>Driverless high speed trains will save no money whatsoever. In fact, the costs and difficulties BART and others have already experienced with existing automation; indicate that the cost of total automation of high speed trains would far exceed the wages and benefits now paid to train operators. Besides, from an economic and business perspective, BART is already way over-automated.

This has been going on for years. All BART "operators" to is hold the doors open at stations. For the same rate of pay, they could be driving the trains and all the capital intensive computerized automated equipment could be done away with (ideally not purchased to begin with).

>And if the strength of the new cars is beefed up as well, so as to be able to take the buff forces of being locomotive hauled at high speed; then they could just couple on a loco at "Bay Point", and keep on truckin' over non-electrified extensions. No need for yet another incompatible technology such as E-BART. Just plurp down the track - and go.

Well , , , with this, there's that problem of the oodball track gauge.

>As to the fewer seats and more doors, that is an astonishingly stupid plan - its purpose being to save about 5-10 seconds time at downtown platforms, per train. But I would guess that each train will loose about 160 seats. At 24 trains per hour, that's 3840 seats lost per hour.

BART's current seating and door layout was perfected by the US transit industry by WWI. There have been no significant improvements since.

> . . unless they expect us to get so chummy, as to not need to hold on - probably more chummy than the law, or good public morals, will allow.

Now that's a novel point of view.