[BurlOak]

You can add an extra train, but the issue at peak goes way beyond capacity of the trains themselves - there is the issue of platform crowding to consider. Yonge-Bloor is already somewhat unsafe (ditto a few others, like King, Queen, Dundas, College under some conditions), and god forbid there should be a delay somewhere on the Yonge line when you have 7 car trains. Plus with platform conditions like that you'd probably get tons more delays at the station themselves, leading to increased station dwell time. Things sounds great on spreadsheets, but it's fantasyland until you actually have a first hand look a the on the ground operational conditions.

AoD

The reason that the platforms are crowded is because people are not getting on trains. The reason the trains do not empty faster is that the platforms are crowded. I think if you increase the train capacity, you can remove crowding from the plaform and decrease dwell time by increase the efficiency of passengers exiting the trains. This efficiency would also be helped by the train stopping at the same location every time (even without platform edge doors) so that waiting passengers would not block the location of the doors so people could exit better.

TJOP:
The time when you need to a 7 car train (i.e. peak) is exactly when you can't easily walk within the train to get anywhere.
AoD

Thats why I think the 8th car should be run so that at some stations the front car is off the platform, and at others it is the last car. This way passengers would only enter the first or last car if it will stop at their origin and destination. Passengers who get off at a counterflow station (i.e. Northbound Queen Park in the morning) would probably be able to walk through the train to get to the proper door. In case of emergencies, all passengers still have the ability to exit the train by walking through.

 

[diminutive]

While ATC is technically feasible and has been in use in many other cities for years, it's unlikely to happen in Toronto because Bob Kinnear (transit union prez) is on record as strongly opposing it. Since the union controls a public sector monopoly on an essential service, whatever they say goes. Or doesn't go if they strike.

ATC doesn't automatically mean driverless trains. My understanding was that the operator would still be present to control doors and such, but the train would drive itself through the route.

Though if all the driver is doing is opening/closing doors it does beg the question of why bother with drivers anyways... If installing ATC on the YUS is costing ~400m, it could almost be worthwhile on getting rid of crews alone.

The TTC has been careful to stress that ATC isn't a threat to operators, though, with reasoning like:

But while the system being installed in Toronto is designed to allow for further automation, TTC officials stress that there are no plans here to go the additional steps and remove humans entirely. They cite public perception as one reason, and also the need for expensive platform-edge barriers to prevent people getting onto the tracks.

But that's ridiculous. There's no indication that the public is scared of driverless trains, or that driverless trains need platform screen doors.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

The reason that the platforms are crowded is because people are not getting on trains. The reason the trains do not empty faster is that the platforms are crowded. I think if you increase the train capacity, you can remove crowding from the plaform and decrease dwell time by increase the efficiency of passengers exiting the trains. This efficiency would also be helped by the train stopping at the same location every time (even without platform edge doors) so that waiting passengers would not block the location of the doors so people could exit better.

That is a very, very optimistic scenario that assumes everything is working perfectly all the time, besides the efficiency of passengers exiting the trains isn't really something that you can improve by adding a train when the trains are packed. It also assumes increase passenger flow within the station themselves aren't limited by existing structural and access points. The assumption that waiting passengers would not block the location of the doors is also false as well - passengers block the doors knowing it's there even within the train itself; nor has it prevented individuals from intentionally boarding when the trains are unloading.

Thats why I think the 8th car should be run so that at some stations the front car is off the platform, and at others it is the last car. This way passengers would only enter the first or last car if it will stop at their origin and destination. Passengers who get off at a counterflow station (i.e. Northbound Queen Park in the morning) would probably be able to walk through the train to get to the proper door. In case of emergencies, all passengers still have the ability to exit the train by walking through.

