2][3] The second, alternately called the People Mover and Minirail, opened in Montreal at Expo 67. Finally the last, called PeopleMover or WEDway PeopleMover, was an attraction that was originally presented by Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company and that opened at Disneyland in 1967.[4] The term "people mover" currently describes technologies such as monorail, rail tracks and maglev. Propulsion may involve conventional on-board electric motors, linear motors or cable traction.

Generally speaking, larger APMs are referred to by other names. The most generic is "automated guideway transit", which encompasses any automated system regardless of size. Some complex APMs deploy fleets of small vehicles over a track network with off-line stations, and supply near non-stop service to passengers. These taxi-like systems are more usually referred to as personal rapid transit (PRT). Larger systems, with vehicles with 20 to 40 passengers, are sometimes referred to as "group rapid transit" (GRT), although this term is not particularly common. Other complex APMs have similar characteristics to rapid transit systems, and there is no clear-cut distinction between a complex APM of this type and an automated mass transit system. Another term "light metro" is also applied to describe the system worldwide.[5][6][7]

History

[edit]
Interior of SEA Underground in Seattle–Tacoma International Airport. Opened in 1969, it was one of the first operational automated people mover systems in the world.

Never-Stop Railway

[edit]
People Mover in Venice, Italy

One of the first automated systems for human transportation was the screw-driven 'Never-Stop-Railway',[8][9] constructed for the British Empire Exhibition at Wembley, London in 1924. This railway consisted of 88 unmanned carriages, on a continuous double track along the northern and eastern sides of the exhibition, with reversing loops at either end.

The carriages ran on two parallel concrete beams and were guided by pulleys running on the inner side of these concrete beams,[10][11] and were propelled by gripping a revolving screw thread running between the tracks in a pit; by adjusting the pitch of this thread at different points, the carriages could be sped up, or slowed down to a walking pace at stations, to allow passengers to join and leave. The railway ran reliably for the two years of the exhibition, and was then dismantled.[12]

Goodyear and Stephens-Adamson

[edit]
PHX Sky Train in Phoenix, Arizona, United States, opened in 2013

In late 1949, Mike Kendall, chief engineer and Chairman of the Board of Stephens-Adamson Manufacturing Company, an Illinois-based manufacturer of conveyor belts and systems,[13] asked Al Neilson, an engineer in the Industrial Products Division of Goodyear Tire and Rubber Co., if Goodyear had ever considered working on People Movers. He felt that with Goodyear's ability to move materials in large quantities on conveyor belts they should consider moving batches of people.

Four years of engineering design, development and testing led to a joint patent being issued for three types of people movers, named Speedwalk, Speedramp, and Carveyor. Goodyear would sell the concept and Stephens-Adamson would manufacture and install the components.

A Speedwalk consisted of a flat conveyor belt riding on a series of rollers, or a flat slippery surface, moving at 1.5 mph (2.4 km/h) (approximately half the speed of walking). The passengers would walk onto the belt and could stand or walk to the exit point. They were supported by a moving handrail. Customers were expected to include airport terminals, ballparks, train stations, etc. Today, several manufacturers produce similar units called moving walkways.

A Speedramp was very similar to a Speedwalk but it was used to change elevations; up or down a floor level. This could have been accomplished by an escalator, but the Speedramp would allow wheeled luggage, small handcarts etc. to ride the belt at an operating cost predicted to be much lower than escalators or elevators. The first successful installation of a Speedramp was in the spring of 1954 at the Hudson and Manhattan Railroad Station in Jersey City, New Jersey, to connect the Erie Railroad to the Hudson and Manhattan Tubes. This unit was 227 feet (69 m) long with a rise of 22 feet (6.7 m) on a 15 degree grade, and only cost $75,000.

A Carveyor consisted of many small cubicles or cars carrying ten people riding on a flat conveyor belt from point A to point B. The belt rode on a series of motorized rollers. The purpose of the motorized rollers was to facilitate the gradual acceleration and deceleration speeds on the conveyor belt and overcome the tendency of all belts to stretch at start up and during shutdown. At point "A" passengers would enter a Speedwalk running parallel to the belts and cars of the Carveyor. The cars would be moving at the same speed as the Speedwalk; the passengers would enter the cars and be seated, while the motorized rollers would increase the speed of the cars up to the traveling speed (which would be preset depending on the distance to be covered). At point B Passengers could disembark and by means of a series of flat slower belts (Speedwalks) go to other Carveyors to other destinations or out to the street. The cars at point B would continue on rollers around a semicircle and then reverse the process carrying passengers back to point A. The initial installation was to be the 42nd Street Shuttle in New York City between Times Square and Grand Central station.

The first mention of the Carveyor in a hardback book was in There's Adventure in Civil Engineering by Neil P. Ruzic (1958), one of a series of books published by Popular Mechanics in the 1950s in their "Career" series.[14] In the book the Carveyor was already installed and operational in downtown Los Angeles.

Colonel Sydney H. Bingham, Chairman of the New York City Board of Transportation, had several meetings with a group of architects who were trying to revamp the whole New York City Subway system in the heart of town to connect Pennsylvania Station, Madison Square Garden, Times Square, Grand Central and several new office complexes together. Several of these architects were involved in other programs, and in later years many variations of the Carveyor people movers were developed.

In November 1954 the New York City Transit Authority issued an order to Goodyear and Stephens-Adamson to build a complete Carveyor system between Times Square and Grand Central. A brief summary and confirmation can be found in Time magazine on November 15, 1954. under the heading "Subway of the Future".[15] The cost was to be under $4 million, but the order was never fulfilled due to political difficulties.

Chocolate World in Hershey, Pennsylvania, Disneyland in California, and Walt Disney World in Florida are among many locations that have used variations of the Carveyor concept.

Other developments

[edit]
Platform of Zhujiang New Town APM in Guangzhou, Guangdong, China
Pisamover in Pisa, Italy

The term 'people mover' was used by Walt Disney, when he and his Imagineers were working on the new 1967 Tomorrowland at Disneyland. The name was used as a working title for a new attraction, the PeopleMover. According to Imagineer Bob Gurr, "the name got stuck," and it was no longer a working title.[16]

Starting in the late 1960s and into the 1970s, people movers were the topic of intense development around the world. Worried about the growing congestion and pollution in downtown areas due to the spread of cars, many countries started studying mass transit systems that would lower capital costs to the point where any city could afford to deploy them. Most of these systems used elevated guideways, which were much less expensive to deploy than tunnels. However, elevating the track causes problems with noise, so traditional steel-wheel-on-rail solutions were rare as they squealed when rounding bends in the rails. Rubber tired solutions were common, but some systems used hovercraft techniques or various magnetic levitation systems.

Two major government funded APM projects are notable. In Germany, Mannesmann Demag and Messerschmitt-Bölkow-Blohm developed a system known as Cabinentaxi during the 1970s. Cabinentaxi featured small cars with from four to eight seats that were called to pick up passengers on-demand and drove directly to their destination. The stations were "offline", allowing the cabs to stop by moving off the main lines while other cars continued to their destinations. The system was designed so the cars could be adapted to run on top or bottom of the track (but not easily converted from one to the other), allowing dual-track movements from a single elevated guideway only slightly wider than the cars. A test track was completed in 1975 and ran until development was completed in 1979, but no deployments followed and the companies abandoned the system shortly thereafter.

