Transportation Technology "Bombs".

[SectorZ]

This may baffle the young-uns, but when shoulder belts were first mandated, many cars had this crazy scheme with a movable anchor in a motorized slot over the door that moved the belt out of the way when the door was opened.

I'm only 42 years old, and the car I learned to drive in had such a mechanism:  a 1988 Toyota Camry.  It also had a pair of red buttons down in the center console that would allow a person to disconnect one end of the shoulder belt in case of an accident and subsequent need to exit the vehicle without being able to open the door;  if you pressed it, it would beep-beep-beep as a warning.  If we had a new person riding in the car, my dad was known to press the button on the sly and, when the person asked what the beeping was, he'd answer, "The ejection seat."

My 1992 Ford Tempo had one. I actually got the "passive restraint system" discount on my auto insurance just the same as if it had airbags. Airbags superseded the automatic seat belts by the time airbags were mandated in 1996.

[1995hoo]

I fly into and out of Dulles Airport on occasion. The mobile lounges are still in use and now serve three purposes. The most important is to carry inbound international passengers to the International Arrivals Building; as others have noted, this allows those passengers to be segregated from domestic traffic until they clear Customs and Immigration and re-clear security.

The second use is as an alternative to the AeroTrain system. The AeroTrain serves the A, B, and C midfield concourses but does not directly serve the D concourse. You can get to D by taking the train and then walking because C and D are in the same building, but it's often faster and easier to take the mobile lounge directly between the main terminal and the D concourse. I believe the mobile lounge will also take you from A/B to D, though I've never done that.

The third use is on rare occasions when a gate isn't available and they need to use a remote stand to board or disembark a flight. They pull a "Plane Mate" mobile lounge (easily identified by the two smokestack-type things on top of the lounge) up next to the plane and raise it up to the door level. All flights at Dulles used to operate that way, but it's very rare these days. Somewhere online you can find pictures of a mobile lounge being used this way in June 2023 when the final Air France Concorde flew into Dulles carrying airline personnel (the aircraft did not return to France because Air France donated it to the Smithsonian museum located adjacent to the airport).



Regarding the motorized seatbelts, as others have noted, there was a federal standard in place requiring "passive restraint systems," that is, one that would operate regardless of whether the driver or front-seat passenger chose to fasten the seatbelt. At one point, some automakers attached both the shoulder and lap belts to the door and intended that they would remain buckled (the late 1980s Honda CRX is a good example), but pretty much everybody hated those because it was too hard to get in and out of the car (women wearing skirts understandably really disliked them), so a lot of people just unbuckled them and either used them as conventional seatbelts or didn't use them at all. The motorized shoulder belts were a response to the negative customer feedback, but as noted they required you to buckle the lap belt yourself, and a lot of people in turn didn't do that. Airbags became the longer-term solution. I remember a car magazine article commenting on the absurdity of the federal regulation because a Ferrari or similar sold in Europe had a five-point racing seatbelt that was a superior design, but in the US it had to be sold with the motorized shoulder belt that scooted along the door to comply with the regulation.

[mgk920]

Self-driving and straight battery-electric vehicles.

Mike

[SEWIGuy]

Self-driving and straight battery-electric vehicles.

WAAAYYY too early to make that pronouncement.

[SectorZ]

Self-driving and straight battery-electric vehicles.

WAAAYYY too early to make that pronouncement.

I'm inclined to agree on the first, especially since now Apple released news today about their "self-driving" car being pushed back to 2028 and it's self-driving features will be no different than my wife's Mazda CX-5.

On the latter, I don't ever think the government is going to allow it to happen.

[SEWIGuy]

We are in the infancy of the technology for both.

[GaryV]

Self-driving and straight battery-electric vehicles.

WAAAYYY too early to make that pronouncement.

I'm inclined to agree on the first, especially since now Apple released news today about their "self-driving" car being pushed back to 2028 and it's self-driving features will be no different than my wife's Mazda CX-5.

On the latter, I don't ever think the government is going to allow it to happen.

The gummint's not going to allow battery-electric vehicles? Someone ought to tell Elon pretty quick.

[ZLoth]

Self-driving and straight battery-electric vehicles.

WAAAYYY too early to make that pronouncement.

I agree on the electric cars being way too early on that pronouncement. I also disagree with the carrot-and-stick approach certain states are making to force the usage of electric cars by a certain year. The extreme cold and the inability for Tesla's to charge in extreme cold certainly didn't help paint a positive picture of electric cars.

