Metrolinx: Bombardier Flexity Freedom & Alstom Citadis Spirit LRVs

[nfitz]

What is it that they will need to "drop that much money" on in order to run the LRVs driverless to the yard?

You'd have to add equipment to each vehicle to run without an operator. They are designed for an operator to close the doors and press the button to let the ATC take over - like the SRT.

 

[nfitz]

Yes; remember that ATO in Toronto means a very different thing than everywhere else in the world.

Montreal has been running ATO for over 40 years - I've never seen a driverless train (a driver reading a big newspaper while driving, sure ... who hasn't). I thought that most systems kept an operator in the cab - with Vancouver being the exception, not the rule. London had ATO on the Jubilee line - I haven't seen driverless trains - though I haven't been there for a bit; and I thought they'd expanded that somewhat with the modernization - but still with operators.

 

[Markster]

You'd have to add equipment to each vehicle to run without an operator. They are designed for an operator to close the doors and press the button to let the ATC take over - like the SRT.

Interesting. That's a rather fine distinction.
Nothing I've read so far indicates that the Automatic Train Operation they are planning on installing with the line requires a human driver at all times.

An older interview with Metrolinx has them saying:

Will the LRT be driverless?

“The trains will have fully functional cabs. (They) may have somebody sitting in there as a customer ambassador, similar to the GO trains. But the actual acceleration, deceleration and braking will be computer-controlled, which is called Automatic Train Operation.”

Certainly, they're saying they won't be driverless for revenue service in the tunnel, but I would be really curious to see where you've read that it's simply not possible to do driverless non-revenue movements.

 

[nfitz]

Interesting. That's a rather fine distinction.

It's a huge distinction if one wants to send cars back to the yards empty!

Nothing I've read so far indicates that the Automatic Train Operation they are planning on installing with the line requires a human driver at all times.

Nothing indicates they won't require an operator. Nothing indicates that there won't be a buffet car selling sandwiches either - but surely if there was, someone would hav emention

Certainly, they're saying they won't be driverless for revenue service in the tunnel, but I would be really curious to see where you've read that it's simply not possible to do driverless non-revenue movements.

Acceleration, deceleration and braking will be computer-controlled - that's 40+ year old tech. The key is doors closing and the start of movement; I've seen nothing to indicate that level of technology is being installed on the cars - and if they don't plan to run like this, why put in the extra expense?

 

[Duck]

Are we thinking that an operator will hop off when it enters the tunnel and get in a train going the other direction? And trains will operate unmanned in the tunnels only? Everything I've read suggested ATO in the tunnel only. Obviously because as surface LRT you can't have ATO with crossings, surface vehicle interactions, etc.

(ATO driverless is very common. Lyon, Rennes, Lille, Copenhagen, Taipei, Vancouver, KL, Tokyo (actually, 2/3 of the AGT systems in Japan)... Every airport peoplemover in the world... Do I need to go on?)

 

[nfitz]

Are we thinking that an operator will hop off when it enters the tunnel and get in a train going the other direction? And trains will operate unmanned in the tunnels only? Everything I've read suggested ATO in the tunnel only. Obviously because as surface LRT you can't have ATO with crossings, surface vehicle interactions, etc.

Given I keep commenting that you still need the operator to close the doors, and press the button to let the ATO take over after every station - surely the operator would stay in the cab.

Have you seen anything that indicates that trains would be unstaffed.

 

[Duck]

I have not but others (Markster) are saying they have. Other systems that run ATO/Driverless obviously do not need operators to close the doors. That's all I'm saying.

Why are you so defensive all the time? Chill, dude.

 

[Steve X]

ATO doesn't need a human on the train for it to move but they don't include a safety detection system to slow down or stop if someone is on track level. The main reason why someone is kept on the driverless trains is to deal with emergencies, something that computers can't do properly. Why they are there, they as well close the doors cause sensors sometimes fail to detect someone being crushed by the doors.

Acceleration, deceleration and braking will be computer-controlled - that's 40+ year old tech. The key is doors closing and the start of movement; I've seen nothing to indicate that level of technology is being installed on the cars - and if they don't plan to run like this, why put in the extra expense?

That's true, they don't plan to do driverless in revenue service. You did mention 40+ year tech. 40+ years ago, the component that controls the door closing button is a physical button attached to a wire to the doors while the start button to attached to the main computer for ATO. If they performed an update, they might have to replace the computer board. Today however the doors and ATO is all on the same main computer. The control can come from a physical switch or an external signal from transit control. They just need to program the software and use the touchscreen. No physical switch is needed.

