Talk:DFW Skylink

United States: Texas Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Texas (assessed as Low-importance).

	Aviation
This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status: Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion not met Supporting materials: invalid parameter

Trains Low‑importance

Trains Portal DYK July 1, 2017 This article is within the scope of WikiProject Trains, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to rail transport on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. See also: WikiProject Trains to do list and the Trains Portal.TrainsWikipedia:WikiProject TrainsTemplate:WikiProject Trainsrail transport articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

The route diagram template for this article can be found in Template:DFW Skylink.

I received these ->

back in winter of 2005 from a training session at the SkyLink control center before it was handed off from Bombardier. I will ask the Dfw ambassadors program what its speeds are now.... I remember that the top speed is on that long stretch of track before the location of Terminal F

Rainfay 19:59, 9 July 2007 (UTC) I have seen multiple conflicting sources for the topspeed of the Skylink train system.[reply]

• The
  Dallas-Fort Worth International Airport
  page claims that the topspeed is 50mph.
• The DFW Airport Website claims that the topspeed is 35mph, but the content is a little old, even though it has been updated at least once since Skylink's opening in 2005.
• The Lea+Elliott company website, who worked with Bombardier in developing Skylink, claims that the topspeed is 37mph.

Maybe if someone could contact the various sources involved to get the actual value? Probably not though. For now I just have it marked as 35-37mph. RedPoptarts 12:21, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

After a pretty exhaustive search, the only justification I can find for the 50 mph claim is at [1], which clearly states that the automated people mover planned for Dulles airport will move at 50 mph. The same document reinforces the 35 mph claim substantiated elsewhere for the Skylink system at DFW. The Dulles people mover has the luxury of generally straight paths to follow, which makes higher speeds more attainable.

In any case, barring an actual source that shows the 50 mph claim for Skylink to be justified, I do not believe there is a valid dispute. I have deleted the tags from this article and will proceed to clean up the

Dallas-Fort Worth International Airport article now. Mmccalpin 17:44, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply

]

I don't think the "largest high-speed" claim is very defensible, as eg. AirTrain JFK is clearly longer (8.1mi) and has a maximum speed of 100 km/h [2] or 110 km/h [3] depending on who you ask. Jpatokal (talk) 05:43, 6 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. Both large and high-speed need to be defined. Is large defined by the number of passengers it serves? Length or gauge of track? Height or length or number of cars of a train? Area it serves? Then, where is the boundary for high-speed? Certainly it is higher than 50 km/h! 68.35.186.232 (talk) 01:31, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've added an image on the Commons: Commons:Image:DFW rail 01A.jpg. Article is so short and infobox so big that I hesitate to add it, but if this ever grows, please pick it up. - Jmabel | Talk 05:17, 9 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It appears that one or more editors have taken to referring to Skylink as "Woon doon doon things" or simply using the phrase "woon doon" in this article. Seems pretty clear to me this is vandalism or

And it's back again... —/Mendaliv/^2¢/_Δ's/ 04:29, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The introduction contains almost the whole content of the article. That's not what it should do. I think the first to lines are enough. I will change this in a few days.--MrEnglish (talk) 07:53, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]