Sharon Yetman's Subway Safety Plan (Better barrier for subways 'an obsession')

[kettal]

oh. okay then.

 

[Asterix]

Fellow transit geeks, let's put some numbers in here and stop the insanity.
How many trains/hr pass Y-B now? It's pretty high...low 40's IIRC(?)

As nfitz pointed out, this has been done repeatedly. Just go back to somewhere around page 10 - 12 in this thread and work through until the present.

The math is very clear: many people will have significantly longer commutes and given there is no real attempt to address headway, crowding will only be increased (to say nothing of confused and disgruntled passengers - just asking for reduced safety).

Saying stop & creep at Y&B will suddenly address headway throughout the entire line just further demonstrates a complete lack of understanding of the concept of headway and therefore line capacity. It simply is not believable that any TTC official would not point that out in the first 5 minutes of any meeting, let alone three 1 hour meetings. My money says no such meetings ever happened.

 

[SlickFranky]

I'm ignoring the station skipping portion. It's dumb, and will never happen. But I get the feeling that's not involved in the capacity improvements. I'm assuming she has understood that speed and capacity are not connected. We've gone over that thoroughly, and although she hasn't been clear on her understanding of this fact, I'm assuming that's the case. (I know...I'm potentially making an ass of u and me)
From her last post it seems like her capacity claims are based solely on Yonge-Bloor throughput improvements.
Trains currently max out around 2 min frequency. TTC's passenger flow changes were aiming for 3-5% improvement. Her amazing invention(s) can cut this in half! YUS will have the most frequent subway service in the world, because of HER INVENTION!!!

 

[Asterix]

I'm ignoring the station skipping portion. It's dumb, and will never happen. But I get the feeling that's not involved in the capacity improvements. I'm assuming she has understood that speed and capacity are not connected. We've gone over that thoroughly, and although she hasn't been clear on her understanding of this fact, I'm assuming that's the case. (I know...I'm potentially making an ass of u and me)
From her last post it seems like her capacity claims are based solely on Yonge-Bloor throughput improvements.

I beg to differ. If you increase throughput at Y&B, where are all those extra trains going to come from and where are they going to go if you are doing nothing about headway/throughput throughout the rest of the line?

 

[nfitz]

I beg to differ. If you increase throughput at Y&B, where are all those extra trains going to come from and where are they going to go if you are doing nothing about headway/throughput throughout the rest of the line?

To some extent, because Y&B is the current bottleneck, you can increase throughput there without any problems handling it in the rest of the system. With the recent modifications at the Bloor south platform in AM rush-hour, they managed to increase the throughput by 3-4 trains an hour ... and they were slipping in some extra empty trains starting service at Bloor (coming from Davisville).

But there are limits ... you can't get it down to what is proposed here.

 

[SlickFranky]

During peak, max frequency is determined by Y-B. It's the log jam, or the bottleneck, whatever you want to call it. All other YUS stations can move trains faster, but there's no point since they'll just get jammed up at Bloor. That part is all true, and everyone (even TTC) knows it. I'm interested how Sharon's plan can double the throughput of the system's busiest station. She's repeatedly claimed 103% capacity improvement, and if this is where she's getting it we can get on the same page and finish this craziness.

I think she has been ignoring the speed vs capacity discussions because it's not involved. I'm hoping she thinks she can double Y-B frequency, thereby doubling capacity on the line. That way we can explain that she can't. Claims like this are spectacularly easy to disprove. The inside-the-box thinkers have been analyzing this stuff for decades. There are text books. Here's one, free, online (thanks google!). Rail transit capacity By Tom Parkinson, Ian Fisher. It actually goes into detail about the Y-B issues, and several solutions...none of which approach the kind of headways she's touting.

 

[subway safety]

subway safety

Once again everyone, thank you for your patience.

This is "grassroots" innovation. It involves meetings, discussionn, debate, questions, answer etc. Just like we are doing here.
Thank you for that FTA contact book info The Director of this very division in the States, I'm not sure he held his position while this report was done until his direction. But his answer to my innovation is
"I see no glaring flaws". Twice he said if he could write me a cheque....if he could. Indicating, things take time. And one must wait on procedure and politics to take it's course.

I have just been informed I have two more meetings. One of them have granted me 3 hours.

