DavidH
Senior Member
There has been a complete lack of clear explanations, supporting illustrations and materials, and solid logic on Sharon's part in this thread. For those reasons, I am out.
Last edited:
|
|
|
Sharon Yetman's Subway Safety Plan (Better barrier for subways 'an obsession')
- Thread starter andomano
- Start date
- Status
dunkalunk
Senior Member
Hmm, I'm sensing a serious case of Deja Vu.
UrbanPrincess
New Member
Doesn't it concern you that someone from Sundridge, Ontario is trying to solve the TTC's (along with many other transit systems) problem ? l
This thread is a joke and I don't understand how Sharon doesn't get the simple increased speed does not increase capacity. I think that professionals and officials in any transit system in any major city probably looked at speed as a factor and dismissed it right away because it did not make sense nor did it make a difference in service. If Sharon wanted some support on this, show us an example or precedent of this already in place? Show us studies of transit systems looking at/have implemented a policy like this.
I must admit, I would like to see this thread grow and see more ridiculous comments from Sharon (Since it gave me a good laugh during my commute home)
Why won't she admit/realize that the rationale for her doing this isn't safety at all; it's comfort.
How about a simple etiquette marketing campaign saying "wait aside for other passengers to exit the train before you enter"?...similar to the "walk left, stand right" campaign for escalators, if platform safety is an issue?
oh her plan is so flawed, I wouldn't invest my last cent on this.
This thread is a joke and I don't understand how Sharon doesn't get the simple increased speed does not increase capacity. I think that professionals and officials in any transit system in any major city probably looked at speed as a factor and dismissed it right away because it did not make sense nor did it make a difference in service. If Sharon wanted some support on this, show us an example or precedent of this already in place? Show us studies of transit systems looking at/have implemented a policy like this.
I must admit, I would like to see this thread grow and see more ridiculous comments from Sharon (Since it gave me a good laugh during my commute home)
Why won't she admit/realize that the rationale for her doing this isn't safety at all; it's comfort.
How about a simple etiquette marketing campaign saying "wait aside for other passengers to exit the train before you enter"?...similar to the "walk left, stand right" campaign for escalators, if platform safety is an issue?
oh her plan is so flawed, I wouldn't invest my last cent on this.
DavidH
Senior Member
The rest of your criticisms were well targetted but this one needs to be called out. What does her place of birth have to do with anything? Her proposals should be evaluated on their own merits rather than on where she is from.
Of course, this thread has shown that there is very little merit to her proposals.
UrbanPrincess
New Member
Sorry the initial article stated that she was from sundridge, ontario. It didn't really state that she was a current resident of the city. I just thought it was a little iffy that someone who may not have experienced the daily commute would come in and propose change. My misunderstanding! Desole.
RedRocket191
Senior Member
We do have to keep the local context in mind. A person from outside of the city can still understand the local context, but it is much easier to "get it" if you're from here or have spent a lot of time here.
Jonny5
Senior Member
The local context is what helps you realize things like sending people from Davisville to Eglinton to go south would be politically and logistically unworkable.
subway safety
New Member
Subway Safety
Well I haven't gone away.
I plan to stick to it until I obtain a "non political" and "non desciminitary" response from the powers that be.
I remain convicted and convinced that "separated passenger flow" for single sided platforms, is not only my footprint, but also highly valuable and necessary for 'ULTIMATE' TRANSIT..... TO MOVE THE MASSES.
Station skipping is just the creative edge, which cost effective platform safety, now opens up many NEW DOORS AND OPPORTUNITY for operational improvements.
One thing for sure, platform safety, will prevent all suicide, all subway accidents with humans, all track fires, to which each of all three regularily effect service.
Platforms now can be air conditioned, and or heated properly. These costs will dramatically be lower.
With effective operational changes, the PAA Alarms will be likely cut in half or almost elliminated. People won't have enough time to feel sick, faint, panic attack etc. That' s why stations skipping can be effective on many fronts.
SEE THE ATTACHED, example of what platform safety could look like. I have costed this out at $99,360 including installation and taxes, just add, the header, posts, outer manual exit push doors and my inventor fee. and WALA....safety complete.
No more 10 million a station. This is the CORE Portion of the invention.
1. "separated passenger flow " for single sided platforms.........highly reducing KEY VALUABLE DWELL TIME, for high volume transfer stations.
2. Extreme cost effective platform safety.
3. The capability of combining the apparatus alongside with the optional method of station skipping.
#3 is just the fun stuff, with lots of interesting opportunity to see how you can MAXIMIZE a MASS Transit System.
Sharon, Oh Well, I attached stuff in the past, With the Web changes, it not allowing me to do it.
Well I haven't gone away.
