jks
Continuous Lurker
Wow, personally, I'd prefer this to full-length platform screens. The safety aspect is still there, but it's not claustorphobic.
|
|
|
DRL Station Design
- Thread starter wyliepoon
- Start date
wyliepoon
Senior Member
Last edited:
dunkalunk
Senior Member
Wouldn't half height platform screens convince people to lean on them? Personally, I think the risk of being randomly pushed onto the subway tracks is less than someone (drunk or otherwise) from getting their neck snapped by a passing train. Sure you can put spikes on the barriers but it sort of defeats the purpose.
Last edited:
nfitz
Superstar
Yeah, that's exactly what they would do. I'd think you'd need the doors at least 5 to 6-ft high. I can see not wanting to go full-height, for various mechanical and air-flow issues, but half-height is going to cause incidents.
golodhendil
Active Member
http://www.urbantoronto.ca/showpost.php?p=241552&postcount=24
"Half-height" PSD that is really 3/4 the height of full PSD (~1.5 m) is the actual standard. The only reason why HK's Disney Line (the first line in the world to use half-height) used 1-m gates, as depicted in these renderings, is to avoid blocking the special features on the Disney trains. There's no reason why, when/if PSDs are installed in our system, we should use 1 m gates
"Half-height" PSD that is really 3/4 the height of full PSD (~1.5 m) is the actual standard. The only reason why HK's Disney Line (the first line in the world to use half-height) used 1-m gates, as depicted in these renderings, is to avoid blocking the special features on the Disney trains. There's no reason why, when/if PSDs are installed in our system, we should use 1 m gates
CDL.TO
Moderator
They have PEDs in Paris as well.
golodhendil
Active Member
^ that's the picture in my post I linked to above 
Minato ku
Active Member
These were tested between 2006 and 2007 in Invalides and Saint Lazare stations (line 13).
We have currently two types of PED
Full : Line 14. (All station 9)
Medium (170 cm) : Line 13 (Chatillion Montrouge), Line 1 (Porte Maillot, Berault), the whole line 1 should be equipated by 2010.
Saint Emillon (M14)
Chatillon Montrouge (M13)
Rendering (M1)
We have currently two types of PED
Full : Line 14. (All station 9)
Medium (170 cm) : Line 13 (Chatillion Montrouge), Line 1 (Porte Maillot, Berault), the whole line 1 should be equipated by 2010.
Saint Emillon (M14)
Chatillon Montrouge (M13)
Rendering (M1)
Last edited:
nfitz
Superstar
The Seattle Monorail has half-height gates about 1-metre high - and I assume they have been there since the 1950s. And I'm sure that isn't the only example ... off the top of my head don't both the Disneyworld peoplemover and the Houston Airport peoplemover use about 1-metre high gates?
golodhendil
Active Member
I don't think these:
nor these:
would qualify to be discussed in the same category as PSDs or APGs (automatic platform gates).
While for Houston's IAH:
the "gates" themselves (if they can be considered as such) are not half-height.
nfitz
Superstar
Not automatic - but the heights and related safety issues are similiar - though in my experience, both vehicles enter the stations much slower than a subway train.
They aren't, but you can see in the photo, that the wall next to the train, and adjacent to both the train, and the passengers waiting IS half-height - and thus the same safety issue exists - but likely slower speeds than a subway train.
the "gates" themselves (if they can be considered as such) are not half-height.
CDL.TO
Moderator
^ that's the picture in my post I linked to above
Aw geez.
Well, I'm behind on these threads. Also, I usually never click links to other Urban Toronto threads because I know it will mess up tracking of which posts I've read and which I haven't.
golodhendil
Active Member
Agreed, I was referring more to the fact that HK's was the first half-height platform gate of the type relevant to our discussion (with the automation and control) rather than just a flimsy metal or plastic barrier.
And yes, monorails and people movers are basically "light rails" that have lower speed and momentum then normal metro, so the risk of getting your head chopped off really is minimal. Those barrier serves more to avoid people interfering with the tracks' operation (in the case of the IAH ITT, a linear-motor system that is basically at "walking level") or to avoid passengers falling to the street below (some of the monorail stations don't have anything beneath/around the guideways).
nfitz
Superstar
I thought it had more to do with the decceleration being done before the station is entered - partially because the trains are so short.
LRT can be just as fast as subway; the SRT (which I guess isn't true LRT) runs faster than the subway.
golodhendil
Active Member
Really? Do you have data about the operating speeds of the two trains?
In any case, the important criterion here is the momentum (the speed, I mentioned in another thread, has more to do with it being easier for people to be pulled away before anything happens). Heavy rail metro has much bigger momentum than light rail (or medium capacity trains such as the ART), and can thus kill/cut things off more easily on impact, and yes also makes it more difficult to decelerate (I am not sure about the technical details, but I think linear motor systems also have quicker acc/dec than conventional motors). I also think it's generally true that light rail travels slower than heavy rail, at least according to design specifications, due to the technology of the trains.