Since I have divuldged my potential "example" of the new transformation TTC ma, remembering I am the inventor of "alternative platform safety", the station skipping is just the new window for opportunity that was not available previously. Figuring these details out are the fun pieces.

Take for example from Finch Station there are exactly 9 train stops.

Quite simply train #1 would pick up at North York, Lawrence and St. Clair,

Train #2 could pick up at Sheppard, Eglinton, and Summerhill

and Train #3 could pick up at York Mills, Davisville and Rosedale.

All stations are serviced toward the downtown core. The trains going northbound would need to be selectively chosen, but the key is during 6am and say 8:30 you attempt to move twice as many people.

It takes 22 seconds to stop your train. It takes 30 seconds to accelerate to full speed again. You say account for a 15 second dwell or 20 if you need it. 67 seconds x 3 stops. 3.35 Minutes then you add the time it takes at 88 kilometres an hour if driven direct and this is your NEW COMMUTE TIME.

As far as Yonge and Bloor, the stop and creep is in place as one train leaves another trains slowly enters.

Let's say it takes 35 seconds for your dwell time, which I believe I can achieve. and it takes 40 seconds as one train butt is leaving the station and the next train falls into position that is 75 seconds. How many 75 seconds fit in 60 minutes. The answer is 48 trains per hour. Before they used my Yonge Bloor Improvement pieces of my invention they were getting about 23 trains per hour. 23 trains to 48 trains equals a 108% Capacity Improvement. The headway stays set between all other trains distance, aside from the Yonge Bloor situation.

So if it used to take 29 minutes Finch to Yonge & Bloor, and of course some days over an hour. Now you have a consistent 3.35 minutes plus say 12 minutes direct run time, the new time to work from finch is 15.35 minutes.

My invention creates the ultimate solution for a Yonge / Bloor scenerio. My invention also creates the affordability and many other benefits (very detailed and tendeous to list here), but primarily the affordability and feasibility to provide safety through out, now opening the window of a whole lot of opportunity.

Sharon.

 

[kEiThZ]

Once again everyone, thank you for your patience.

This is "grassroots" innovation. It involves meetings, discussionn, debate, questions, answer etc. Just like we are doing here.

There is no debate and discussion here. It's just you saying stuff and us disagreeing.

And I sincerely hope you're not using this community to bolster your streetcred.

 

[Woodbridge_Heights]

Take for example from Finch Station there are exactly 9 train stops.

Quite simply train #1 would pick up at North York, Lawrence and St. Clair,

Train #2 could pick up at Sheppard, Eglinton, and Summerhill

and Train #3 could pick up at York Mills, Davisville and Rosedale.

All stations are serviced toward the downtown core. The trains going northbound would need to be selectively chosen, but the key is during 6am and say 8:30 you attempt to move twice as many people.
Sharon.

Wait a minute. First you said that there was a certain set of stations that would be served during the peak period and that all others would be skipped. Now you're saying that there will be "A", "B", "C", etc trains that will serve their own set of stations.

I specifically asked you to clarify your position on this and you ignored me, others assumed that you were talking about the first situation and the discussion followed on that premise. Now you're telling us that it's the second situation. If you can't even get your proposal straight (let alone your basket of lies, 4, 5, 6... meetings) how can you expect us to take you seriously!

When asked to clarify liike this please respond, it will not threaten your patents, but it will help others understand what you are proposing.

 

[kEiThZ]

If we are operating to some train to every station now, how will they be going faster without running into the train front of them? Are we going to get subway bunching?

 

[SlickFranky]

Yeah, you can't run ultra-frequent service, AND an A, B, C stop-skipping scheme. The two plans conflict.

 

[Asterix]

Take for example from Finch Station there are exactly 9 train stops.

Quite simply train #1 would pick up at North York, Lawrence and St. Clair,

Train #2 could pick up at Sheppard, Eglinton, and Summerhill

and Train #3 could pick up at York Mills, Davisville and Rosedale.

All stations are serviced toward the downtown core. The trains going northbound would need to be selectively chosen, but the key is during 6am and say 8:30 you attempt to move twice as many people.