I plan to stick to it until I obtain a "non political" and "non desciminitary" response from the powers that be.
I remain convicted and convinced that "separated passenger flow" for single sided platforms, is not only my footprint, but also highly valuable and necessary for 'ULTIMATE' TRANSIT..... TO MOVE THE MASSES.
Station skipping is just the creative edge, which cost effective platform safety, now opens up many NEW DOORS AND OPPORTUNITY for operational improvements.
One thing for sure, platform safety, will prevent all suicide, all subway accidents with humans, all track fires, to which each of all three regularily effect service.
Platforms now can be air conditioned, and or heated properly. These costs will dramatically be lower.
With effective operational changes, the PAA Alarms will be likely cut in half or almost elliminated. People won't have enough time to feel sick, faint, panic attack etc. That' s why stations skipping can be effective on many fronts.
SEE THE ATTACHED, example of what platform safety could look like. I have costed this out at $99,360 including installation and taxes, just add, the header, posts, outer manual exit push doors and my inventor fee. and WALA....safety complete.
No more 10 million a station. This is the CORE Portion of the invention.
1. "separated passenger flow " for single sided platforms.........highly reducing KEY VALUABLE DWELL TIME, for high volume transfer stations.
2. Extreme cost effective platform safety.
3. The capability of combining the apparatus alongside with the optional method of station skipping.
#3 is just the fun stuff, with lots of interesting opportunity to see how you can MAXIMIZE a MASS Transit System.
Sharon, Oh Well, I attached stuff in the past, With the Web changes, it not allowing me to do it.
Fresh Start
Banned
Station skipping only makes sense if there's a parallel local line to service all station stops. Otherwise you'll be inconveniencing far greater people than those whom recieve an actual time advantage. It's simply too late for that kind of thinking along the Yonge corridor. North of Eglinton is already express stopping every 2kms with the exception of NYCC. South of Eglinton every station is vital and needed, the area is just too built up now to neglect any neighbourhood en route. Even the least trafficked, Summerhill, will soon become a major hub whereby average daily walk-ins there will increase exponentially. You'd have greater luck applying the skipping of stops rationale to new lines for which modifications to make your system work how its supposed to is built in from the designing stage. Making your plan applicable to half-century's old subways won't cut it, and modern systems are being built with fewer station stops anyway, in effect nullifying any reason to skipover any stop as faster speeds are the norm. I think the forum has been very patient and councilatory in hearing out your plan, but maybe its time now to accept the criticisms that you have been given and move on to something else.
catcher_of_cats
Active Member
If Sharon stopped posting some forum members will lose a thread of weekly amusement and bewilderment.
UrbanPrincess
New Member
agreed! the main reason why i joined UT was to view this and get updates lol i just found it hilarious.
Fresh Start, you made a really good point. "express service" is immediately shut down without the extra infrastructure or parallel line to accommodate it.
SlickFranky
Active Member
Voila
sorry, pet peeve
(there's technically an accent on the 'a' too, but I'm not bothered by that)
subway safety
New Member
subway safety
Back again,
Well I have three things to say, no four.
1. Yes I can't spell, thank you Voila......I like that word. I just had never used it before.
2. I have email from the CEO of the Los Angelos, California transit system, Mr. Leahy, for those who want to check requesting a meeting with me !!!
Toronto's Pride really suck.
3. My invention has now gone public for those who want to understand it. It was filed in Canada July 29th, 2008, and it is lst on the list of 81 inventions to do with subways. It is called the "Subway Retractable Safety Barrier", also have drawings, claims, description, and even manufacturing time frames and price costs. The patent application have "voluntary ammendments" whtich take away the specifics, such that the product used is not narrow to only include "up and down", or only specific products, as long as it is in keeping with the "unique" and "novel" function of "separating passenger flow" for single sided platforms which is brand new to my knowledge world wide.
4. I have done more work on my station skipping. Not to say my previous work was bad but I will help some of you walk through some of this a little easier. The reason I am prepared to do this is because as I await my TTC meeting which I trust to be soon, I have and am preparing myself for this to be brought to the media and or city hall steps. This innovation must be discussed and properly unveiled, walked through, and have all the pros and cons fairly weighed. On the pro side is over 100% capacity improvements and over 1.3 billion annual new revenue potential, and potentially 123 million cars removed from Toronto highways. All of which are annual numbers.
Let's take the route Finch to Bloor, from 6 am to say 8:30 am. How about getting to work in about 12 minutes. and with the train about half full, since twice as many trains now can pass through Bloor every hour. This is possible with only the stop and creep approach for Yonge/Bloor station or even with a supplementary signal lighting creating a "double stop sign". This allows a continal flow of trains on goingly. One leaves, one immediatedly comes in, One leaves, and one immediately comes into....just like roller coaster cars.