Everything today is software. They don't need to touch the physical LRV to make these sort of changes. Welcome to the new era.

I'm still talking about getting a non-revenue train to the yard. Not for revenue service. Known Toronto, they'll need someone in the trains for emergencies. If you're still wondering the the door closing part, the operator can close all doors, do his special tricks to get out and have it drive back driverless to the yard.

 

[nfitz]

I have not but others (Markster) are saying they have. Other systems that run ATO/Driverless obviously do not need operators to close the doors. That's all I'm saying.

Have they? Anytime I ask, they just wave their hands, and say that everywhere else does ... when I point out most places don't, there's no response.

Why are you so defensive all the time? Chill, dude.

Defensive? About what. I simply asked you what you knew, as you seem to have some kind of inside track to Bombardier - so if I'm wrong, then you are the most likely to know something. Given I'm frequently wrong, and have no problem with that - I don't see why you think I'm being defensive. I'm just trying to root out a fact here, where all we seem to have are people playing telephone.

I'm still talking about getting a non-revenue train to the yard. Not for revenue service. Known Toronto, they'll need someone in the trains for emergencies. If you're still wondering the the door closing part, the operator can close all doors, do his special tricks to get out and have it drive back driverless to the yard.

And where's the money to put in the system to stop the train when someone jumps off the platform at Mount Dennis, runs down the track, and stands in front of the train in a suicide attempt? Would they just run into the yard, and clean off the blood there?

Actually, they do - Vancouver has pressure mats on the ICTS lines and Optical (LIDAR coffeepots) on the Rotem Canada line. Copenhagen has LIDAR coffeepots on the open platforms with no screen doors.

ATO doesn't need it - Montreal doesn't have this. You only need it for unstaffed operation. You don't need it for most ATO lines, which keeps an operator in the cab.

 

[Duck]

ATO doesn't need a human on the train for it to move but they don't include a safety detection system to slow down or stop if someone is on track level.

Actually, they do - Vancouver has pressure mats on the ICTS lines and Optical (LIDAR coffeepots) on the Rotem Canada line. Copenhagen has LIDAR coffeepots on the open platforms with no screen doors.

 

[Duck]

Have they? Anytime I ask, they just wave their hands, and say that everywhere else does ... when I point out most places don't, there's no response.

Hmm? No, I listed like ten systems that use ATO/Driverless off the top of my head and you ignored me. No hand waving.

 

[nfitz]

Hmm? No, I listed like ten systems that use ATO/Driverless off the top of my head and you ignored me. No hand waving.

Didn't see that.

Here's 20 that have ATO and aren't Driverless:

Montreal Line 1; Montreal Line 2; Montreal Line 4; Toronto Line 4; London Jubilee; London Victoria, London Docklands, London Central, London Northern, Munich U-Bahn, Barcelona (several lines), Madrid (several lines), Paris (several lines), Copenhagen, Bilbao, Istanbul, Washington DC, New York Line L, BART, Milan, Seoul (several lines), Busan, Delhi, Bangkok Sktrain, Bangkok subway, ... okay, that's more than 20 ...

I just don't see why they'd bother spending the cash to put such high-tech systems into the Eglinton cars, when they might as well just keep the operator on board, and the other lines they are planning to use those vehicles on (Waterloo, Finch, Hurontario, Sheppard), don't have a significant grade-separated section.

 

[Duck]

Oh, we're including individual lines now within a city? Ok, let me get a list together of ATO/Driverless if we use those parameters...

Oh wait, this is pointless and stupid, and you're just arguing now for the sake of arguing.

Moving along...

 

[nfitz]

Oh, we're including individual lines now within a city? Ok, let me get a list together of ATO/Driverless if we use those parameters...

Ignore that then, I do believe I still listed 20 separate cities (or at least systems - surely London Dockland and deep-level tubes are two very different beasts - and of course the Bangkok Skytrain and Subway).

 

[Steve X]

And where's the money to put in the system to stop the train when someone jumps off the platform at Mount Dennis, runs down the track, and stands in front of the train in a suicide attempt? Would they just run into the yard, and clean off the blood there?

You do remember the platforms are low floor like Queen's Quay Station. Accidents will be much lower. With a driver or driverless, there is no way to prevent suicide attempts unless they go with PSDs. Sure it's easier to attempt suicide and they can just go to the GO train tracks at Mt Dennis, it's free to get there and less people are watching.