I certainly hope you have the dwell time argument in mind when you set this scenario up. In any case, keep on piling on the Yonge line just increases the severity of single point failures in the whole network (it is already vulnerable to disruption as is, looking at the servicability stats, which is already made to look favourable to the TTC since it measures frequency of disruptions and not number/% of passenger trips disrupted - i.e. a rush hour train packed with riders getting held up is a bigger problem than a train at 11 at night). At some point, you simply have to prioritize alternate routes first.

AoD

 

[nfitz]

ATC doesn't automatically mean driverless trains. My understanding was that the operator would still be present to control doors and such, but the train would drive itself through the route.

Which is how the SRT operates.

Montreal switched to ATC in 1975, and they still had 2 operators on each train well into the 1980s (when the union finally buckled after two 6-week strikes).

 

[diminutive]

Which is how the SRT operates.

Montreal switched to ATC in 1975, and they still had 2 operators on each train well into the 1980s (when the union finally buckled after two 6-week strikes).

I mean, I don't mean to sound like an anti-union fossil, but it is kind of ridiculous. I at least hope that ATC will see the TTC merge the operator and/guard position into one.

 

[innsertnamehere]

Yes, I would like there to be at least one employee on the trains, but 2 is unnecessary for a train that drives itself.

 

[TJ O'Pootertoot]

And what makes you think the province won't fund the DRL first? Or complete the North York Relief line. It does cut both ways. And in order to add on the ends you have to build on the core. The Liberals and Toronto get that.

First of all, I'm not denigrating the importance of the DRL. (I'd like to see the Sheppard connection bridged too, eventually)

My point was that Toronto can't even keep its own priorities straight for 6 months at a time. Two years ago the DRL wasn't even on its radar. Toronto council only got their act in the game there when they attached it as a caveat to their approval of the Yonge extension.Now they're also saying they want the NY Relief Line to go in first? Maybe next week some ward councillor will decide they think a bridge to Rochester should also go in first. At some point what Toronto council wants or thinks it needs becomes beside the point.

Toronto doesn't "get" that you have to build the core first, nor does it "get" (rather obviously) what has to be done to develop both the core and the ends. The REGION needs a bunch of projects, including the DRL and the Yonge extension. The REGION also needs revenue tools to build these projects. Over the past few months, the suburbs (including York Region, and Mississauga) have been moving this agenda forward while Toronto has been somewhere between a non-factor and an outright obstruction.

We all know that politics trumps planning when it comes to project approvals. The Liberals had the Yonge extension as a top priority before anyone outside this board even knew what a DRL was. Yeah, maybe they'll fund it before a bunch of other projects. Or maybe they looked at yesterday's debate and decided that whether or not the city needs their projects prioritized, they don't deserve it. I doubt the premier, Minister of Transpo and head of Metrolinx are sitting around today thinking about what THEY can do for Toronto.

 

[rbt]

ATC doesn't automatically mean driverless trains. My understanding was that the operator would still be present to control doors and such, but the train would drive itself through the route.

Though if all the driver is doing is opening/closing doors it does beg the question of why bother with drivers anyways... If installing ATC on the YUS is costing ~400m, it could almost be worthwhile on getting rid of crews alone.

#1 cause of capacity reduction on Yonge is passenger assistance alarms.

#1 reason to have staff on the train is to rapidly (within a couple of minutes) determine if it's a real emergency or not, and the process for resolving it (passenger stuck in the door, medical like a heart attack, theft, or something else).

Until a computer can figure out why the passenger assistance alarm went off and begin a process which will solve it rapidly, staff will be on the train because it's far cheaper than holding up 40 trains while someone drives 20 minutes from a central location to solve a false alarm.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

#1 cause of capacity reduction on Yonge is passenger assistance alarms.

#1 reason to have staff on the train is to rapidly (within a couple of minutes) determine if it's a real emergency or not, and the process for resolving it (passenger stuck in the door, medical like a heart attack, theft, or something else).

Until a computer can figure out why the passenger assistance alarm went off and begin a process which will solve it rapidly, staff will be on the train because it's far cheaper than holding up 40 trains while someone drives 20 minutes from a central location to solve a false alarm.

