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

[Asterix]

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.

Oh my gosh. Wrong again. Why do you have this pathological insistence on not reading or bothering to understand the posts and explanations of others?

You continue to change your story (who you are meeting and when; suddenly throw in station skipping, first for every train and then alternating trains skipping alternating stations).

Just how do you think it looks to any objective observer that while others post actual calculations and logic demonstrating the failings of your proposal, you simply repeat meaningless fluff lines about how magical your solution is?

There's a reason you haven't gotten anywhere with having anyone at the TTC give so much as the time of day.

 

[kettal]

Sharon, please, go buy a toy train set, and try make half the trains stop at half the stations, while the other trains stop at the other half. Watch your toy trains crash into each other. Think about how tragic this would be if they were real trains.

 

[ITcomputer]

Sharon, please, go buy a toy train set, and try make half the trains stop at half the stations, while the other trains stop at the other half. Watch your toy trains crash into each other.

I hope they're "N" scale.

 

[kEiThZ]

Traffic management on subways isn't even a physics problem. It's a straight up maths problem. And a fairly easy one to solve at that. There are plenty of simulations that can be programmed and run to test Sharon's idea. The best one would be using a train set of course! I'd like to see one of these simulations and the results.

Sharon, if you do want people to take your ideas seriously, a simulation might be worth pondering. If you can't write code or manage software that runs such simulation, pay someone to do it for you. Having such results will really bolster your case. And if you do run something like this, please put up the results here.

 

[SlickFranky]

Crazy doodles are better than simulations. Math is for insiders. She just knows. Why can't you see it? Common sense! Outside the box! Hyperbolic statement, followed by outrageous claim!!!

 

[subway safety]

subway safety

Traffic management on subways isn't even a physics problem. It's a straight up maths problem. And a fairly easy one to solve at that. There are plenty of simulations that can be programmed and run to test Sharon's idea. The best one would be using a train set of course! I'd like to see one of these simulations and the results.

Sharon, if you do want people to take your ideas seriously, a simulation might be worth pondering. If you can't write code or manage software that runs such simulation, pay someone to do it for you. Having such results will really bolster your case. And if you do run something like this, please put up the results here.

Thank you Keith, This is good advice. I have looked into this. The software is licensed to a particular company and costs about $20,000, plus training costs. There comes a limited to how much time and money anyone puts into something considering you can have the greatest thing since sliced bread as the saying goes. The bottom line TTC is BOSS, even though this is a public agency or corporation as the best way I know how to explain it.

I have even been told by "big wig" CEO's of Consultant firms, more or less, "we just do what we are told". "we are not allowed to have opinions as it may affect our next bid". It's kind of a monopoly situation, which create the whole problem in the first place. The reality is, it should be simple. They have an innovation dept. or suggestions dept. and such input from the member of the public are taken seriously and without bias. The system is not set up this way.

Anyway, I have news!

In the later part of last week, I have received 3 more important meetings!

As far as the breakdown. Alot depends on the availability and feasibility of the stop and creep approach, or doubld stop sign approach for Yonge and Bloor . This would determine the maximum trains an hour achieveable.

I believe I could achieve a 35 second dwell with the platform safety....with enhanced passenger flow components, the leaving butt of one train, and the sneaking in of the next train, would primariliy be a operational change. The factors allowing this to take place, is the space and not bunching up creates actually by the station skipping itself.

Sharon

 

[ITcomputer]

http://www.jbss.de/hpg_eng.htm

free software, not exactly one of the big boys, but an improvement over just drawings. under $20 for the full version.

"If you have been disappointed that your city's public transportation system doesn't run often enough, or doesn't run at all, BAHN lets you see how things could be if you were in charge!"

 

[SlickFranky]

Here's a portion of a Torontoist article from a few months ago.

"Reducing the dwell time at Bloor-Yonge station will improve the performance of the Yonge-University-Spadina line dramatically," Brad Ross, the TTC's director of communications, told Torontoist. "It’s not about crowd control. It’s really just a test to see if we can manage passenger flow better…Prior to this test, the [dwell time] situation—due to bottlenecking at the north end of the platform—is about fifty-five seconds. The goal is to get that down to anywhere between thirty to forty-five seconds. If we can get another train on the line, that’ll mean less crowding on trains."

We timed several trains on Thursday, between 7:30 a.m. and 9:30 a.m., and found that the average dwell time was about thirty-five seconds. According to City Councillor and TTC Chair Adam Giambrone (Ward 18, Davenport), each rush hour train carries about twelve hundred people, and Bloor-Yonge’s southbound platform handles approximately thirty thousand people an hour at peak times. So, even if the experiment only adds one additional train an hour, that’s still a potential capacity increase of 3–4%

So the key points here (from an extremely small sample)
-current passenger control improvements have reduced dwell to around 35s
-TTC estimates this improvement adds 3-4% line capacity

If they have met your 35s dwell time, where is the extra 100% capacity coming from in your numbers?

Please don't say station skipping, as we've been over that and it doesn't make sense. And keep in mind that there needs to be a minimum safe headway in place, and yes, it increases with speed.

 

[PinkLucy]

In the later part of last week, I have received 3 more important meetings!

How does one receive a meeting?

The idea of the simulation using either software or a train set is a good one. Try it out and let us know how it goes.