In the U.S., a 1966 federal bill provided funding that led to the development of APM systems under the Downtown People Mover Program. Four systems were developed, Rohr's ROMAG, LTV's AirTrans, Ford's APT and Otis Elevator's hovercraft design. A major presentation of the systems was organized as TRANSPO'72 at Dulles International Airport, where the various systems were presented to delegations from numerous cities in the US. Prototype systems and test tracks were built during the 1970s.

One notable example was Pittsburgh's Skybus, which was proposed by the Port Authority of Allegheny County to replace its streetcar system, which, having large stretches of private right of way, was not suited for bus conversion. A short demonstration line was set up in South Park and large tracts of land were secured for its facilities. However, opposition arose to the notion that it would replace the streetcar system. This, combined with the immaturity of the technology and other factors, led the Port Authority to abandon the project and pursue alternatives. By the start of the 1980s most politicians had lost interest in the concept and the project was repeatedly de-funded in the early 1980s. Only two APMs were developed as a part of the People Mover Program in the U.S., the Metromover in Miami, and the Detroit People Mover. The Jacksonville Skyway was built in the late 1980s.

From development to implementation

[edit]

Although many systems were generally considered failures, several APM systems developed by other groups have been much more successful. Lighter systems with shorter tracks are widely deployed at airports; the world's first airport people movers, the Tampa International Airport People Movers, were installed in 1971 at Tampa International Airport in the United States. APMs have now become common at large airports and hospitals in the United States.

Driverless metros have become common in Europe and parts of Asia. The economics of automated trains tend to reduce the scale so tied to "mass" transit (the largest operating expense is the driver's salary, which is only affordable if very large numbers of passengers are paying fares), so that small-scale installations are feasible[citation needed]. Thus cities normally thought of as too small to build a metro (e.g. Rennes, Lausanne, Brescia, etc.) are now doing so.

On September 30, 2006, the Peachliner in Komaki, Aichi Prefecture, Japan, became that nation's first people mover to cease operations.

EverLine Innovia ART 200 train in Yongin, South Korea
Two-car AirTrain JFK on elevated guideway

Manufacturers

[edit]

Heavy APMs

[edit]

Light APMs

[edit]

Examples

[edit]

Airports

[edit]
Main article: List of airport people mover systems
Marconi Express in Bologna, Italy, links Bologna Guglielmo Marconi Airport to Bologna Centrale railway station with an intermediate station

Many large international airports around the world feature people mover systems to transport passengers between terminals or within a terminal itself. Some people mover systems at airports connect with other public transportation systems to allow passengers to travel into the airport's city.

List of automated people mover

[edit]

Austria

[edit]

China

[edit]

Germany

[edit]
MiniMetro-people mover attending the multistorey car park of The Squaire

Italy

[edit]
Automated MiniMetro in Perugia, Italy

Japan

[edit]

Portugal

[edit]

Singapore

[edit]
Sengkang LRT line, A Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Crystal Mover on the East Loop, Singapore

South Korea

[edit]

Thailand

[edit]

United Arab Emirates

[edit]

United States

[edit]
Metromover, Miami, Florida, United States

Venezuela

[edit]

Others

[edit]

Canada

[edit]

China

[edit]

Hong Kong

[edit]

Indonesia

[edit]

Japan

[edit]
  • Slope car, a small automated monorail found in various parts of Japan, can be considered as a simple form of people mover.

South Korea

[edit]
  • SkyCube in Suncheon, a PRT connects the site of 2013 Suncheon Garden Expo Korea to a station in the wetlands "Buffer Area" next to the Suncheon Literature Museum

United States

[edit]
[edit]
  • Detroit People Mover, Detroit, Michigan, United States
    Detroit People Mover, Detroit, Michigan, United States
  • Bukit Panjang LRT Line, Singapore
    Bukit Panjang LRT Line, Singapore
  • An underground people mover, called The Plane Train, station at Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport, Atlanta, United States
    An underground people mover, called The Plane Train, station at Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport, Atlanta, United States
  • Air Rail Link at Pearson International Airport in previous livery, Toronto, Canada
    Air Rail Link at Pearson International Airport in previous livery, Toronto, Canada

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

People mover

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
A people mover is a guided transit mode with fully automated operation, featuring driverless vehicles or multi-car that operate on fixed guideways with exclusive right-of-way, often elevated or at-grade, to transport passengers over short distances in confined areas such as , urban districts, or amusement parks. These systems, sometimes classified under (AGT), typically use electrically powered vehicles capable of carrying 20 to 100 passengers per train, emphasizing reliability, , and in high-density environments without operators. The development of people movers traces back to mid-20th-century innovations in urban transportation, with early demonstrations in the 1950s by companies like General Motors, though widespread adoption began in the 1970s through U.S. government programs such as the Urban Mass Transportation Administration's (UMTA) Downtown People Mover initiative, which funded pilot projects in cities to address downtown congestion. The first operational airport installation occurred in 1971 at Tampa International Airport for airside shuttling, followed by the 1974 debut of AIRTRANS at Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport, marking the initial landside application and operating for over 30 years. By the 1990s, advancements in pinched-loop configurations enabled longer-distance systems, as seen at Chicago O'Hare International Airport (1993) and New York John F. Kennedy International Airport (2003), expanding their role in facilitating passenger movement across expansive terminals. People movers are integral to major transportation hubs worldwide. As of 2010, approximately 44 systems were operational, supporting configurations from short dual-lane shuttles to complex networks at speeds up to 25-30 mph; since then, the number has grown with new installations, including the expanded automated people mover at that began serving passengers in July 2024. Urban examples include the , a single-track elevated loop serving the city's since 1987, demonstrating their adaptability for circulator services in geographically small areas. Standards like those in ASCE 21 ensure performance in automation, accessibility, and safety, influencing ongoing deployments in both aviation and municipal settings.

Definition and Classification

Core Concept and Terminology

A people mover, often referred to as an automated people mover (APM), is a fully automated, driverless transit system operating on a fixed guideway, designed primarily for high-frequency, short-distance passenger transport within confined or dedicated environments such as , urban districts, or campuses. These systems utilize small-scale vehicles that run on exclusive rights-of-way, typically elevated tracks or tunnels, to provide seamless connectivity between key nodes without interference from other . The core function emphasizes reliability and efficiency for intra-facility mobility, distinguishing them as a subset of (AGT) technologies. The terminology "people mover" emerged in the amid initiatives in the United States, where transportation experts and engineers sought innovative solutions to alleviate congestion in growing metropolitan areas through automated, low-cost mass transit. This concept was influenced by demonstrations like Westinghouse's Skybus project in 1965-1966, which tested driverless vehicles for shuttles, reflecting a broader vision for "activity center" transport in high-density zones. The term gained traction in federal programs, such as the Urban Mass Transportation Administration's efforts, to describe compact systems that could integrate with larger urban for efficient movement. Central to people movers are their operational characteristics: operating speeds typically ranging from 10 to 35 mph (16 to 56 km/h), with averages around 10-15 mph (16-24 km/h) in many systems to ensure and smooth rides in short-haul scenarios, compact accommodating 20-100 passengers, service intervals as frequent as 60 seconds during peak times, and complete automation via systems that eliminate onboard operators and reduce staffing needs. These features enable high throughput in limited spaces while prioritizing passenger comfort and energy efficiency. In contrast to simpler vertical or horizontal aids like elevators, escalators, or moving walkways—which serve point-to-point conveyance without discrete vehicles or multi-stop routing—people movers constitute integrated transit networks capable of serving several stations along a looped or linear path, offering greater flexibility and capacity for group travel. This positions them as true alternatives rather than mere conveyors.