At least with my two examples (Personal Rapid Transit and Mobile Lounges), these were transport technologies that are almost 50 years old, but failed to get widespread adoption, thus they are what I considered to be transportation "bombs".

[Road Hog]

Push button gear shifting on various cars in the late 1950s?

[lepidopteran]

Dare I say it, the monorail?

Once thought to be the transportation system of the future, the monorail never really caught on in a big way.  They might have a useful function at zoos and amusement parks, but they seem to be gradually vanishing even there.  And while Disney does seem to maintain their systems, it speaks volumes that they never extended the system to any of their other parks beyond Epcot.  They just stuck with the good old-fashioned motorbus, though the new "Skyliner" aerial gondolas seem to be making a hit.

At Newark Liberty Airport (EWR), the first contractor was recently selected to replace their monorail-based Skytrain with a more conventional peoplemover system. (I hear they've decided on a cable-driven model, like those at CVG or DTW.)

Tampa International Airport (TPA) had a monorail to access long-term parking -- NOT to be confused with the 4 peoplemovers used to access the satellite concourses, or the new transport system that takes you to the ConRAC.  This monorail was kind of hidden, to the point where most airport visitors probably didn't know about it.  In any event, it was removed a few years ago, and replaced with mere moving walkways.

Some of the drawbacks of monorails are that they tend to be based on proprietary technology, making them difficult to service.  Also the fact that they are required to be on an expensive elevated structure.

Heck, even The Simpsons had a laugh with them.  (s4e12, "Marge vs. the Monorail")

[jeffandnicole]

Tampa International Airport (TPA) had a monorail to access long-term parking -- NOT to be confused with the 4 peoplemovers used to access the satellite concourses

Even the peoplemovers are a waste. By the time you wait for the next train, er, peoplemover, you could've just walked between the terminal and the central hub.  The distance is only about 1,000 feet, or a 4 - 5 minute walk.

[Bruce]

HOV lanes.

Highly effective as a first step towards HOT lanes or bus lanes, and allows for highway expansion without pissing off certain types. I don't think it qualifies for this list.

After work-from-home significantly shifted commuting patterns away from inbound-AM / outbound-PM, I think reversible express lanes may enter this list. They work well in some cases, and most systems did work well upon initial implementation, but now maybe not so much? Idk, just my opinion

Seattle's system does cause considerable congestion where the express lanes begin/end at Northgate, so it really doesn't work well for the modern city. Should've been torn out for a busway decades ago.

[jeffandnicole]

HOV lanes.

Highly effective as a first step towards HOT lanes or bus lanes, and allows for highway expansion without pissing off certain types. I don't think it qualifies for this list.

But if they worked, we'd see a lot more HOV lanes, the HOT component wouldn't be needed, and buses would coexist within the lanes. 

People just don't like carpooling. HOV lanes may be a tried experiment, but except in very crowded areas, they never worked out well.  Worth noting those crowded areas also tend to have sufficient mass-transit systems, which even with their issues, generally work better than HOV lanes.

[Revive 755]

Self-driving and straight battery-electric vehicles.

WAAAYYY too early to make that pronouncement.

I'll agree it's way too early with the straight battery-electric vehicles (given how likely it feels that gas will go back over $5/gallon this year), but not as strongly with the self-driving.


Perhaps the Dallas signal design/phasing since it has been replaced by the flashing yellow arrow display?

[Rothman]

HOT lanes.  Sure, popular for the rich who can afford them.   A bomb for everyone else.

[Scott5114]

DIA's baggage system they tried to implement in the 90's. Way ahead of its time, but had a habit of launching baggage.

I think they should take whatever remains of it, and rebrand it as a ride.

DIA seems like it might well be a more entertaining destination than whatever you were flying into Denver to do.

[pderocco]

Dare I say it, the monorail?

Once thought to be the transportation system of the future, the monorail never really caught on in a big way.  They might have a useful function at zoos and amusement parks, but they seem to be gradually vanishing even there.  And while Disney does seem to maintain their systems, it speaks volumes that they never extended the system to any of their other parks beyond Epcot.  They just stuck with the good old-fashioned motorbus, though the new "Skyliner" aerial gondolas seem to be making a hit.

The obvious technological difficulty of monorails is branching. Disneyland has one big loop, with a huge contraption for diverting the vehicle onto a spur that goes into what looks like a maintenance building. It also has trolleys on the ground, which are easy to branch.

[ZLoth]

Dare I say it, the monorail?

