CurveLight
Rookie
- Oct 16, 2009
- 9,768
- 317
- 0
- Banned
- #1
The basic idea is to provide 3 to 5 drop off locations to reduce. loss of life and safer driving during peak hours and severe congestion. Instead of ambulances losing time and risking further injuries by trying to rush to the hospital they would bring the patient to a High Speed Drop-Off where personnel and equipment would be ready for immediate and unimpeded transfer to the emergency room..
Each rail would be set up on a loop with several "cars" waiting in line in case there are four patient drop-offs in a matter of minutes. Once the patient has made it to the ER the empty car returns to the original drop off point. In the event of mechanical failure the direction of each track may be reversed at any time. These rails and cars would not be in league with the size of subways. They would be much smaller which would reduce cost and afford easier design for running through congested areas.
The question is: would you defend this as an economically justified use of tax funds?
Each rail would be set up on a loop with several "cars" waiting in line in case there are four patient drop-offs in a matter of minutes. Once the patient has made it to the ER the empty car returns to the original drop off point. In the event of mechanical failure the direction of each track may be reversed at any time. These rails and cars would not be in league with the size of subways. They would be much smaller which would reduce cost and afford easier design for running through congested areas.
The question is: would you defend this as an economically justified use of tax funds?