It takes 22 seconds to stop your train. It takes 30 seconds to accelerate to full speed again. You say account for a 15 second dwell or 20 if you need it. 67 seconds x 3 stops. 3.35 Minutes then you add the time it takes at 88 kilometres an hour if driven direct and this is your NEW COMMUTE TIME.

Wrong again. Your new commute time is assuming passengers enter the platform right when their particular train arrives.

In reality, for 2/3 of the passengers at each of those 9 stations, they would have to stand and wait on the platform for one or two cycles of trains to pass by before their train would arrive (and heaven help the ones who want to go from North York to Eglinton or Sheppard to Davisville). You've now completely negated any supposed time savings, simply transferring time spent on the train to time spent on the platform where they are exposed to either the yawning chasm of the pit of death or an electrically charged automatic door purchased at the Home Depot.

Now, back to headways. For safety purposes we'll assume you need a MINIMUM of 60 seconds from train to train when travelling at any point on the line (being very generous to your case). Now we come to Eglinton station where the first train breezes right through, but the second one has to stop and pick up passengers. We've now added at least 67 seconds (by your math) to the headway, giving us an actual headway of 2:07. Third train was 60 seconds behind train two when train two got to full speed south of Eglinton (can't be any closer for safety reasons) but then it now needs to take 67 seconds to service Davisville.

Since we've now got minimum 2:07 headways between trains, how, exactly, do they suddenly get close enough to serve Y&B at 60 or even 75 second frequency?

And might I ask where you get the 88 km/h speed? I was under the impression they usually top out around 70 km/h (or does this plan depend on pushing the safety speed envelope?) Of course I know full well you are going to ignore this and other crucial points and simply repeat how novel your idea is, how anyone and everyone actually in transit can't find any fault with your idea and how amazing everything would be if only the rest of us inhabited your fairy tale world of cheap platform doors and magical trains that can apparently teleport themselves across space and time.

 

[subway safety]

Wrong again. Your new commute time is assuming passengers enter the platform right when their particular train arrives.

In reality, for 2/3 of the passengers at each of those 9 stations, they would have to stand and wait on the platform for one or two cycles of trains to pass by before their train would arrive (and heaven help the ones who want to go from North York to Eglinton or Sheppard to Davisville). You've now completely negated any supposed time savings, simply transferring time spent on the train to time spent on the platform where they are exposed to either the yawning chasm of the pit of death or an electrically charged automatic door purchased at the Home Depot.

Now, back to headways. For safety purposes we'll assume you need a MINIMUM of 60 seconds from train to train when travelling at any point on the line (being very generous to your case). Now we come to Eglinton station where the first train breezes right through, but the second one has to stop and pick up passengers. We've now added at least 67 seconds (by your math) to the headway, giving us an actual headway of 2:07. Third train was 60 seconds behind train two when train two got to full speed south of Eglinton (can't be any closer for safety reasons) but then it now needs to take 67 seconds to service Davisville.

Since we've now got minimum 2:07 headways between trains, how, exactly, do they suddenly get close enough to serve Y&B at 60 or even 75 second frequency?

And might I ask where you get the 88 km/h speed? I was under the impression they usually top out around 70 km/h (or does this plan depend on pushing the safety speed envelope?) Of course I know full well you are going to ignore this and other crucial points and simply repeat how novel your idea is, how anyone and everyone actually in transit can't find any fault with your idea and how amazing everything would be if only the rest of us inhabited your fairy tale world of cheap platform doors and magical trains that can apparently teleport themselves across space and time.

Oh my gosh,

It's not that hard. It just means the train gets to Yonge & Bloor at a faster speed. It also means you are not standing or sitting with someone's butt in your face, or being coughed on.

It just means you may, and I mean may be at the platform in a safe and uncrowded place for about 2 to 3 extra minutes, and then 1 or 2 stops and you are downtown. Safety brings reliability and with the station skipping the potential for ultimate efficiency.

Sharon.

 

[SlickFranky]

But it is that hard. Without adequate spacing you can't have trains making alternating stops. You can have frequent, uniform service. You can't have trains heading full speed through a stop that the train ahead is stopping at. If you want to do it that way (A, B, C style) you need MORE spacing, so trains will be LESS frequent, and capacity goes down.

I don't know why you're still even going on about this. Speed isn't even an issue on YUS.

 

[Fresh Start]

Make the lambs stop screaming!