[ehlow]

Yes. It's like using auto-pilot on an aircraft while the pilots are still in the cockpit. The human is for rare emergencies, general oversight, and to handle on-the-fly changes.

I actually meant if the human is actually driving. I'm totally fine with having a person in the train doing nothing while the computer drives, because we'll get the benefit as a rider, which is my main concern. Hopefully that's the plan.

 

[rbt]

I actually meant if the human is actually driving. I'm totally fine with having a person in the train doing nothing while the computer drives, because we'll get the benefit as a rider, which is my main concern. Hopefully that's the plan.

If the human is actually driving because the computers running ATC are broken that day, we do not get that efficiency gain ATC provides.

The plan is as you describe. Use ATC when available (which will be 99% of the time) and have someone in the cab for emergencies and oddball situations.

 

[BMO]

I thought that with ATC, they'll keep an employee on the train to handle customer service, emergencies, and any problems on the train.

This would be a great use of the extra employee and help deal with emergencies or issues that arise quicker.

 

[ehlow]

If the human is actually driving because the computers running ATC are broken that day, we do not get that efficiency gain ATC provides.

The plan is as you describe. Use ATC when available (which will be 99% of the time) and have someone in the cab for emergencies and oddball situations.

Great thanks! Now to wait until 2018 for the improvements. *taps foot impatiently*

 

[Palma]

Yes. It's like using auto-pilot on an aircraft while the pilots are still in the cockpit. The human is for rare emergencies, general oversight, and to handle on-the-fly changes.

So what happens when there is an issue and the train does not stop? How will that driver get to the first car fast enough from where ever he is? I really do not like the idea of a driverless car. In a plane you still have the pilot and co-pilot up there at the front.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

How many accidents have there been on metros with ATC? I did a quick Google search and couldn't find any. I really can't understand why people fear ATC but love human operators. I'd be far more worried about a human driver screwing up like they did with the Russell Hill Accident.

 

[BurlOak]

So what happens when there is an issue and the train does not stop? How will that driver get to the first car fast enough from where ever he is? I really do not like the idea of a driverless car. In a plane you still have the pilot and co-pilot up there at the front.

If the train does not stop, I think that only the brakes need to be applied and you do not have to see anything. If there is some breakdown of the ATC, a few cameras on the front and back would allow the driver to easily drive to the next station at a reduced speed.

 

[W. K. Lis]

While I don't really care if the trains meet a rat in the tunnels, I'm sure there are other rodents where a driver may have to take over driving the train. Whether heavy rail, light rail, or some other ATC train.

[video=youtube_share;FoeY9PzosZ4]http://youtu.be/FoeY9PzosZ4[/video]

 

[TFC]

So what happens when there is an issue and the train does not stop? How will that driver get to the first car fast enough from where ever he is? I really do not like the idea of a driverless car. In a plane you still have the pilot and co-pilot up there at the front.

The ATC being implemented at the TTC would see a driver remain in the drivers seat, except he/she wouldn't actually be driving. The driver wouldn't be meandering around the train.

 

[Earlscourt_Lad]

How many accidents have there been on metros with ATC? I did a quick Google search and couldn't find any. I really can't understand why people fear ATC but love human operators. I'd be far more worried about a human driver screwing up like they did with the Russell Hill Accident.

+1 for everything.

Vancouver's been alright with the SkyTrain for coming up on 30 years. No drivers, no screen doors, and no major accidents.

 

[rbt]

So what happens when there is an issue and the train does not stop? How will that driver get to the first car fast enough from where ever he is? I really do not like the idea of a driverless car. In a plane you still have the pilot and co-pilot up there at the front.

The driver will be in the first car looking out the front window. At the platform, instead of watching signals to see when they should go, they will instead be watching CCTV cameras to manage the doors.

The guard position (mid-train or end of train) will be eliminated.

 

[BurlOak]

The driver will be in the first car looking out the front window. At the platform, instead of watching signals to see when they should go, they will instead be watching CCTV cameras to manage the doors.

The guard position (mid-train or end of train) will be eliminated.

Would ATC not also come with some type of debris detection system which would automatically stop (or slow at a reasonable deceleration) the train if debris of a certain size is on the tracks.
I think a "driver" in the front car who is on the lookup for debris that may show up once in a blue moon is not a very reliable system. Also, why traumatize the driver for any jumpers on the tracks, for which he still would not be able to safely stop.

 

[rbt]

Would ATC not also come with some type of debris detection system which would automatically stop (or slow at a reasonable deceleration) the train if debris of a certain size is on the tracks.

I asked that in one of my earlier messages too. I'm not certain that the TTC is installing that kind of sensor or that it would be useful as they're prone to false positives and you would need to send staff out to visit the train every time one tripped.

False positives might include a sheet of newspaper that happened to unfold flat for a brief instant in the tunnel ahead of the train.

Vancouver has an advanced intrusion detection system, but that's part of the stations and sensors at track level, not the trains. I don't know how Vancouver trains react if you tossed a box at the front of the train as they entered the station.

One of Google's main achievements in their self-driving vehicles was the elimination of false positives which is a rather complicated video system that attempts to determine the mass of the object but that's not ready for a multi-passenger vehicle yet.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

One of Google's main achievements in their self-driving vehicles was the elimination of false positives for collision detection sensors but that's not ready for multi-passenger vehicles yet.

How is the number of passengers inside a vehicle relevant for collision detection?

 

[rbt]

How is the number of passengers inside a vehicle relevant for collision detection?

It's relevant to the insurance company and their rates for coverage of a mistake in that system. It also impacts the number of people involved when it slams on the emergency brakes for no good reason.

TTC isn't the place to be deploying experimental and still rapidly evolving technology.