The skytrain and the Honolulu system are often called light metro which is a form of rapid transit. It's the same as any other metro system except has very short trains. The APTA puts it in the same category as other metro systems which it calls heavy rail.

Predominantly it is true, but there are some sections of street running. In these areas, the trains hane their own lanes but still have to observe traffic signals.

No, that is untrue. APTA categorizes SkyTrain as an "automated guideway" rather than as "heavy rail."

^ that description seems to fit it best.

so what happens when older lines become more automated? like mta is moving toward making the L and 7 trains robot trains, for example. automated heavy i guess?

The MTA wants to make them fully automated but will they not have train operators/drivers? I assumed they would be like LA and DC, which also have fully automated systems even if they don't always operate automatically. But they still have train operators. The MTA will likely get rid of conductors on those lines though.

Whether or not a metro system has a driver has no effect on or whether it's heavy rail or light metro since a metro system with any type of rolling stock can be made automated. When looking at the SRT in Toronto (which is exactly the same system and rolling stock as the original Skytrain), the APTA calls it "intermediate rail" (aka light metro) which the is the same category the skytrain would fall under if it weren't run without drivers. Of course in Toronto, the SRT drivers were only kept around for the sake of union obligations since they aren't actually needed because the SRT system is totally automated (being identical to the Skytrain).

You wrote "The APTA puts it in the same category as other metro systems which it calls heavy rail." That is obviously false, and as such it was a fallacious appeal to authority. Do you acknowledge your error?

No, we were discussing the topic of light versus heavy, not automated vs non-automated, and the APTA clearly places systems with this level of capacity and operating characteristics on a higher level than light rail. So there is no error. If anyone misunderstood this, then I have sufficiently clarified. Do you acknowledge fixating on something irrelevant to the topic of the actual discussion in an attempt to diminish my credibility?

Also, when you're discussing the meaning of terms, citing a reputable source such as an leading industry group like the APTA isn't an "appeal to authority" any more than citing a dictionary or encyclopaedia when discussing the meaning of typical word. How else is a person going to find such information?

A forumer who refuses to acknowledge he posted a falsehood, when presented with the easily verifiable truth, has zero credibility. Zero. Whatever point you intended to argue is lost in the shroud of intellectual dishonesty.

I responded to and clarified the information as soon as I saw your post. If this was simply about the accuracy of the information, when I clarified it that would have been the end of it. I realise that this is a common tactic on the internet - when someone appears to know more about a particular topic than them, to latch onto whatever nitpicky thing they can find like a spelling or grammar error or any other irrelevant technicality they can use to belittle the person. If you enjoy playing immature games like that, then fine. But don't expect anyone else to indulge you.

2016 transit openings
 

Yonah Freemark of the Transport Politic has his annual look at expected transit openings for 2016.

Openings and Construction Starts Planned for 2016
http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/w...nstruction.jpg
Image courtesy of the Transport Politic.

"Cities across the country are waking up to new bus and rail lines in droves. In 2016, North American transit agencies are expected to open 245 miles of new fixed-guideway transit lines, including 89 miles of bus rapid transit, 93 miles of commuter rail, 7 miles of heavy rail, 39 miles of light rail, and 18 miles of streetcars. This is more than triple the new mileage of such lines opened in 2015..."

http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/2...nned-for-2016/

This would be a pretty epic streetcar line, the BQX, Queens to Brooklyn generally following the East River down. 1.7 Billion, 17 miles.

The booming Brooklyn-Queens waterfront is primed for a $1.7 billion streetcar route, according to a detailed proposal obtained by the Daily News.

A study commissioned for a nonprofit called the Friends of the Brooklyn Queens Connector — whose members include transit experts, community leaders and business giants like Doug Steiner of Steiner Studios, investor Fred Wilson of Union Square Ventures and Helena Durst of the Durst Organization real estate firm — envisions sleek streetcars zipping through 10 neighborhoods along the 17-mile stretch of waterfront land between Sunset Park and Astoria.
http://www.6sqft.com/1-7b-light-rail...ront-proposed/

http://www.6sqft.com/wp-content/uplo...-BQX-lines.jpg

That's not official though.

Seattle First Hill Streetcar soft launch tomorrow:

http://seattletransitblog.com/2016/0...ches-saturday/

Moving the Seattle streetcar to the completed pile.

DC's H Street streetcar opens Saturday Feb 27. So I'll move it to "complete" after that. I'll also take DC's Anacostia streetcar off the list, as it is not currently moving forward (it's a long story).

https://c2.staticflickr.com/6/5651/2...b6c30d18_c.jpg

Easy, there... I am as excited as anyone that the H Street streetcar is scheduled to begin service on Saturday morning but there is still about 40 hours until 10 AM Saturday. A lot can go wrong for DDOT until then.

OPEN.

https://c2.staticflickr.com/2/1467/2...ce09a4729d.jpg

Woo-hoo! Great day for DC! After several years, it looks like the streetcar was successful.

March 19th is the opening day for the Phoenix Northwest extension (part 1). You can preemptively take it off the list, since construction is complete, they're just testing now.