[kEiThZ]

If (and that's a big if) the TTC is actually listening to her, it's probably because they want to get cheaper platform screen doors and they think she may have something. When they find out her "engineering" won't meet any codes, is not really all that cheap all things considered (like actually meeting safety standards), etc. they'll just say "Thanks. We'll keep you in mind." and move on. ATC is already in the plans and is needed. PSDs will follow after that.

Sharon can cry all she wants about finding a leader who is able or willing. She won't find one. It would take some cojones to screw half the commuters (by imposing an extra transfer on them) just to increase speeds marginally, all to avoid inevitable spending on automation and proper platform safety systems.

 

[Asterix]

It would take some cojones to screw half the commuters (by imposing an extra transfer on them) just to increase speeds marginally, all to avoid inevitable spending on automation and proper platform safety systems.

That's one of the points. The thinking on the speed thing is flawed. Many passengers won't get there faster (they'll take significantly longer). Plus, since she has demonstrated a complete lack of understanding of the concept of headway being the determining factor for capacity, by making many people take longer trips, she will be increasing subway crowding (more kms/passenger).

It is for this (as well as all the other previously explained reasons) this idea isn't going anywhere beyond ranting on the internet. No one at the TTC has given any kind of substantive support and there is no reason anyone would.

 

[subway safety]

That's one of the points. The thinking on the speed thing is flawed. Many passengers won't get there faster (they'll take significantly longer). Plus, since she has demonstrated a complete lack of understanding of the concept of headway being the determining factor for capacity, by making many people take longer trips, she will be increasing subway crowding (more kms/passenger).

It is for this (as well as all the other previously explained reasons) this idea isn't going anywhere beyond ranting on the internet. No one at the TTC has given any kind of substantive support and there is no reason anyone would.

You mentioned "out to lunch" Yes, this is true. When flying was first introduced, everyone thout the Wright Brothers were out to lunch. Trust me I often re go over my work, and the answers remain the same.

You guys keep picking it apart. The engineering is not my department, however, the invention portion is.

I will be on the next Toronto Transit Commissioner's Correspondence List. I will keep my info to myself as to who I am meeting. But by the end of February, I believe I will know a whole lot more.

There are only 3 things you need to move a city faster:

1. Platform Safety
2. Stategic Station Skipping during rush hour.
3. Stop and creep approach for Yonge and Bloor.

Collectively, I have done the math at 103% capacity improvement, 1.346 Billion in new annual revenue potential

And the bonus of when first in place all trains will be close to 1/2 full.

And the additional bonus everyone get to work in about 1/2 the time.

I don't see any other solutions on the table? In fact there have been no solution for over 30 years since TTC reached it's reasonable capacity.
Sharon

 

[PinkLucy]

The engineering is not my department, however, the invention portion is.

But without the engineering, the invention isn't going to fly and numerous posters have pointed out that the engineering isn't going to work.

 

[DavidH]

The engineering is not my department, however, the invention portion is.

Nice hand waving. Without engineering, you don't have an invention. Did you see Steve Jobs announce the iPad and then tell us to figure out how to build one?

I don't see any other solutions on the table? In fact there have been no solution for over 30 years since TTC reached it's reasonable capacity.

Yes. ATC, Toronto Rocket Trains, build a Downtown Relief Line. This stuff isn't magic. It's just expensive.

 

[Asterix]

Trust me I often re go over my work, and the answers remain the same.

And those answers are still wrong, no matter how many times they remain the same for you. Please re-read the numerous posts in this thread where that fact is shown (and your continued insistence on NOT reading any of those explanations doesn't make you a visionary, it just makes you pig-headed and ignorant).

You guys keep picking it apart.

Because it is easily demonstrated to be faulty.

The engineering is not my department, however, the invention portion is.

But you have repeatedly tried to claim your 'invention' was sound engineering. It is not sound transportation engineering. It is not sound mechanical engineering and it is not sound safety engineering. Doesn't leave much.

I will be on the next Toronto Transit Commissioner's Correspondence List. I will keep my info to myself as to who I am meeting. But by the end of February, I believe I will know a whole lot more.

Sure. Just like all the other posts cited above. 'Soon it will all be explained.' 'Soon all will be clear.' 'Soon I'll have my meetings.' 'Soon it will be publicly announced.'

I'm not buying it and neither are many others.

