TTC: Automatic Train Control and Subway Platform Screen Doors

[AlvinofDiaspar]

Report from the Feb 17 Commission Meeting:

http://www3.ttc.ca/About_the_TTC/Co...upplementary_Reports/Subway_Suicide_Preve.pdf

In this case, I don't really care whether it prevent an individual from killing themselve or not - that shouldn't be the concern of the TTC - what should be of concern is preventing someone from disrupting traffic as a result of their attempts. The ability of a single individual to disrupt the system should be minimized as much as possible.

AoD

 

[golodhendil]

The heating and cooling is the biggest advantage, not only for the stations themselves but also for the trains. It drives me crazy in winter when the train pulls into Rosedale station and all the heat rushes out of the car.

Since the tracks in a station like Rosedale are still out in the open-air, and there aren't airlocks between the train doors and platform doors, I don't see how that will prevent heat loss from the trains (I suppose it could slow heat loss slightly because there will be less open space for the air to rush out).

Do transit systems that have these barriers in place allow advertising on them?

Yes.

 

[kettal]

So what priority would this be installed at? First stations with inadequate platform room (danger of falling off), then busiest stations, then at stations which would create the most disruption with a track-level injury.

Unimaginitive: preventing that heat loss does not require station barriers, just trains which have manual door open buttons.

 

[unimaginative2]

Unimaginitive: preventing that heat loss does not require station barriers, just trains which have manual door open buttons.

Yeah, that's what I suggested as an alternative in my comment above. It is another good alternative.

Since the tracks in a station like Rosedale are still out in the open-air, and there aren't airlocks between the train doors and platform doors, I don't see how that will prevent heat loss from the trains (I suppose it could slow heat loss slightly because there will be less open space for the air to rush out).

It would make a dramatic difference. If you opened a door to a heated station with just a couple inch crack around the side, you'd let in way less heat than just opening the entire door to outside. If you pressurized the station a little bit, the station and train wouldn't lose any heat at all.

 

[golodhendil]

If you pressurized the station a little bit, the station and train wouldn't lose any heat at all.

Actually yeah, this is what I thought after posting.
However, many systems that retrofit existing open-air stations (HK, Singapore; not newly constructed open-air stations) use half-height gates instead of full-height PSDs, explicitly to avoid the cost of installing new ventilation systems to these stations. It would require some number-crunching to see how the cost of a/c / heat loss compares with that of adding such ventilation systems, especially if the reasoning is that every station would require new ventilations anyway in TTC's case (of course there is always the environmental consideration as well).

 

[noctis]

I don't what to say but in my opinion, things like this should of been implemented long time ago. Just starting to thinking about it now and deciding whether it should be built or not is kinda late. If they are really gona do this however, I say start implementing these barriers at those major stations. Once again, the city is hit with budget and funding problems, so for projects like this are just gona be talks and no action.

 

[Jaye101]

Report from the Feb 17 Commission Meeting:

http://www3.ttc.ca/About_the_TTC/Co...upplementary_Reports/Subway_Suicide_Preve.pdf

In this case, I don't really care whether it prevent an individual from killing themselve or not - that shouldn't be the concern of the TTC - what should be of concern is preventing someone from disrupting traffic as a result of their attempts. The ability of a single individual to disrupt the system should be minimized as much as possible.

AoD

Excuse me? What a strange thing to say. Are we really that faceless in this society that one can now say that they don't care whether an initiative is going to stop people from taking their own lives. "The ability of a single individual to disrupt the system" is a small concern when thinking of someone feeling as if the world to which we are apart is not worth living in. How mechanical are we as humans? The disruption of public transportation cannot be weighed against the life of a human being, in any case whatsoever

 

[jwill]

I don't think he said that he didn't care if someone commits suicide. He said that the mandate of the TTC is to move people, not to prevent suicides. And he's correct; platform barriers will limit disruptions to service from a variety of factors, including suicides. Its a win-win, unless you're paying for it.