Types and Variants

Automated people movers (APMs) are classified into heavy and light variants based on their scale, capacity, and intended applications, with heavy APMs designed for high-volume urban transportation corridors and light APMs suited for lower-demand environments such as shuttles. Heavy APMs typically serve dense urban routes where demand requires robust throughput, while light APMs focus on shorter, intra-facility connections with less intensive usage. This distinction helps in selecting systems that match specific needs and passenger volumes. Variants of people movers also differ by guideway type, including rubber-tired systems that use pneumatic tires on or guideways for smooth, quiet operation; steel-wheeled systems that employ traditional rail-like tracks for higher speeds and durability; and maglev-based systems that utilize for frictionless travel and reduced maintenance. Rubber-tired variants are common in enclosed or settings due to their ability to navigate tight curves and gradients, whereas steel-wheeled ones are often used in open urban environments for cost efficiency, and maglev variants appear in specialized high-tech installations for superior energy performance. Capacity differences further delineate these types, with heavy APMs capable of handling over 5,000 passengers per hour per direction (pphpd) to support major commuter flows, compared to light APMs that typically manage 1,000 to 5,000 pphpd for targeted shuttle services. These ranges reflect vehicle size, frequency, and route length, ensuring heavy systems integrate with broader transit networks while systems prioritize efficiency in confined spaces. For instance, heavy systems often operate with larger trains at shorter headways to achieve peak demands, whereas systems use smaller units for flexibility. Hybrid variants incorporate elements of personal rapid transit (PRT) into traditional people mover technology, enabling on-demand routing with small, autonomous vehicles that bypass intermediate stops for direct point-to-point service. These hybrids blend the fixed-guideway structure of APMs with PRT's individualized dispatching, allowing dynamic vehicle allocation to reduce wait times and enhance user privacy in mixed-demand scenarios. Such systems represent an evolving approach to combine scalability with personalization in urban and campus settings.

Historical Development

Early Innovations

The concept of people movers emerged in the late 19th century as engineers sought efficient ways to transport crowds without traditional stops, drawing inspiration from industrial machinery. One of the earliest prototypes was the moving walkway debuted at the 1893 World's Columbian Exposition in Chicago, a continuous conveyor system spanning over a mile along a pier into Lake Michigan. Designed by architect Joseph Lyman Silsbee and engineer Max E. Schmidt, it featured two levels: a slower inner belt for seated passengers and a faster outer one for standees, accommodating up to 6,000 people at a time and operating at speeds of about 3-6 miles per hour. This installation demonstrated the potential for automated, loop-based passenger transport but was limited to the fairgrounds and dismantled afterward. In the early , ideas for continuous-loop rail systems gained traction, influenced by the growing use of belt conveyors in industry. The Adkins-Lewis system, patented around 1911 by inventors Benjamin Ratcliffe Adkins and Yorath Lewis, proposed an underground electric railway with cars on a nonstop loop, allowing passengers to board and alight at low-speed platforms via moving steps synchronized to the train's motion. This concept evolved into the Never-Stop Railway, constructed for the 1924 at , , where it transported visitors along a 2.5-mile elevated track using cable-hauled cars that slowed to 2-3 mph at stations without halting. The system, powered by electric motors and featuring automatic coupling, carried over 1 million passengers during the exhibition, showcasing a for urban transit but highlighting mechanical complexities in . Industrial conveyor technology played a key role in shaping these early designs, with companies like Stephens-Adamson Manufacturing Co., founded in 1901 in Aurora, Illinois, pioneering belt-driven systems for bulk materials. Stephens-Adamson produced idlers, pulleys, and elevators that emphasized durable rubber belting and roller supports, bridging factory automation to public transport concepts. Early adoption faced significant hurdles, including mechanical unreliability from friction in continuous belts and the absence of modern automation controls, leading to frequent breakdowns and safety concerns like passenger slips during boarding. These prototypes often required manual oversight, limiting scalability, and economic factors post-World War I delayed broader implementation beyond temporary exhibitions.

Mid-20th Century Advances

In the and , began conceptualizing automated transportation systems inspired by industrial conveyor mechanisms, such as those he observed at Ford Motor Company's facilities for moving steel ingots, laying the groundwork for innovative people mover designs. This vision culminated in the development of the WEDway system, which debuted at in 1967 and employed linear induction motors (LIMs) to enable continuous, driverless vehicle flow along steel rails, providing quiet, efficient movement without traditional mechanical connections and influencing future automated transit concepts. A pivotal demonstration occurred at the 1964-1965 New York World's Fair through Ford's Magic Skyway attraction, designed by Disney's WED Enterprises, where real Ford convertibles were fixed to a track and propelled through themed scenes of prehistoric and futuristic worlds using early track-based automation. This ride, capable of transporting 4,000 guests per hour, showcased scalable people mover technology with integration and refined track propulsion, directly informing the evolution of the WEDway PeopleMover by proving reliable, high-capacity guest flow in a public setting. Parallel engineering efforts advanced (AGT) concepts, exemplified by Westinghouse Electric Corporation's Skybus project initiated in 1963, which featured fully automated, rubber-tired vehicles running on an elevated guideway with a central for guidance. These vehicles, powered by 60-horsepower DC motors and capable of 50 mph speeds, emphasized driverless operation and quiet rubber traction on dedicated tracks, marking a key step toward practical urban AGT systems despite the project's eventual termination in 1975. By the mid-1960s, initiatives elevated people movers as tools for revitalization, notably through the U.S. Department of Transportation's creation of the Urban Mass Transportation Administration (UMTA) in 1966, which prioritized funding and research for innovative transit like people movers to address and congestion. This program, stemming from the 1964 Urban Mass Transportation Act, supported demonstrations of automated systems to integrate with city cores, fostering designs that bridged experimental prototypes with viable public infrastructure.

Post-1970s Expansion

The expansion of people mover systems from the 1970s onward was significantly driven by U.S. federal policies aimed at modernizing urban transit. In 1975, the Urban Mass Transportation Administration (UMTA), now the , launched the Downtown People Mover Program, providing grants to selected cities for demonstration projects to alleviate downtown congestion and promote automated transit innovation. This initiative funded the development of several early operational systems, including the first airport installation in 1971 at for airside shuttling, and the , which began construction in 1983 and opened in 1987 as a 2.94-mile elevated loop serving . The and marked a period of rapid proliferation tied to the global airport expansion boom, where people movers became essential for efficient passenger circulation in sprawling terminals. Economic growth in prompted installations at major hubs, such as the Airtrans at , which commenced operations in 1974 and transported passengers, baggage, and supplies across the facility, influencing subsequent designs for higher capacity and seamless integration. These deployments refined operational standards, including automation reliability, amid rising demands for non-stop connectivity in aviation infrastructure. Internationally, adoption gained momentum through national research efforts and urban experiments starting in the late 1970s. In , initiated the High Speed Surface Transport (HSST) project in 1972 as a low-speed people mover for and urban links, culminating in the HSST-01 prototype's completion in 1975 and manned tests reaching 110 km/h on the Miyazaki track by 1977, laying groundwork for commercial viability. Europe's early urban trials followed suit, with the (VAL) system debuting in , , in 1983 as the world's first fully automated line-haul people mover, and the Birmingham opening in 1984 to connect the to the city center, demonstrating adaptability to dense European environments. Entering the 2000s, policy shifts emphasized , with people movers evolving toward fully electric, low-emission configurations to align with environmental regulations and reduce urban carbon footprints. This trend integrated systems into eco-friendly designs, such as battery-electric variants that minimize use and . In the , post-COVID-19 recovery accelerated their role in smart cities, promoting contactless operations for health safety and efficient short-distance mobility in reimagined urban networks.

