I'm referring to the updated and automated 21st Century version of the San Francisco style Cable Car, a technology that was perfected in the 1870's by Andrew Hallidie, and a predecessor to electric streetcars. This modern version shares the fundamental features of San Francisco's 1870's Cable Cars:

• Non-motorized cars that can be attached to the driving cable by a "grip".
• Miles-long cables pulled by large motor-driven pulleys, driven first by stationary steam engines, and later by very large electric motors (the latter a feature shared by the 21st Century version).
• Multiple stations on a line, with vehicles starting by gripping the driving cable with the grip, and stopping by detaching from the cable.

• Operation on lightweight, grade-separated guideways that are mostly elevated, but also can operate on the ground and in tunnels.
• Modern, completely automated operation, eliminating the need for expensive onboard personnel.
• Operational capabilities from a few hundred meters and up to a maximum of five miles, according to the manufacturer.
• Modular design and installation that dramatically speed up construction, enabling full service within 18-24 months. Modular design that lends itself to small passenger volumes (e.g., less than 2,000 daily) to several tens of thousands of daily users (up to 7,000 riders per hour, claimed by manufacturer).
• Uses standardized steel supports and track, with spans of up to 60-70 meters (200+ feet).
• Operating speeds of up to 30 mph, with average speeds of 15-25 mph, depending on station spacing of  0.25 to 1.0 mile.
• Very simple mechanical systems and control systems compared to the convoluted technologies pursued by PRT enthusiasts, dramatically reducing operating expenses by operating a limited number of larger vehicles, and avoiding such likely maintenance nightmares as the 12-wheeled "Vectus" PRT cars with only 4-6 seats.
• Can take advantage of the "Pulsed Connnections Network" concept; e.g., multiple lines can operate from a central connections hub with coordinated schedules, between the "Doppelmayrs" as well as any other transit technology, e.g., rail, buses, mountain cableways, ski lifts, etc.

I am referring to the cable railway concept that has been proven, and is now being marketed, by Doppelmayr Cable Car (DCC) of Austria. Their "21st Century Cable Car" website is located http://www.dcc.at .

Contrary to the "no transfer" misconceptions of many PRT advocates, CONNECTIONS (the word "transfer" is now banished from this website: see http://www.humantransit.org/2009/04/why-transferring-is-good-for-you-and-good-for-your-city.html#more), are perfectly acceptable IF the average wait is minimal, e.g., no more than a few minutes. Ideally, connections will be made between services operating every 2-6 minutes. In cases where economics dictates longer headways, operation of Pulsed Connections Networks is necessary to maximize the convenience of connecting between different routes and minimizing waiting times.

As I wrote in another context (ti.org/antiplanner/?p=1311 ):

To be successful, [short-haul urban transit including "Doppelmayrs,"] intercity rail passenger service and other intercity transit must begin to be conceived differently. A major reason that the affluent little country of Switzerland has the second highest per capita level of rail and other transit usage on the planet compared to Japan (which has much more densely packed cities and severe traffic congestion), is that the Swiss have focused on the connections between various modes. Swiss trains aren’t particularly fast, reaching 125 mph on just one or two longer routes between Zurich, Bern, and Geneva. But Swiss trains are extremely frequent, and are totally coordinated with all other modes at virtually every train station.

The Swiss operate what I call a “pulsed connections network” where most modes at key stations meet at set times past the hour, allowing comfortable, quick “cross platform” connections. This allows the maximum number of markets to be served without costly service duplication. The Swiss system of connections contrasts rather starkly with the typical U.S. approach to “transfers”" too often a lone bus stop sign too close to heavy traffic, and often a mud puddle for company, while waiting 20 or 30 minutes for the “connection.” In Switzerland, the typical connection allows one to simply get off an arriving vehicle and walk across the platform, and then immediately board the waiting vehicle, usually in less than 30 seconds plus a few minutes wait before all vehicles leave simultaneously (some allowance for schedule adherence is needed, especially by the extremely time-conscious Swiss). This system of connections effectively eliminates the negatives associated with transferring routinely assumed by U.S. transit planners.

I’ve posted a copy of the 2003 TRB paper that discusses this issue and proposes a completely coordinated transit system similar to Switzerland in the S.F. Bay Area and environs at http://www.publictransit.us/ptlibrary/TRB2003-002020.pdf .