About the false alarms, how have they become such an enormous issue? I don't remember there being too many of them a few years ago. Now it seems like they happen every day.

Perhaps we're just noticing them more because the TTC is announcing them across the system?

 

[TheTigerMaster]

The platforms can FIT a maximum of 7 car trains, and even that would be a tight fit.

Good correction.

Our platforms weren't even designed for the T1s are TRs. They were orignally made for the G-series cars, which were of much shorter length than todays rolling stock.

7 car would be a tight fit, but ATC will be able to squeeze them in no problem.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

The Province is paying for it. What's new is that Metrolinx now essentially controls design and construction of transit expansion, and the TTC has been relegated to an advisory role (all in the name of accounting rules we're told). Major loss of power for Toronto.

What's the problem with this? I was skeptical of Metrolinx initially, but so far they've done a wonderful job. I have no problem with them designing and building it.

And I Metrolinx does go insane, TO Council/TTC will go ahead and stop it. Remember, Metrolinx made that insane decision to not have the TTC be in charge of operation of the ECLRT? The TTC Chair stepped in and said no. Within days Metrolinx announced that the TTC would have full control of operation.

Metrolinx absolutely needs the cooperation and approval of the TTC and Council for these projects. They're in no position to be wasting $ Billions

 

[diminutive]

#1 cause of capacity reduction on Yonge is passenger assistance alarms.

#1 reason to have staff on the train is to rapidly (within a couple of minutes) determine if it's a real emergency or not, and the process for resolving it (passenger stuck in the door, medical like a heart attack, theft, or something else).

Until a computer can figure out why the passenger assistance alarm went off and begin a process which will solve it rapidly, staff will be on the train because it's far cheaper than holding up 40 trains while someone drives 20 minutes from a central location to solve a false alarm.

Is there any evidence from anywhere in the world that single operator or driverless metros experience greater or more frequent delays?

It's not like driverless trains or single operator trains are somehow new. They've been used all over the world for decades now with no noticeable increase in delays decrease in passenger safety.

 

[Johnny Au]

Another problem about 7-car trains: some stations do not have straight platforms. Some 4-year-old girl fell in St. Clair station and it was with a 6-car train. Museum station is also not straight to accommodate trains going from Lower Bay to Museum.

Platform extenders can be used as well, as New York City's MTA use them all the time, but it would not be cheap.

 

[rbt]

About the false alarms, how have they become such an enormous issue? I don't remember there being too many of them a few years ago. Now it seems like they happen every day.

Perhaps we're just noticing them more because the TTC is announcing them across the system?

You notice them more because substantially more people are impacted.

A false alarm causing a 2 minute delay reduces capacity of the line by about 1100 passengers for that hour. Not noticeable when running at 90% of capacity but it's a big problem when running at 98% of capacity.

The real problem is that TTC trains during rush run very close to 100% of capacity. Any interruption at all in the peak area (Union to Bloor) and someone is going to be left on the platforms as a result; even if the interruption is very short.

They also tend to cascade. A minor delay resulting in higher passenger densities on the trains can take someone from being borderline to having a panic/anxiety attack or making them claustrophobic.

DRL will help temporarily but I think Yonge is going to be at capacity permanently going forward which makes reliability very important.

 

[rbt]

Is there any evidence from anywhere in the world that single operator or driverless metros experience greater or more frequent delays?

I'll be damned if I can find this kind of data on Vancouver's system. Paris would be a great study because they have both automated and driver based trains but my french isn't so great and few of their automated lines run at capacity since they are local service (RER is the backbone).

Asian cities tend not to be comparables as they have different procedures for handling passenger problems than Toronto does.

What we do know from TTC data is that putting standby medical support (ambulance crews with portable equipment) inside stations with frequent problems (Bloor/Yonge) has reduced service delays, saving money.