Technical Components

Propulsion and Power Systems

People movers primarily employ linear induction motors (LIMs) for , which generate a traveling along the guideway to induce motion in the without physical contact between motor components, enabling smooth acceleration and deceleration up to 0.8-1.5 m/s². This non-contact design reduces wear and maintenance needs compared to traditional geared systems. In contrast, rubber-tired variants often use onboard rotary electric motors, typically asynchronous or synchronous types, to drive the wheels directly, providing precise control for navigating steep grades or curved paths. Power is commonly supplied via third-rail electrification, delivering direct current (typically 600-750 V DC) through a conductor rail positioned alongside or beneath the guideway, as seen in systems like the Detroit People Mover. For off-grid or transitional segments, battery or onboard supercapacitor storage enables short autonomous operation, supplementing primary electrification to maintain continuity in hybrid setups. Efficiency in people movers is enhanced by low energy consumption rates, typically ranging from 0.05 to 0.2 kWh per passenger-km, influenced by vehicle mass, speed, and load factors. Regenerative braking systems recapture kinetic energy during deceleration, converting it back to electrical power for storage or grid return, which can recover 20-30% of braking energy and reduce overall consumption by up to 15% in frequent-stop operations. Steel guideways paired with offer superior performance due to lower (coefficients as low as 0.001-0.002), allowing efficient linear or rotary motor operation with minimal energy loss to . Rubber guideways with rubber tires, while providing higher traction ( coefficients 0.5-1.0) for rapid starts, incur greater (0.01-0.02), increasing power demands by 20-50% but enabling quieter rides and better adhesion on inclines. In rubber-tired systems, performance is governed by the equation for rotary motors: T=IαT = I \alpha where TT is the torque delivered to the wheels, II is the of the rotating components, and α\alpha is the , directly linking motor output to vehicle motion control.

Automation and Safety Features

Automated people movers (APMs) predominantly operate at Grade of 4 (GoA4), enabling fully driverless and unattended train operations without any on-board staff intervention for starting, driving, stopping, or door management. This level of automation relies on advanced sensor technologies for precise positioning and navigation, including radio-frequency identification (RFID) tags embedded along the guideway for absolute location referencing, inductive loops for continuous train detection and speed measurement, and light detection and ranging () systems for real-time environmental mapping and obstacle avoidance. These sensors integrate with (ATC) systems to ensure safe, high-frequency service in confined urban or airport environments, such as the driverless APM at . Recent advancements as of 2025 include 5G-enabled vehicle-to-infrastructure (V2I) communications for reduced latency in CBTC and AI-based to enhance system reliability, as implemented in new deployments like . Safety protocols in APMs are governed by standards like IEEE 1474.1 for (CBTC), which mandates vital automatic train protection (ATP) functions including emergency stop systems that apply full braking upon detection of unsafe conditions, such as or track incursions. Obstacle detection is achieved through redundant , combining , ultrasonic sensors, and trackside balises to identify intrusions on the guideway, triggering immediate halts if vital parameters are violated. Redundant fail-safes, including dual independent ATP subsystems and automatic procedures, ensure system integrity per ASCE/T&DI 21-21 standards, which set minimum safety requirements for APM design and operation to prevent collisions and derailments. Communication architectures in APMs vary between centralized and distributed models to support GoA4 operations. Centralized control, as in many early CBTC implementations like the Downtown People Mover, routes all train movements through a single operations control center for scheduling and . Distributed architectures, prevalent in modern systems, employ vehicle-to-infrastructure (V2I) protocols via radio-based CBTC, where wayside equipment along the guideway independently manages zone enforcement and train authorization, enhancing scalability for high-density networks. These V2I communications use dedicated short-range protocols to exchange real-time position, speed, and authority data, minimizing latency in . Post-2010 cybersecurity measures for APMs have evolved to address vulnerabilities in connected control systems, with the (APTA) recommending defense-in-depth strategies including signaling for CBTC radio links to prevent unauthorized access or spoofing in urban deployments. protocols, such as those aligned with IEEE 1474, secure V2I transmissions against interception, while access controls and intrusion detection systems monitor for anomalies in centralized or distributed architectures. These measures, implemented in APMs like those at major U.S. hubs, mitigate risks from cyber threats, ensuring operational continuity without compromising safety.

Infrastructure and Integration

People mover infrastructure primarily consists of dedicated guideways that support vehicle movement while minimizing interference with surrounding urban environments. These guideways are typically constructed as elevated structures to avoid street-level conflicts, though at-grade and underground configurations are also employed depending on site constraints and . Materials such as —often precast for —and are commonly used for their structural and resistance to environmental stresses, ensuring long-term in high-traffic applications. Stations in people mover systems are designed for efficient passenger flow and safety, featuring elements like to prevent falls and enhance climate control. Fare collection is integrated directly at station entrances via automated gates or vending machines, streamlining access without onboard delays. compliance, including adherence to Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) standards, incorporates features such as level boarding platforms with gaps no greater than one inch, elevators, and for visually impaired users. Integrating people movers into urban landscapes presents several challenges, including the acquisition of dedicated right-of-way to avoid displacement of existing infrastructure. Vibration mitigation measures, such as resilient mounts and isolated foundations, are essential to reduce impacts on nearby buildings from guideway operations. Coordination with complementary transit modes, like buses and subways, requires synchronized schedules and shared intermodal facilities to facilitate seamless transfers and maximize network efficiency. Construction costs for people mover infrastructure typically range from $50 to $150 million per mile, encompassing guideway erection, station builds, and utility relocations. These estimates include mandatory environmental impact assessments to evaluate effects on air quality, noise, and habitats, often adding 3-5% to total expenses through required mitigations.

