And those now using the system will be able to breathe for the first time, until full capacity is reached all over again.
There is added capacity room for 494,000 "NEW" passengers every morning.
How many extra people can you fit on the subway as we speak?
Aside from the fact you still haven't answered my question comparing the travel time from Davisville to College via the current system and via your proposed system, your math here is still flawed.
It doesn't matter how fast trains actually travel, capacity is determined by how many can pass through a given station in a given time period. If the TTC can have a train arriving at say, Eglinton, every 2 minutes (with assumed capacity of 1000 passengers), they will still be able to move 30,000 people an hour regardless of whether those trains are flying at 70 km/h straight to Bloor or whether they are crawling at 10 km/h.
The limiting factor is train spacing, not speed as you seem to think it is. With the current system with manual train control, safety reasons limits how close they can run trains.
With ATO, they will be able to decrease that headway. Notice how they talk about headway, not speed, since that is the control on capacity.
They could move far more passengers if they ran trains 30 seconds apart, but moving only 10km/h, than if they ran them 1:30 apart but at 100 km/h.
The fact you do not appear to understand that suggests to me that these meetings you claim to have had with transit brass never happened as this is such a fundamental piece of your proposal and so obvious to anyone at all familiar with transportation, that they surely would have raised it with you at some point during any discussion longer than 3 minutes.
Further, the fact that all your previous postings in the fall, including early posts that have been deleted (but saved in the quoted responses from others) as well as related pieces in various media outlets, dealt exclusively with platform barriers and had no mention whatsoever of express trains, skipping stations or travelling in reverse directions, further implies some fantasy with regards to recognition from official sources as your proposal has gone off on a completely different tangent from the original argument.
Once again, a very simple request, without all the repeated lines glorifying the wonders of your proposal, please provide the substance of an actual trip breakdown from Davisville to College using the current system and then your proposed system. We can worry about the flaws in the capacity calculations afterwards.