 

[Mapleson]

Excuse me? What a strange thing to say. Are we really that faceless in this society that one can now say that they don't care whether an initiative is going to stop people from taking their own lives. "The ability of a single individual to disrupt the system" is a small concern when thinking of someone feeling as if the world to which we are apart is not worth living in. How mechanical are we as humans? The disruption of public transportation cannot be weighed against the life of a human being, in any case whatsoever

Unfortunately, we live in a capitalistic society where everything is monetized. A human life is generally costed at $1,000,000, a loss of limb at $100,000, and loss of digit at $10,000 (my numbers might be slightly out of date). Road-deaths are a common factor in determining the economics of transportation projects and equates lives saved to a dollar amount for a return-period on investment.

At $10,000,000 a station and 18 deaths over 64 stations, it would take 35 years to justify on life-safety reason alone.

 

[fanoftoronto]

^^If it takes 35 years to justify the cost then the TTC should've installed PSD's by 1989, 35 years after the start of the Yonge subway line.
I wonder what the Premier would say if he had to justify not funding the PSD's for the reasons that you mentioned......"We're not funding the Platform Screen Doors because enough people are just not dying!! Call us for money when the number of people that die goes up to maybe 50 a year then we'll think about it" It's insulting to think that a human life can be given a monetary value.

 

[bleeepbluuup]

It's insulting to think that a human life can be given a monetary value.

You gotta pick and choose when you don't have infinite supplies of money. We can't ever be perfectly safe.

 

[Mapleson]

I would be interested to see the number of 'rail level instances' in the 1960-1980s. Toronto has grown up a lot in the last 50 years.

If you propose a project for Life-Safety purposes only, how do just justify the cost effectiveness of the project? How many people get injuried in escalators or even killed? Those injuries are justified by the relative benefit they give to most people most of the time. You could spend multiple billions of dollars on death-prevention, but it's still going to happen. It's the law of diminishing returns. Without some number, which is generated by insurance companies that pay out based on that number, you can't draw a definate line in the sand or compare the cost of say installing mass elevators to avoid stair/escaltor injuries to the cost of installing protection barriers. We live in a fund starved environment, so these head-to-head decisions must be made, and without a number it's all down to feelings or $/death and $/injury, which is another number.

I assume you don't have life insurance if you think a life can't be given a monetary value.

I would like a Toronto which would referenum projects like this tied to a specific tax hike. If the refererum passes, the project is funded and then the tax goes away.

 

[Asterix]

I wonder what the Premier would say if he had to justify not funding the PSD's for the reasons that you mentioned......"We're not funding the Platform Screen Doors because enough people are just not dying!! Call us for money when the number of people that die goes up to maybe 50 a year then we'll think about it" It's insulting to think that a human life can be given a monetary value.

With that kind of logic, there is no limit to the amount of money you could spend 'to save lives'. Barriers down all the sidewalks with gates that open only when the cross walk is green. Armour plating mandated on all cars so occupants can survive collisions. Cover all paths with pillows because you don't want anyone to break an arm when they trip.

But is this really the most efficient way to save those 18 or so lives a year?

What would be cheaper, treating someone dieing of lung cancer or educating them enough to never start smoking in the first place?

Rather than spend millions on treating one symptom of mental health problems (suicides in the subway), why not address funding to mental health that will ensure these people not only don't try to kill themselves in front of your train, but don't want to kill themselves period?

How many psychiatrists or programs could be funded for the cost of a single station ($10 million)?

 

[fanoftoronto]

I only said a human life should not be given a monetary value. I know there are other places where this money could be well spent, but saying a human life costs $1,000,000 and that's why the PSD's aren't gonna be installed is just ignorance. Let's spend that $690 million on education on smoking and lung cancer or psychiatric programs or cancer or whatever. BUT, it should be to save human lives and not to because we're losing X number of people to it and all the dead people are valued at X million dollars. Have some respect for the dead is all I'm asking.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

Don't forget that it's not just the cost of installing the PSD - there is also the economic cost of delays for the individuals (and ultimately society) using the system, and that could be quite significant - and that's on top of another important issue - serviceability of the system. What kind of system degradation are we willing to tolerate because of these incidents until something gives and the system becomes utterly undependable? That's why I loathe to argue for PSD on the basis of saving lives - while nice, this is not what the system is about and it shouldn't be portrayed as this touchy-feely attempt by the TTC to do their part in dealing with mental health issues.

Asterix:

I think you're oversimpiflying the matter - funding mental health services will probably only have a very peripheral influence on suicide rates on the TTC.

AoD