Manufacturers and Systems

Leading Companies

Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, based in , is a prominent manufacturer of automated people mover (APM) systems, particularly for urban and applications. The company began developing rubber-tired AGT systems in the , focusing on innovative transit solutions to address growing urban mobility needs. Its entry into operational APM projects accelerated in the late , with notable contracts such as the 1999 order for , marking its fourth APM project overall. Mitsubishi's series, introduced in the early , exemplifies its expertise in driverless, medium-capacity systems, and the company continues to secure orders in and beyond, contributing to its significant market presence. Alstom, a French multinational with roots in Canada through its acquisition of Bombardier Transportation, leads in APM systems tailored for airports and urban networks. Bombardier initially expanded its rail portfolio in the 1970s via acquisitions like Lohnerwerke, laying the groundwork for advanced transit technologies, including the Innovia APM line developed in the 1980s for automated guideway transit. The 2021 acquisition of Bombardier Transportation by Alstom for approximately €5.9 billion integrated these capabilities, enhancing Alstom's global footprint and positioning it as a key player in energy-efficient, fast-deployment APM solutions. Alstom's systems, such as the Innovia series, are widely adopted for their automation and integration features, with recent contracts underscoring its dominance in airport transit. Otis Elevator Company, a U.S.-based leader in vertical and horizontal transportation, specializes in light APM variants, often using roped or cable-driven mechanisms. Otis entered the APM sector in the 1970s and 1980s, collaborating on projects like the Downtown People Mover in , where it supplied key components and conducted winterization tests for urban operations. Through partnerships, such as with , Otis has installed over 19 roped APM systems worldwide since the 1980s, emphasizing reliability in high-traffic environments like airports and stations. Its innovations include the system, which enables seamless transitions between elevators and APM cabs, enhancing integrated people-moving efficiency. In the 2025 APM market, valued at approximately USD 2.9 billion (as of 2025), Asia-based firms like and hold substantial shares, driven by rapid and expansion in the region. European and North American companies, including and Otis, command strong positions in and specialized light systems, with collective leadership among a few key players ensuring moderate market concentration.

Heavy Automated People Movers

Heavy automated people movers are high-capacity systems designed for dense urban environments, featuring vehicles capable of carrying over 100 passengers per car in multi-car configurations. These systems operate on dedicated elevated or at-grade guideways, enabling bidirectional travel without interference from other , which enhances efficiency in complex city networks. Typical speeds reach up to 80 km/h (approximately 50 mph), though operational averages are often lower to accommodate frequent stops and safety protocols. Notable examples include ' series, a rubber-tired automated system that supports flexible train formations of up to three or four cars, each accommodating up to 105 passengers for high-volume urban routes. In , variants of the have been adapted into four-car configurations for Seibu Railway's urban lines, providing seamless integration into existing transit corridors. 's , evolving from rubber-tired technologies like the NeoVal concept, offers similar heavy-duty capabilities with driverless operations on dedicated guideways, emphasizing scalability for metropolitan demand. Leading manufacturers such as and play key roles in customizing these systems for urban scalability. In mass transit applications, heavy automated people movers integrate directly with lines to alleviate congestion at transfer points and handle peak directional demands exceeding 10,000 passengers per hour per direction (pphpd), such as in systems like the VAL network extensions in . This integration allows for synchronized scheduling and shared infrastructure, boosting overall network capacity in growing cities without the need for full heavy rail expansions. For instance, configurations can achieve up to 25,000 pphpd through short headways of 60 seconds or less, making them suitable for high-density corridors. These systems offer advantages in urban scalability, enabling expansion from shuttle services to full line-haul operations as populations grow, while providing reliable, emission-reduced via electric propulsion. However, their higher demands result in costs often surpassing $60 million per kilometer, reflecting the expense of dedicated guideways and controls. Despite the elevated upfront investment, long-term operational efficiencies from help offset costs in high-usage scenarios.

Light Automated People Movers

Light automated people movers feature compact vehicles designed for lower-capacity transport, typically accommodating 20 to 50 passengers per unit to suit shuttles and short-distance intra-facility needs. These systems operate at speeds ranging from 15 to 40 km/h (9 to 25 mph) on average, prioritizing smooth, frequent service over high velocity, and are frequently arranged in uni-directional loops to minimize complexity and enhance reliability in confined environments. Notable models include Doppelmayr's , a cable-propelled tailored for shuttles, where like cabins hold up to 33 passengers and achieve operational speeds around 30 km/h in loop configurations for efficient passenger flow. Similarly, variants of the CyberCab PRT by 2getthere offer flexible options with smaller pods seating 4 to 6 passengers but scalable in networks for light-duty applications, operating at maximum speeds of 40 km/h in automated, off-line station setups. These systems find application in low-density settings such as hospitals and campuses, where they provide seamless connectivity for staff, patients, and visitors over short distances without disrupting traffic. For instance, the People Mover connected multiple hospital facilities in a compact loop, serving daily intra-campus needs until its decommissioning (decommissioned in February 2019). Installation costs for such light systems typically range from $20 million to $50 million per kilometer, reflecting simpler and reduced material demands compared to larger networks. Due to their smaller scale, light automated people movers exhibit lower power draw, often 10% to 20% less than equivalent heavy systems, enabling integration with sustainable power sources. In 2020s models, battery technology has gained prominence for enhanced energy efficiency; Mitsubishi Heavy Industries' Prismo, a battery-powered variant, incorporates high-density regenerative to achieve operational savings of around 10% through onboard management of braking energy.

Applications and Implementations

Airport and Terminal Systems

People movers, also known as automated people mover (APM) systems, serve as critical intra-airport transit solutions designed to streamline flows in expansive terminal complexes. Their primary functions include linking main terminals to remote buildings, gates, and parking facilities, thereby minimizing the physical and temporal burdens of navigation. By replacing lengthy pedestrian paths—often exceeding 1,500 feet without such systems—with efficient guideway shuttles, these systems reduce overall walking distances to typically under 1,300 feet, alleviating the "long, tiring, time-consuming trek from the parked car to the " that characterizes many large . This connectivity supports seamless inter-terminal transfers, enabling airlines to optimize gate utilization and reduce missed connections during peak operations, with vehicle headways as short as to 2 minutes to maintain fluid movement. Design adaptations for people movers emphasize operational resilience and passenger comfort within controlled environments. Vehicles are typically fully enclosed and driverless, operating on dedicated guideways such as tunnels or elevated structures to shield passengers from inclement weather and external disruptions. integration is a key feature, allowing passengers to check or reclaim luggage at centralized transportation hubs before or after shuttle rides, which streamlines the journey through multi-terminal layouts. High reliability is paramount, with systems engineered for minimal downtime to avoid cascading delays in schedules, underscoring the need for robust and protocols in these high-stakes settings. Economically, people movers enhance overall facility throughput by enabling more compact terminal designs and higher passenger volumes without proportional increases in walking infrastructure. These systems can boost capacity through improved transfer efficiency, driven by reduced wait times and optimized space use. materializes via elevated airline revenues from shorter ground times and increased daily turnarounds, alongside fees from higher traffic, though initial range from $200 million to over $1.5 billion per mile in 2020s dollars, as seen in recent projects like the . Despite these benefits, implementing people movers in presents notable challenges, particularly in integrating with airside protocols and managing demand fluctuations. Navigating secure zones requires seamless synchronization to prevent bottlenecks at checkpoints, where steady streams from the systems must align with screening capacities without compromising . Peak-hour surges exacerbate these issues, as elevated volumes can strain capacities—typically rated at 7,200 to 16,000 passengers per hour per direction—potentially leading to congestion if headways or fleet sizes are insufficiently scaled. Light automated people mover variants are commonly adapted for these environments due to their flexibility in shorter, enclosed routes.

