[rbt]

I doubt the trains are going to be driverless in the tunnel.

Perhaps, but that is unrelated to them running on the surface. Eglinton trains will be long enough I could see them having 2 staff on the surface (driver + door man) and 1 staff underground (door man).

Our subway trains will always have one staff on board when automated just as Montreal's continue to despite having been automated a long time ago.

 

[ssiguy2]

Having someone on board despite being is automated is an example of why the TTC's operating costs are so high.
SkyTrain tracks are indeed more expensive than regular rail but would still be sizeably less that building rail and the overhead power supply for 20km including tunneling large enough tunnels to accomodate the higher heights of the trains required. Also by just using a complete SkyTrain from Black Creek to STC would not require building a brand new LRT maintence, storage, and operational centre as these cannot use the same centres as the new legacy streetcars centre as they are different gauge.

 

[accura407]

Perhaps, but that is unrelated to them running on the surface. Eglinton trains will be long enough I could see them having 2 staff on the surface (driver + door man) and 1 staff underground (door man).

Our subway trains will always have one staff on board when automated just as Montreal's continue to despite having been automated a long time ago.

But that is the question...? Why? Vancouver has been operating 100% of their metro system without any drivers for 25 years and they don't have any problems...

Why are we paying premium $$ for an underground segregated alignment with automated driverless trains...to then pay an overpriced laborer on a train?

Am I the only one that see the insanity in this?

 

[rbt]

But that is the question...? Why? Vancouver has been operating 100% of their metro system without any drivers for 25 years and they don't have any problems...

Safety is the usual answer mentioned.

TTC has found having full time medical response crews in some stations has reduced costs by decreasing service outage time so there is evidence that some level of staffing is useful. Obviously, their ideal job description and skillset may be different than what we have today.

It allows for some flexibility in handling signal failure, medical emergencies, security emergencies (people on the track: I've witnessed this a couple of times) too.

Eliminating 180 staff (the doorman as the driver position will be eliminated) may not be a cost savings if the average service outage increases by 5 minutes.

A fun game in Vancouver is to toss a cardboard box into the door of an empty train at a low usage station. It can take 30 minutes for the jam to be cleared by staff if you do it at the right station. Likely one of the reasons they will be getting fare-gates and manning most stations.

 

[Platform 27]

Would unstaffed *trains* but staffed *platforms* be a better solution? Having a customer service presence out and about interacting with the pubic at platform level is far more useful in terms of answering questions and ensuring inexperienced travelers get on the right train, and if having manually-triggered door closure was still seen as an asset, it could be done using some sort of handheld gismo. If there's a medical incident on a train, 99% of the time it's going to at least go as far as the next platform, anyway.

 

[Northern Magus]

Would unstaffed *trains* but staffed *platforms* be a better solution? Having a customer service presence out and about interacting with the pubic at platform level is far more useful in terms of answering questions and ensuring inexperienced travelers get on the right train, and if having manually-triggered door closure was still seen as an asset, it could be done using some sort of handheld gismo. If there's a medical incident on a train, 99% of the time it's going to at least go as far as the next platform, anyway.

The London Underground more or less does both: staffed trains and staffed platforms. Essentially the platform guard takes the place of the TTC's in-train guard and signals the driver to let him know it's safe to close the doors.

 

[Justin10000]

Really? I thought the train driver opened and closed the doors, and watched the platform with the help of CCTV?

 

[ssiguy2]

The SkyTrain almost never has any problems............it's just an excuse the unions use keep as many staff as they can.

 

[Justin10000]

The SkyTrain almost never has any problems............it's just an excuse the unions use keep as many staff as they can.

pppppfffffffffffftttttttttttttttt......

Immature, I know. But the Skytrain has it's problems...Blaming the Unions is a pretty weak excuse.

 

[Rainforest]

SkyTrain tracks are indeed more expensive than regular rail but would still be sizeably less that building rail and the overhead power supply for 20km including tunneling large enough tunnels to accomodate the higher heights of the trains required.

Back in 2008-2009, TTC studied options for the Scarborough RT upgrade and extension to Malvern Centre. They costed both the SkyTrain / ICTS option and the fully grade-separate LRT option. The project would include a variety of segments:

1) Kennedy Stn to McCowan: upgraded / converted existing guideway
2) McCowan to Progress / Milner: new elevated line
3) Progress / Milner to Malvern: tunneled

The estimated costs for SkyTrain / ICTS and for LRT came very close (actually, ICTS a tad more expensive).

Therefore, I doubt the Eglinton as ICTS would be cheaper than Eglinton as LRT.

Also by just using a complete SkyTrain from Black Creek to STC would not require building a brand new LRT maintence, storage, and operational centre as these cannot use the same centres as the new legacy streetcars centre as they are different gauge.

The existing Bellamy yard probably can't handle the greatly increased number of trains needed to operate the whole SRT-Eglinton line.

 

[rbt]

Would unstaffed *trains* but staffed *platforms* be a better solution?

For many situations. Anything medical needs to go to the station anyway. I would certainly prefer the guy taking fares roam through the station and fare-taking be automated.

The guy at the station doesn't help with signal, power, rail issues/work zones/inspections during the day, fire/evacuation procedures during an on-train emergency ('95 crash likely dictates minimum on-train staffing).


A signal failure, for example, fully locks down that point for automated systems. The driver radios control for permission to go ahead and control grants it at a slow speed. Driver is expected to keep close watch for obstacles which 1) may have caused the signal to fail (rail damage, tunnel wall collapse, etc.) and 2) ensure they don't run into a train ahead of them.

Hard to do without someone on board. Before you ask how often this happens, there is debate about making it standard procedure to go through a red signal at Bloor to increase Yonge line frequencies. It was standard procedure (very frequent occurrence) until the '95 crash.

 

[rbt]

The existing Bellamy yard probably can't handle the greatly increased number of trains needed to operate the whole SRT-Eglinton line.

Nor can it handle the increased train length without substantial overhaul.

 

[gweed123]

Nor can it handle the increased train length without substantial overhaul.

Are they going to operate more than 1 yard for the ESLRT, or are they moving everything over to the new yard around Black Creek and centralizing it there? (So as a consequence, abandoning Bellamy)

 

[rbt]

Are they going to operate more than 1 yard for the ESLRT, or are they moving everything over to the new yard around Black Creek and centralizing it there? (So as a consequence, abandoning Bellamy)

Great question. The original plan was to centralize at Black Creek but that was before the SRT became an extension of Eglinton.

The SRT yard is both small and has an odd shape. It could maintain a use as tailtrack storage for 4 to 8 trains similar to what TTC intends to build on the Yonge line.

I don't see any maintenance capabilities existing in that Yard after Eglinton is finished. That will be centralized for cost savings.

 

[CDL.TO]

The London Underground more or less does both: staffed trains and staffed platforms. Essentially the platform guard takes the place of the TTC's in-train guard and signals the driver to let him know it's safe to close the doors.

I'm pretty sure they only do this in busy stations during busy periods. They use CCTV at all other times.

The Docklands Light Rail in London is pretty much completely automated. There is a staff member on board, but not in a booth. They walk around the train checking tickets and ensuring everything is OK, as well as closing the doors at stations through the use of control panels situated throughout the train.