[Fresh Start]

Retrofitting the entire existing subway would cost way too much. And the only transfer station with enough floor space to accomodate a partition today is Bloor Station on the Yonge Line. Yonge and St George are too narrow. Platform barriers are best left up to of brand new subway lines (e.g. DRL nad Eglinton) whereby the expenditure to incorporate platform barriers to a station is a day-one part of construction costs.

 

[Second_in_pie]

I think that retrofitting all the platforms is a bit too much for right now, but certainly all future subway stations should be built to accommodate these, maybe even with PSDs in their budget, ready to be installed when Automatic trains start running.

Eventually, we should be putting platform screen doors in all the entire system. It doesn't have to happen overnight, but there's a number of benefits. Firstly, it will stop suicides and attempted suicides, which not only means less horrible, traumatic events in the system, but also a better oiled system. I haven't witnessed a suicide on the TTC, but I have been forced to wait on the subway a number of times due to "people on track level," and I have to admit it gets really annoying. It also helps general aesthetics of the system; PSDs mean much less, if not no garbage on track levels, no worry about dirty subway cars, and perhaps one of the best parts, no ridiculous noise when trains are stopping. It might actually increase platform capacity, since I'm guessing that a proper door will take up less space than the Yellow line, meaning people can stand right up next to one without feeling unsafe.

It's just one of those things to increase comfort in the system and general pleasantness. Future stations should be designed with them in mind, and we should be planning to put platform doors into old stations as a retrofit (after automatic trains come in, of course,) but I don't see a screamingly urgent reason to put them in. Of course, it'd be nice if they could get put in, and I'd love to see some alternative ideas that the TTC might find acceptable

 

[nfitz]

The reason why it's going to cost a lot because most of these platforms aren't built to handle the weight of 24 sets of automatic doors. Most of the cost is to retrofit the existing platforms safely accommodate the increased load.

Interesting point; are the platforms in the new Spadina line stations going to built to handle a future load? Seems it would be a small expense to build the structural support in now, rather than having to go back later on and retrofit it.

 

[kettal]

Ultimately though this is a dollars and cents issue. Suicides don't cost us enough to make these barriers worthwhile. Even if it's 30 million. And if that was the cost to the system you'd have a business case for doing the YUS loop at 10 million per station. Far better to take the tens or hundreds of millions and plough them into the DRL and alleviate the overcrowding in the first place that necessitates passenger flow control, platform screen doors, etc.

I think we all underestimate the loss of capacity due to suicides and the disruptions they cause to the system. But that's to be expected because the knee-jerk response is "somebody just died and you're worried about capacity?"

 

[TOareaFan]

Dragon's Den.....

....the last episode to air had a lady (bit of a nutter really) who was convinced she had the perfect barrier system for subways!

Look it up TTC.....there may be a solution in the works

 

[kEiThZ]

Setting aside the novelty or feasability of the idea, the dragons were right. How do you make money from the idea? What's stopping companies like Siemens or Bombardier from throwing together a bunch of technology to pull off a similar solution (even if it's patented)?

That's the reason the TTC is not meeting with you. Sharon, you are better off selling your idea to a subway or platform construction company than trying to pitch it yourself. The TTC or for that matter, any other subway system, is not about to do business with someone that has no experience in the business and can't deliver them a low or no risk solution.

That's not to discount your passion for improving efficiency or safety. But that's the reality of doing business. Have you even gotten engineering drawings done for your design (signed by a PEng)?

 

[kEiThZ]

I think we all underestimate the loss of capacity due to suicides and the disruptions they cause to the system. But that's to be expected because the knee-jerk response is "somebody just died and you're worried about capacity?"

I think it's likely that the TTC has looked at this. I am fairly sure if the disruption was serious enough and cost them, they would have made the business case for platform screen doors or even an idea like Sharon's.

But I am fairly sure there is more to this than simply putting up the barriers. There's likely to be several issues with platform space, fire codes, etc. that have to be dealt with before they implement an idea like this. Can you imagine the passenger flow nightmare on the platform if you lop off 24 inches on each side at Union or Yonge or St. George? If any of that requires platform modifications costs will skyrocket.

 

[kettal]

I think it's likely that the TTC has looked at this. I am fairly sure if the disruption was serious enough and cost them, they would have made the business case for platform screen doors or even an idea like Sharon's.

Judging by some the TTC's other policies, I don't have much faith it was properly studied.