Urban and Intra-City Networks

Urban people movers serve as key components of city-wide or transit grids, providing automated, elevated guideway systems that facilitate efficient mobility in densely populated areas. These systems, often heavy automated people movers (APM), are designed to complement broader urban transport networks by offering reliable, driverless service over short to medium distances within central business districts or high-density zones. For instance, the operates as a free, 4.4-mile elevated loop connecting 21 stations across , Omni, and neighborhoods, enhancing intra-city connectivity. Integration strategies for urban people movers emphasize seamless linkages with , buses, and pedestrian infrastructure to address last-mile challenges in congested urban environments. In , the directly interfaces with the heavy rail system at Government Center station and aligns with Metrobus routes at multiple points, allowing passengers to transfer without additional fares and reducing overall travel times in traffic-heavy areas. Similarly, these systems support multimodal hubs where elevated stations provide direct access to lines, promoting higher ridership by minimizing wait times and physical barriers. Such integrations are critical in cities with mixed traffic, where people movers bypass ground-level congestion to serve as feeders for larger networks. Capacity and frequency characteristics of urban people mover networks enable them to handle moderate passenger volumes with high reliability, typically achieving 2-5 minute headways during peak periods. The Miami Metromover, for example, runs trains every 1.5 to 3 minutes at peak times, accommodating up to 50 passengers per across its three loops, which supports an average daily ridership of approximately 24,000 passengers as of September 2025. This setup allows lines to serve 5,000 to 15,000 daily riders, depending on urban density and integration, making them suitable for corridors rather than high-volume routes. Heavy APM designs, like those in these networks, prioritize consistent service to boost public confidence in automated transit. Urban benefits of people mover networks include significant reductions in traffic emissions and contributions to economic revitalization of districts. By shifting commuters from private vehicles to electric-powered systems, these networks can lower CO2 emissions by up to 30% for households switching to transit from driving, as public transportation generally emits less per passenger than solo car trips. In , the has supported downtown redevelopment by improving access to commercial and cultural sites, fostering business growth and reducing vehicle dependency in a car-centric region. These systems also alleviate local and noise, enhancing livability in high-traffic zones while stimulating property values around stations through better connectivity. Planning considerations for implementing urban people movers involve zoning adaptations for elevated infrastructure and innovative funding models to ensure long-term viability. Cities must revise codes to accommodate guideway tracks and stations, often through (TOD) that encourages higher- mixed-use buildings near stops to maximize ridership and offset costs. For example, Miami's efforts include zoning incentives for density around proposed extensions, integrating people movers into broader . typically relies on public-private partnerships (PPPs), where governments provide land and grants while private entities handle construction and operations, as seen in various U.S. urban projects supported by federal transit funds. These models balance fiscal constraints with private innovation, ensuring equitable access and .

Specialized and Recreational Uses

In industrial settings, automated people movers facilitate efficient worker transport within large factories and hubs, reducing from long walks and improving . For instance, systems like automated carts or shuttle-based people movers are deployed in environments to move employees between workstations and break areas, minimizing physical strain and enhancing in high-volume production facilities. These applications leverage compact, guideway-based designs suited to confined industrial layouts. Recreational uses of people movers are prominent in theme parks and tourism sites, where they serve as both attractions and crowd management tools. At Resort, the Tomorrowland Transit Authority PeopleMover offers guests an elevated, emission-free tour of Tomorrowland, operating continuously to distribute visitors evenly and alleviate congestion during peak hours. Similarly, cable- or belt-propelled systems in amusement centers provide low-demand transport at speeds up to 50 km/h, enhancing visitor experience in leisure environments over the past three decades. Light automated people movers are often referenced for such small-scale recreational needs due to their adaptability. Unique adaptations extend people movers to temporary event setups and specialized intra-facility links, such as hospital complexes. For major events like the Olympic and , Toyota's Accessible People Mover (APM) deploys electric, low-floor vehicles to provide last-mile transport for athletes, staff, and spectators with mobility needs, ensuring inclusive access in dynamic venues, as used in Paris 2024. In healthcare, the People Mover connected multiple downtown hospitals via an elevated automated tram, transporting staff and patients between facilities like Methodist Hospital and from 2003 until its closure in 2019. These specialized deployments face limitations in scalability owing to their site-specific engineering, which tailors guideways and vehicles to unique environments like factories or event sites, often resulting in higher upfront costs ranging from $200 million to over $1 billion for complex installations per dual-track mile in contemporary terms. However, such customization yields specialized efficiency, with small systems installable in under a year and low operating costs relative to benefits when integrated with existing infrastructure, offsetting expenses through reduced labor and improved throughput in targeted applications.

Global Examples

Asia-Pacific Installations

Japan stands as an early adopter of people mover technologies in the , predating many regional implementations with systems like the in (operational since 1995), a fully line facilitating urban connectivity. In , people mover systems have expanded alongside major infrastructure projects, notably at , where Bombardier supplied the CX-100 automated people mover that opened in 2008 to link terminals ahead of the . Similarly, the Automated People Mover in began service on November 8, 2010, serving as a driverless underground link within the city's . Singapore's installations highlight both airport efficiency and tourism applications, with the launching in 1990 as an early automated connection between Terminals 1 and 2. The system underwent refurbishment in 2025, with new cars planned by 2029 as part of a S$3 billion enhancement. The Express , operational since January 15, 2007, provides seamless access to the island's recreational attractions from HarbourFront. South Korea's incorporates an automated people mover to shuttle passengers between Terminal 1 and Terminal 2, which entered service upon the latter's opening in January 2018. In Thailand, introduced its automated people mover system in September 2023 as part of the Satellite Terminal 1 expansion, marking the country's first fully automated intra-airport transit. Across the , rapid has propelled people mover deployments, with the region capturing about 20% of the global automated people mover market by 2025 and incorporating hybrid technologies such as the system at Incheon Airport, operational since 2016. Manufacturers like and Bombardier have played pivotal roles in these developments through tailored APM solutions.

Europe and Middle East Systems

In , people mover systems have been deployed to enhance connectivity at airports, universities, and urban extensions, often emphasizing reliability and integration with existing infrastructure. Germany's , a suspended developed by , exemplifies early adoption of driverless technology for campus and airport transport. The initial system at Technische Universität Dortmund opened on May 2, 1984, linking university centers over a 1.4 km route with four stations, operating fully automatically without onboard staff. A similar installation at , branded as SkyTrain, began service in June 2002, spanning 2.7 km to connect terminals A, B, C, and the long-distance train station, handling up to 3,000 passengers per hour. These systems highlight Germany's focus on innovative, suspended guideway solutions for high-density short-haul transit. Italy's Turin Metro introduced automated people mover technology as part of its urban rail expansion. The first line, utilizing Siemens' Véhicule Automatique Léger (VAL) system, opened on February 4, 2006, coinciding with the Winter Olympics, with an initial 8.3 km section featuring 13 driverless stations. This light metro configuration serves as an urban extension, integrating with surface transport to alleviate congestion in the city center. In Austria, Vienna has pursued light rail integrations with automated elements, such as Siemens' X-Wagen trains on the U-Bahn network, which support future driverless operations and connect with tram systems for seamless multimodal access across the metropolitan area. In the , people mover deployments align with ambitious airport expansions and mega-projects, prioritizing capacity for growing passenger volumes. At , the Automated People Mover system, a driverless loop connecting terminals and concourses, entered service in 2008 as part of Terminal 3's development, transporting up to 6,000 passengers per hour per direction. has managed operations since 2019, ensuring 99.99% availability through advanced maintenance protocols. In the UAE, is advancing people mover integrations; Zayed International Airport's Terminal A, opened in 2023, incorporates plans for expanded automated guideways to link concourses, while is evaluating bids for a 14-station system to support its mega-expansion to 260 million annual passengers. European trends underscore an EU emphasis on , with funded pilots promoting low-emission people movers, such as the Horizon 2020 project integrating electric and automated shuttles in cities like for zero-emission urban mobility. In contrast, the Middle East's approach centers on mega-projects, driving market growth in automated systems, as seen in Saudi Arabia's 6.4% CAGR for people movers tied to infrastructure like Riyadh's expansions.