Anyway, train one stops at North York Centre, Lawrence and St. Clair......and Voila you are downtown.
train # 2 stops at Sheppard, Eglinton and Summerhill and Voila you are downtown.
train # 3 stops at York Mills, Davisville, and Rosedale and Voila you are downtown.
ONLY 3 STOPS AND YOU ARE DOWNTOWN.............PERFECT RELIABILITY, PERFECT SAFETY, AND PERFECT EFFICIENCY.
Isn't that is what MASS transit supposed to be about ??????
Now let the real discussions begin. HHHHMMMM.
SAFETY my friends is and has become the true key to ULTIMATE EFFICIENCY>>
Safety previously has been seen as a hinderence, unfeasiblie, nonsensicle, unaffordable,
One MUST have safety if one want total reliability, and ultimate efficiency. I have a presentation that walks through 25 big reasons why? and that's without the money benefits and the capacity benefits.
I have put over 10,000 hours into this, all I need is a hour meetings, which I believe is forth coming, all transit will be unveiled to a whole new window of opportunities.
Sharon
Back again,
Well I have three things to say, no four.
1. Yes I can't spell, thank you Voila......I like that word. I just had never used it before.
2. I have email from the CEO of the Los Angelos, California transit system, Mr. Leahy, for those who want to check requesting a meeting with me !!!
Toronto's Pride really suck.3. My invention has now gone public for those who want to understand it. It was filed in Canada July 29th, 2008, and it is lst on the list of 81 inventions to do with subways. It is called the "Subway Retractable Safety Barrier", also have drawings, claims, description, and even manufacturing time frames and price costs. The patent application have "voluntary ammendments" whtich take away the specifics, such that the product used is not narrow to only include "up and down", or only specific products, as long as it is in keeping with the "unique" and "novel" function of "separating passenger flow" for single sided platforms which is brand new to my knowledge world wide.
4. I have done more work on my station skipping. Not to say my previous work was bad but I will help some of you walk through some of this a little easier. The reason I am prepared to do this is because as I await my TTC meeting which I trust to be soon, I have and am preparing myself for this to be brought to the media and or city hall steps. This innovation must be discussed and properly unveiled, walked through, and have all the pros and cons fairly weighed. On the pro side is over 100% capacity improvements and over 1.3 billion annual new revenue potential, and potentially 123 million cars removed from Toronto highways. All of which are annual numbers.
Let's take the route Finch to Bloor, from 6 am to say 8:30 am. How about getting to work in about 12 minutes. and with the train about half full, since twice as many trains now can pass through Bloor every hour. This is possible with only the stop and creep approach for Yonge/Bloor station or even with a supplementary signal lighting creating a "double stop sign". This allows a continal flow of trains on goingly. One leaves, one immediatedly comes in, One leaves, and one immediately comes into....just like roller coaster cars.
Anyway, train one stops at North York Centre, Lawrence and St. Clair......and Voila you are downtown.
train # 2 stops at Sheppard, Eglinton and Summerhill and Voila you are downtown.
train # 3 stops at York Mills, Davisville, and Rosedale and Voila you are downtown.
ONLY 3 STOPS AND YOU ARE DOWNTOWN.............PERFECT RELIABILITY, PERFECT SAFETY, AND PERFECT EFFICIENCY.
Isn't that is what MASS transit supposed to be about ??????
Now let the real discussions begin. HHHHMMMM.
SAFETY my friends is and has become the true key to ULTIMATE EFFICIENCY>>
Safety previously has been seen as a hinderence, unfeasiblie, nonsensicle, unaffordable,
One MUST have safety if one want total reliability, and ultimate efficiency. I have a presentation that walks through 25 big reasons why? and that's without the money benefits and the capacity benefits.
I have put over 10,000 hours into this, all I need is a hour meetings, which I believe is forth coming, all transit will be unveiled to a whole new window of opportunities.
Sharon
nfitz
Superstar
At what point as an engineer am I ethically bound to contact PEO and report her for practising engineering without a licence? It doesn't take an engineer to know that 300-metres of platform doors that cost $99,360 (including installation and tax ... what tax though ... surely TTC will get an input tax credit for the HST) won't come close to meeting engineeering design and health&safety standards.
kEiThZ
Superstar
I wouldn't worry about it. If her crazy idea ever did get that far (overcoming overwhelming public opposition to such a radical change to their transport system), any engineering changes to the platform will have to be signed off by a PEng. And you know, there is no way a PEng would ever sign off on a barrier that would jeopardize the public. As it stands she's got an idea. It's not engineering till it's being put into practice (actually being designed for a station by her).
That said, I'd love to read the patent.
- Status