 

[Swarley]

You're certainly passionate but I think you're being pretty self-centered calling yourself "the inventor of "separated passenger flow" for single sided platforms" - it's not exactly rocket science to get people to move down the platform to even out the loads.
Certainly doesn't look great for the TTC that this is the first time they're considering this but don't go painting yourself as some sort of transit visionary....

 

[andomano]

I'd have to agree with some of what Swarley said.

Knowing the TTC, this idea has been in limbo for many years and has taken many to come to fruition. I suspect it likely has to do with the announcement of the Pan Am Games, and the higher-ups are beginning to realize our current system won't be able to handle the crunch.

 

[kettal]

Sharon, I can't say I fully understand your invention. If I get a chance I would like to read the patent documents. If the TTC does indeed use your patents, I think you can feel confident they will contact you to arrange terms for their usage.

Don't get angry just yet.

 

[kEiThZ]

Sharon has a patent on a device. She does not have a patent on passnger flow control as a concept. The TTC is not infriging on her (pending) patent at all.

 

[EnviroTO]

Isn't separated passenger flow the standard of every amusement park ride out there?

 

[kEiThZ]

The TTC is not really pressing her idea into service. They are just trying to get people to move down the platform. It's not the same thing. I don't why Sharon needed to be consulted.

 

[rbt]

I will try to give some genuine advice.

First off, get rid of the difficult house-wife attitude. You are an entrepreneur. The one common element between all of the successful entrepreneurs I have met before they were successful is that they exude confidence. You are not up against the city, you are tasked with informing the city and large agencies.

Second, being large agencies, they want proven test cases. Spending $1M on your solution has far more risk than $10M on a solution which has been used by other transit agencies. Why? Politically, you are asking them to extend all of their political capital on an unproven technology; and they really only get to push 1 or 2 special projects per election.


Third, you need to remove the major stumbling blocks.

A) Pick a specific mechanism. Doors, bars, guides, etc. Stop saying anything will work and pick a specific implementation to sell. When you leave the implementation so wide, they will feel they are designing it for themselves and don't believe in the project in the first place.

B) Advisory Committee on Accessible Transportation (ACAT) is a HUGE stumbling block with the ability to dictate damn near anything for a new project. Get them to sign off on your specific implementation.

C) Get a fire chief to sign off on a specific implementation as meeting fire code.

D) Timings. You need to prove it will reduce dwell time. Get 30 volunteers, including one person in a wheelchair AND a vision impaired person (Rocket Riders has/had both as members -- ACAT will help here) and do the following tests for your specific setup and the current setup (standing to left/right of doors):
- 0 off, 30 on
- 10 off, 20 on
- 20 off, 10 on
- 30 off, 0 on
- 25 on and 5 trying to get on but only 2 manage to squeeze in.
- 15 getting off but the exit gate is blocked or is broken
- 15 getting on but the entry gate is blocked or broken.
- Medical services required on train. 28 getting off, and a crash cart getting on.
- Fire/Smoke. All 30 people getting off and they're not friendly about it (pushing, shoving, etc.)

Show that these are improved or explain in detail why the situations which did not improve are not a problem. Note,


Fourth, handle platform crowding. The stations with the biggest crowd problems are King, Queen, Dundas, and Bloor. The first 3 have rather tight platforms and you are taking away several feet of standing space. How does this impact capacity. Have your 30 volunteers show they can still wait in this reduced space compared to today.

Actually go to King during Rush Hour and take rough measurements of how many people there are per square meter, make your reduction for "flow" control, and show it continues to work.




Finally once you have all of the above fleshed out and functional you need to do a real trial with a real train.

Luckily Lower Bay station and trains are rentable for a pretty modest fee (all things considered). For less than $10,000 you can do a real trial with a real train arriving packed with 100 volunteers onboard a single car and have 100 others waiting on the platform. Run through the exact same scenarios as listed above with your real situation. Take video evidence.

Now you are ready to market a unproven solution with minimal evidence of functionality to a transit agency along with your 10% cut, or $100k per station.



As someone who has gone from idea to profitable implementation with a few different products; the idea is the easy part. Making people want to buy it (proving efficiency/safety in this case) is the hard part and you need a ton of evidence to make it something the public will swallow without lots of negative press.


I'm friends with a couple of the people who build the OneStop display boards (hardware and software) and did the installation. You will need to do all of the above as a MINIMUM.

In actual probability, you will need actual installations for a few years somewhere other than the TTC first. A 5% increase in efficiency at Bloor station alone is worth $50M per year in operating costs/capital; likewise, a 5% decrease in efficiency will cost that much or more. A one time charge of $10M is pretty damn cheap when you compare against that -- you need to guarantee results without adding "or you get your money back".