North and South America Deployments

In the United States, the , an elevated automated loop system spanning 2.94 miles, commenced operations on July 31, 1987, utilizing UTDC Intermediate Capacity Transit System (ICTS) Mark I technology developed by . This downtown circulator, constructed under the Southeastern Michigan Transit Authority, serves 13 stations and aims to enhance urban connectivity in Detroit's . Similarly, the Miami Metromover opened its initial 1.9-mile Downtown Loop on April 17, 1986, as a fully automated, driverless system designed to distribute passengers within Miami's and promote economic revitalization. The system later expanded with the Omni and Brickell loops in 1994, increasing its total length to 4.4 miles and integrating with the broader network. Airport applications in the U.S. highlight people movers' role in high-volume passenger handling, exemplified by the Plane Train at Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport, which began service in 1980 as an automated system connecting concourses and terminals across a sprawling layout. This Westinghouse C-100-based network, the world's busiest by passenger volume with over 400 million riders since inception, facilitates seamless transfers in the busiest U.S. airport. In 2025, Atlanta initiated upgrades by adding 14 new energy-efficient Innovia 300R vehicles to the Plane Train fleet, increasing it to 73 cars and enhancing sustainability and operational reliability amid growing traffic demands. In Canada, the Terminal Link at , an automated people mover connecting Terminals 1 and 3 with the Viscount parking facility, entered service on July 6, 2006, providing free, wheelchair-accessible transport over 1.5 miles. This cable-driven system supports efficient inter-terminal movement for the airport's 45 million annual passengers. Vancouver's SkyTrain, a fully automated light network often classified as a people mover due to its driverless operation, has seen significant extensions, including the 2016 adding 7 miles and four stations to the , boosting regional connectivity. South American deployments emphasize adaptations to challenging topography, as seen in Venezuela's Caracas Metrocable, a system integrated into the public transit network starting with Line 1 in 2007 to serve hilly barrios in western . Subsequent lines in the , such as Line 2 (2012) and Line 3 (2010), extended coverage over steep terrain, linking underserved communities to the and reducing travel times by up to 60% while fostering social inclusion. North American people mover trends in the centered on urban revitalization, supported by federal grants from the Urban Mass Transportation Administration's Downtown People Mover program, which funded projects like and to stimulate economic activity through innovative transit. In contrast, South American systems prioritize solutions for hilly terrains, using cable-propelled technologies to bridge vertical and horizontal divides in informal settlements. By 2025, updates across the include retrofits for greater energy efficiency, such as Atlanta's new low-emission vehicles, aligning with broader sustainability goals. Expansions faced setbacks from funding cuts following the 2008 recession, which reduced federal and provincial investments in urban transit infrastructure, stalling proposed people mover projects in both the U.S. and amid tightened budgets and shifting priorities toward recovery efforts.