Collectively, I have done the math at 103% capacity improvement, 1.346 Billion in new annual revenue potential

Collectively, several on this thread have done the math and your 103% capacity improvement is nowhere to be found. In fact, since you aren't addressing headways and are making many people travel longer distances, you have increased crowding.

And the bonus of when first in place all trains will be close to 1/2 full.

And the additional bonus everyone get to work in about 1/2 the time.

Again, no and no. Your math is faulty.

 

[DavidH]

You guys keep picking it apart

Well, what do you expect? This is an Internet forum full of a bunch of very knowledgeable and very opinionated people who are passionate about better transportation. Go look at some of the other threads in here; there is nothing that is safe from analysis and indeed sometimes, attack. You're presenting a proposal and you are surprised that people keep looking for flaws? That's what people do with any proposal, because that's the only way to determine if something is a good idea.

The fact that you seem a bit put out by having your proposal critically disected makes me wonder if you have even talked to a senior TTC manager or engineer.

 

[Cranky Old Fart]

Cranky Old Fart,

This isn't about Lower Bay. There's a reason that was undone. Unreliability and cascading failure are words that come to mind.

Ermmmmmmmmmm yeah that's why I added it to the mix to highlight previous TTC experiments that apparently confounded the beejesus out of the Patrons much like taking a train northbound from Davisville to Eglinton to travel Southbound to King would cause.

 

[subway safety]

subway safety

You are all forgetting> I have already had 3 1 hour appointments with some pretty important people to which, each of them stated that "I was right", my work is "fundamentally sound", and each saw "no holes in it".

This is just now going to another level.

I will keep you posted at the end of February.

The question is do you all want to get to work twice as fast, in a half empty train?

Once again it takes:

1. Station skipping
2. Platform safety

and 3. Separated passenger flow

and 4.Stop and creep approach for Yonge and Bloor, this deals with the headway issue. You only need one transfer point to increase your capacity.

Sharon

 

[nfitz]

You are all forgetting> I have already had 3 1 hour appointments with some pretty important people to which, each of them stated that "I was right", my work is "fundamentally sound", and each saw "no holes in it".

Hopefully none of them said "I live with my brother".

 

[SlickFranky]

You are all forgetting>4.Stop and creep approach for Yonge and Bloor, this deals with the headway issue. You only need one transfer point to increase your capacity.

Sharon

This is where the 103% increase comes from in your math?

Fellow transit geeks, let's put some numbers in here and stop the insanity.
How many trains/hr pass Y-B now? It's pretty high...low 40's IIRC(?)

 

[nfitz]

Fellow transit geeks, let's put some numbers in here and stop the insanity.

You think we haven't tried? Any time anybody makes a simple, clear, post, pointing out how completely bollocks the entire scheme is, it is either completely ignored, or refuted with the original numbers restated, with no indication why.

You just have to learn to suspend disbelief, and go with it.

 

[SlickFranky]

I'm finding 29 trains/hr during peak. (thought it was higher...oh well) Please correct me if the number is different.

So let's do some stupid math.
60min/29=124sec (current)
therefore...
124/2.03=61sec (sharon's)

If your innovation can get Y-B frequency to a train every 61s, then congratulations on hitting the 103% mark. But it can't, can it? Even ATC won't be able to do that.

 

[kettal]

You are all forgetting> I have already had 3 1 hour appointments with some pretty important people to which, each of them stated that "I was right", my work is "fundamentally sound", and each saw "no holes in it".

This is just now going to another level.

I will keep you posted at the end of February.

The question is do you all want to get to work twice as fast, in a half empty train?

Once again it takes:

1. Station skipping
2. Platform safety

and 3. Separated passenger flow

and 4.Stop and creep approach for Yonge and Bloor, this deals with the headway issue. You only need one transfer point to increase your capacity.

Sharon

Please, tell me, how will some trains skip some stations without crashing into the train in front of them (which stops at the station in question)?

The train tracks are one-lane roads. Imagine driving on a one-way, one-lane road behind a garbage truck that stops often... how are you going to drive any faster than the garbage truck in front of you?

 

[nfitz]

Please, tell me, how will some trains skip some stations without crashing into the train in front of them (which stops at the station in question)?

The way her plan works is that ALL the trains skip some stations. For some station no trains will stop, and if you want to go somewhere, you have to jump on a train going in the opposite direction first.

For example, to get from North York Centre to Davisville, you'd have to north to Finch, then a second train south to St. Clair. Then a third train north to Davisville.