Cal Expo has a monorail that was intended to help with getting around, and was put into operation in 1969. Due to accessability and safety issues with the other stations along the route, this monorail effectively is a amusement ride whose sole station is above the main game. Japan seemed to have a more developed monorail system.

[Rothman]

DIA's baggage system they tried to implement in the 90's. Way ahead of its time, but had a habit of launching baggage.

I think they should take whatever remains of it, and rebrand it as a ride.

DIA seems like it might well be a more entertaining destination than whatever you were flying into Denver to do.

I thought they fixed the system, rather than replace it with something entirely different.

[kphoger]

Dare I say it, the monorail?

I was about to suggest that myself, but then I realized how many monorail systems are actually in use around the world, so I determined that it wasn't actually a technology bomb.

[mgk920]

Self-driving and straight battery-electric vehicles.

WAAAYYY too early to make that pronouncement.

I agree on the electric cars being way too early on that pronouncement. I also disagree with the carrot-and-stick approach certain states are making to force the usage of electric cars by a certain year. The extreme cold and the inability for Tesla's to charge in extreme cold certainly didn't help paint a positive picture of electric cars.

At least with my two examples (Personal Rapid Transit and Mobile Lounges), these were transport technologies that are almost 50 years old, but failed to get widespread adoption, thus they are what I considered to be transportation "bombs".

Was it 'too early' when the same technology bombed in the market at the turn of the 19th to the 20th centuries?

Mike

[jeffandnicole]

Self-driving and straight battery-electric vehicles.

WAAAYYY too early to make that pronouncement.

I agree on the electric cars being way too early on that pronouncement. I also disagree with the carrot-and-stick approach certain states are making to force the usage of electric cars by a certain year. The extreme cold and the inability for Tesla's to charge in extreme cold certainly didn't help paint a positive picture of electric cars.

At least with my two examples (Personal Rapid Transit and Mobile Lounges), these were transport technologies that are almost 50 years old, but failed to get widespread adoption, thus they are what I considered to be transportation "bombs".

Was it 'too early' when the same technology bombed in the market at the turn of the 19th to the 20th centuries?

Mike

Yep. In today's world of instant satisfaction, people aren't willing to accept a growth period.

Many people wouldn't consider a car today that don't have certain safety features or conveniences (which differs among each person); most of which were non-existent or in their infancy 20 years ago.  Even cell phones of 20 years ago had nowhere near the technology they do today. But car charging - people see what EVs can do today, and claim they'll never be suitable in the future.

[triplemultiplex]

GPS navigation is probably the single most important transportation technology that's been nearly universally adopted this century so far.  For mostly good, but some bad.  Way fewer people getting lost, but plenty of hiccups along the way.  Took them a while to shake out all the inaccuracies that guided people down non-existent or unsafe roads.   GPS nav is only as good as the data it's working off of and that's gotten good enough for probably 99 percent of use cases.

It's been huge because it's mostly killed paper maps and it's changed the way people drive.  Instead of learning their city's road systems and remembering landmarks for their turns, they mostly use GPS nav.  Obviously folks like us can still get around without nav, but for the general population, they're used to having the car's GPS nav on or having an app on their phone.  They'll go wherever it tells them, even if the difference in travel time is negligible.

I think about any trips from my location in southern Wisconsin to any place southeast beyond Chicago.  GPS nav almost always routes you through Chicago, but going via Bloomington adds just token minutes to the overall trip and is a much, much less aggravating drive.

The technology has been amazing for knowing about and getting around traffic jams.  Particularly the irregular ones that spring up due to crashes or temporary road work.  Lets the driver bail on their planned route well in advance of the slow down and get around it.  Nothing worse than having just passed an exit and around the next turn, everything comes to a screeching halt.  Now an occasional glance at Google Maps or whatever will give you fair warning.

GPS nav has also made route designations sort of moot, if I'm being honest.  The average motorist doesn't care or notice what shields are on the signs, they just know "turn here" "exit there" "go three more miles..."  That does hurt a little, as a roadgeek.  In a pre-GPS world, there was so much more value in route continuity.  "Just stay on highway xx."  For example, they came up with I-69 as this idea of having one route to follow from Mexico to Canada, but since then, GPS has made it irrelevant that such a corridor carry the same route shields.

[mgk920]

Is it more accepted and universal than fuel injection in gasoline engines or the steering wheel?

Mike

[kphoger]

GPS navigation

But neither GPS navigation nor paper maps "bombed".