References

  1. https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-36/chapter-XI/part-1192/subpart-A/section-1192.3
  2. https://rosap.ntl.bts.gov/view/dot/17794/dot_17794_DS1.pdf
  3. https://www.access-board.gov/files/vehicles/guides/h-automated-guideway-transit-systems.pdf
  4. https://nap.nationalacademies.org/read/22926/chapter/5
  5. https://www.flydenver.com/press-release/new-train-cars-at-den-begin-carrying-passengers-to-the-concourses/
  6. https://www.thepeoplemover.com/about
  7. https://ops.colorado.gov/sites/ops/files/ConveyanceRegulations040117.pdf
  8. https://nap.nationalacademies.org/catalog/22926/guidebook-for-planning-and-implementing-automated-people-mover-systems-at-airports
  9. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/271257051_Automated_People_Movers_A_Futuristic_Approach_to_Modern_Transportation_Planning
  10. https://nap.nationalacademies.org/read/22926/chapter/6
  11. https://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/millennium/00008.pdf
  12. https://ietresearch.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1049/iet-est.2017.0004
  13. http://yangdy.freeservers.com/apm/apmrev.html
  14. https://www.princeton.edu/~ota/disk3/1975/7503/750303.PDF
  15. http://www.advancedtransit.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/Fundamentals_all_opt.pdf
  16. https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/moving-sidewalks-before-the-jetsons-17484942/
  17. https://blog.stannahlifts.co.uk/history-of-moving-walkways
  18. https://blog.railwaymuseum.org.uk/the-never-stop-railway/
  19. https://collection.sciencemuseumgroup.org.uk/people/ap29943/never-stop-transit-ltd
  20. https://www.gramconveyor.com/stephens-adamson-conveyor-idlers/
  21. https://d23.com/history-of-the-peoplemover/
  22. https://www.thehenryford.org/explore/blog/ford-meets-disney-at-the-magic-skyway
  23. https://pittsburghtransit.org/skybus.html
  24. https://faculty.washington.edu/jbs/itrans/dpmhist.htm
  25. https://www.detroithistorical.org/learn/online-research/encyclopedia-of-detroit/detroit-people-mover
  26. https://www.tshaonline.org/handbook/entries/dallas-fort-worth-international-airport
  27. https://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/trr/1991/1308/1308-016.pdf
  28. https://faculty.washington.edu/jbs/itrans/hsst_his.htm
  29. https://www.magneticbearings.org/app/uploads/publications/ismst4/ismst4_submission_2.pdf
  30. https://www.credenceresearch.com/report/automated-people-mover-market
  31. https://ascelibrary.org/doi/book/10.1061/9780784405826
  32. https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/12/7267
  33. https://www.mhi.com/technology/review/sites/g/files/jwhtju2326/files/tr/pdf/e461/e461023.pdf
  34. https://www.nap.edu/read/22926/chapter/6
  35. https://s3.amazonaws.com/s3.documentcloud.org/documents/24376614/dtc-board-of-directors-2024-01-25-people-mover-general-information-brochure.pdf
  36. https://www.mhi.com/jp/technology/review/sites/g/files/jwhtju2326/files/tr/pdf/e442/e442002.pdf
  37. http://railtec.illinois.edu/wp/wp-content/uploads/pdf-archive/TRB-2015-NCRRP_rpt_003-Passenger-Train-Energy.pdf
  38. https://www.lawa.org/transforminglax/projects/automated-people-mover-train-system
  39. https://www.sae.org/papers/rubber-tire-vs-steel-wheel-tradeoffs-740228
  40. https://www.mobility.siemens.com/global/en/portfolio/rolling-stock/val-systems.html
  41. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/308867385_Distributed_Automated_Vehicle_Location_AVL_System_Based_on_Connected_Vehicle_Technology
  42. https://railway-news.com/us-panynj-breaks-ground-on-new-airtrain-automated-people-mover-at-ewr/
  43. https://www.bsbedge.com/standard/ieee-standard-for-communications-based-train-control-cbtc-performance-and-functional-requirements-ieee-1474-1-2025/IEEE1474.1-2025
  44. https://pubs.asce.org/Product?isbn=9780784415573
  45. https://www.transit.dot.gov/sites/fta.dot.gov/files/docs/FTA_REPORT_No._0045.pdf
  46. https://backend.orbit.dtu.dk/ws/portalfiles/portal/128950142/COMST2661384.pdf
  47. https://www.cisco.com/c/dam/en/us/td/docs/solutions/Verticals/Transportation/Rail-CBTC/connected-rail-cbtc-and-safety-solution-brief.pdf
  48. https://www.apta.com/wp-content/uploads/Standards_Documents/APTA-SS-CCS-RP-002-13.pdf
  49. https://crp.trb.org/acrp0715/wp-content/themes/acrp-child/documents/188/original/acrp_r140.pdf
  50. https://nap.nationalacademies.org/read/22926/chapter/10
  51. https://inist.org/library/2019-09-30.Bombardier.SanJose_DOT_RFI_response.pdf
  52. https://www.stanleyaccess.com/transportation-platform-screen-door-manufacturer
  53. https://www.apta.com/wp-content/uploads/APTA-SUDS-UD-GL-010-20.pdf
  54. https://www.access-board.gov/files/ada/adaag-2002.pdf
  55. https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-36/chapter-XI/part-1192
  56. https://libraryarchives.metro.net/DPGTL/usdot/1977-review-of-downtown-people-mover-proposals-preliminary-market-implications-for-downtown-applications-of-automated-guideway-transit-december.pdf
  57. https://www.transit.dot.gov/sites/fta.dot.gov/files/docs/research-innovation/118131/transit-noise-and-vibration-impact-assessment-manual-fta-report-no-0123_0.pdf
  58. https://thedocs.worldbank.org/en/doc/ad536a3890f92ea1b587afa5c1bee626-0090062024/original/C2-M3-Public-Transport-Systems-Integration-Combined.pdf
  59. https://fdotwww.blob.core.windows.net/sitefinity/docs/default-source/p-centralbrowardtransitstudy/alternatives-analysis-final-report.pdf?sfvrsn=a8d4114a_2
  60. https://hsr.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/2022/05/Final_EIRS_FJ_V1-31_CH_6_Project_Costs_and_Operations.pdf
  61. https://www.mhi.com/products/engineering/transport.html
  62. https://www.mhi.com/news/0810021256.html
  63. https://www.mhi.com/news/1802082107.html
  64. https://bombardier.com/en/about/our-history
  65. https://www.alstom.com/press-releases-news/2021/1/transformational-step-alstom-completion-acquisition-bombardier
  66. https://www.alstom.com/solutions/turnkey/innovia-automated-people-mover-apm-systems-leading-solutions-urban-and-airport-transit
  67. https://rosap.ntl.bts.gov/view/dot/10446
  68. https://www.thebusinessresearchcompany.com/market-insights/automated-people-mover-market-insights-2025
  69. https://www.marketreportanalytics.com/reports/automated-people-mover-system-138618
  70. https://www.mhi.com/technology/review/sites/g/files/jwhtju2326/files/tr/pdf/e403/e403182.pdf
  71. https://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/tcrp/tcrp_rpt_13-d.pdf
  72. https://www.railway.supply/mitsubishi-to-develop-new-rubber-tired-trains-for-seibu-railway-in-japan/
  73. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/atr.5670330104
  74. http://www.advancedtransit.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/Infrastructure-Cost-Comparisons-A.D.-Kerr-P.A.-James-A.-Craig.pdf
  75. https://www.iosrjournals.org/iosr-jmce/papers/vol11-issue3/Version-3/A011330111.pdf
  76. https://repository.mines.edu/server/api/core/bitstreams/fe3ff8e3-2073-4bee-b2fa-9f75b11559af/content
  77. https://www.doppelmayr.com/en/systems/automated-people-mover/
  78. https://www.2getthere.eu/technology/vehicle-types/prt-vehicle-automated-taxi/
  79. https://schwagerdavis.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/SDI_ClarianPeopleMover_ProjectReport.pdf
  80. https://milpitasprt.com/wp-content/uploads/business-plan.pdf
  81. https://www.wishtv.com/news/iu-health-people-mover-to-shut-down-in-february/
  82. https://www.mhi.com/news/250519.html
  83. https://www.railwaygazette.com/monorail-and-peoplemover/prismo-energy-efficient-peoplemover-announced/68887.article
  84. https://onlinepubs.trb.org/Onlinepubs/trr/1990/1273/1273-004.pdf
  85. http://www.advancedtransit.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/PRT-APM-Comparison-Paper-P.J.-Muller.pdf
  86. https://laist.com/news/transportation/lax-people-mover-delay-grand-jury-report
  87. https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2024-07-15/lax-people-mover-could-have-completion-date
  88. https://www.miamidade.gov/global/transportation/metromover.page
  89. https://www.miamidade.gov/transit/library/system-map-brochure.pdf
  90. https://www.miamidade.gov/transit/library/rtr/2025-03-monthly-ridership-report.pdf
  91. https://www.miamidade.gov/resources/transportation_publicworks/documents/2025-09-monthly-technical-ridership-report.pdf
  92. https://www.travelinusa.us/metromover-miami/
  93. https://www.kcata.org/about_kcata/entries/environmental_benefits_of_public_transit
  94. https://www.urban.org/urban-wire/reducing-transportation-emissions-through-land-use-policy-and-investments
  95. https://www.miamidadetpo.org/library/studies/mdtpo-people-mover-technology-as-option-to-further-extend-reach-of-smart-program-final-report-2024-05.pdf
  96. https://www.mckinsey.com/capabilities/sustainability/our-insights/public-private-collaborations-for-transforming-urban-mobility
  97. https://www.umdautomatedsystems.com/reducing-employee-fatigue-in-manufacturing-with-people-movers/
  98. https://disneyworld.disney.go.com/attractions/magic-kingdom/tomorrowland-transit-authority-peoplemover/
  99. https://newsroom.toyota.eu/toyota-to-deliver-inclusive-electric-mobility-solutions-for-all-at-paris-2024/
  100. https://www.progressiverailroading.com/rail_industry_trends/news.aspx?id=11118
  101. https://landtransportguru.net/train/changi-airport-skytrain/
  102. https://www.channelnewsasia.com/singapore/singapore-changi-airport-3-billion-enhancement-plan-skytrain-cars-terminal-3-4732841
  103. https://landtransportguru.net/train/sentosa-express/
  104. https://www.landrumbrown.com/en/projects/incheon-international-airport/
  105. https://www.nationthailand.com/in-focus/30391365
  106. https://reports.valuates.com/market-reports/QYRE-Auto-21V1022/global-automated-people-mover-system
  107. https://www.miamidade.gov/global/transportation/metromover-upgrade-project.page
  108. https://www.atl.com/media-center/press-releases/read?id=681bc1a4fec4980013f0350e
  109. https://www.train-museum.org/locomotives-rolling-stock/transit/westinghouse-apm/
  110. https://transittoronto.ca/regional/2707.shtml
  111. https://www.translink.ca/plans-and-projects/projects/rapid-transit-projects/skytrain-expansion-program
  112. https://www.gondolaproject.com/2023/07/21/caracas-metrocable/
  113. https://use.metropolis.org/case-studies/the-caracas-metrocable
  114. https://trid.trb.org/View/1123253
  115. https://www.fox5atlanta.com/news/atlanta-airport-unveils-major-upgrade-plane-train-system
  116. https://www.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/pubs/pdf/pa162.pdf
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.