 

[Asterix]

In the later part of last week, I have received 3 more important meetings!

So let me get this straight, your idea is so simple and obvious and that we are all brain dead for not being able to see that from your posts of about a couple hundred words, yet after meeting back in the fall:
"a TTC commissioner,
a Toronto Executive Councillor
Director of CUTA
Director of TEO
Director of Transportation"

Each lasting supposedly over an hour, to say nothing of all the other claimed hour long meetings with "ultimate top management" and the like, yet all these transit officials and professional experts still require more meetings? What more do you have to tell them? You said yourself you don't worry about the details like actual engineering, costing and planning, so why haven't you been able to sell your concept in 10 minutes or less to any of the aforementioned commissioners, directors, executives, whoever?

Might it be because all these meetings are figments of your imagination and this thread will continue to see posts from you about upcoming meetings and how very soon there will be all these big announcements and an overhaul of TTC operation, but not just yet because you need some more meetings?

Oh, and we are all close-minded fools for not instantly seeing how wonderful you idea actually is.

 

[kEiThZ]

We could always ATI the city and find out how many meetings she got with the TTC lobbying for her idea. I was laughing that she thinks 20 000 is too much for software. For pitching an idea, I would think use of industry standard tools and formats is a must. In the aerospace sector we do get people like Sharon who come in with doodles instead of CAD drawings. They don't get very far. If there's a standard out there you have to meet it, even if it costs 20k.

 

[Darwinkgo]

As a non-resident pitching ideas I think she may need to be a registered lobbyist, and as such should be registering all her communications. No need for a ATI, the lobbyist registry should give you all you need. And if she hasn't been registering in it, she should be.

 

[subway safety]

subway safety

As a non-resident pitching ideas I think she may need to be a registered lobbyist, and as such should be registering all her communications. No need for a ATI, the lobbyist registry should give you all you need. And if she hasn't been registering in it, she should be.

Well I have GREAT NEWS !!

Half of the battle is done!

TTC at FEB 18th Commissioners Meeting had a report that approved adding the Capital expenditure for Platform Screen Doors through out the TTC system.

My work is paying off. I believe before my bringing to their attention of probable building code violations, this has never been so easily and quickly adopted. They wouldn't dare tell the whole truth about the situation though.

Anyway now the other half of my mission ....continues.

In doing the math, in providing the "identical full automation" and identiical safe platform", the traditional method would could about 3 billion dollars. 1 Billion for turning Yonge /Bloor into a double sided platform, 1 Billion for automatic train control through out, and 1 billion for Platform Screen doors throughout.

30 Billion as compared to 30 million for the same safety. Now do you know why I have meetings?

In fact, if they want to save more, I have a fencing system quote, with full automation installed for 4 million dollars.

The traditional method does not separate passenger flow, does not stage your train and will take about 10 years before they can beg to get the money given to them, and them another 10 to 20 years before completed.

That's 20 to 30 years more death, delay, and dissatissfaction.

Furthermore, to compare say 18 years of waiting for one system to be done and money raised and while the other system can be completed in about 6 months, and begin earning extra income because of station skipping.

At the end of 18 years my ideas will include 17.1 Billion in the bank as a bonus. Just think maybe this money can go back to you and me......the users and the tax payers. Better still, lets make the fair a loonie or a toonie.

3 BILLION, 30 MILLION, or 3.9 MILLION.

I choose the 30 MILLION. with fully automated "CSA" approved automated doors...... right now they have just thin air between you and pending danger.

Sharon.

 

[PinkLucy]

I'm confused. This article http://network.nationalpost.com/np/...eeded-ttc-suicide-prevention-report-says.aspx says there was a staff report released about barriers but its presentation was deferred until next month's meeting. No mention of Sharon or of expenditure approvals. In fact, how could they approve expenditures if the report presentation was deferred?

Here's the staff report: http://www3.ttc.ca/About_the_TTC/Co...upplementary_Reports/Subway_Suicide_Preve.pdf which ends as follows:

Engineering and Construction has completed analysis on preliminary design and costing for
PSDs and is proceeding with a construction feasibility study in 2010. Further engineering
studies will be conducted to determine the technical and economic viability review of PSD
installation in existing and future stations.
All investigative reports are expected to be complete in the Spring of this year and based on
their conclusions staff will consider their inclusion in the 2011-2015 Capital Budget.

So, capital expenditures are being CONSIDERED; they have not been approved.

 

[subway safety]

subway safety

I'm confused. This article http://network.nationalpost.com/np/...eeded-ttc-suicide-prevention-report-says.aspx says there was a staff report released about barriers but its presentation was deferred until next month's meeting. No mention of Sharon or of expenditure approvals. In fact, how could they approve expenditures if the report presentation was deferred?

Here's the staff report: http://www3.ttc.ca/About_the_TTC/Co...upplementary_Reports/Subway_Suicide_Preve.pdf which ends as follows:


So, capital expenditures are being CONSIDERED; they have not been approved.

That's why I have meetings with top management bigger than TTC.

This is where this so called "public agency" has gone wrong. They do not act like a "public agency". It's their way or the highway.
I have documentation galore supporting my case of their "inappropriate behaviours....left, right and centre". I have chosen to hold back from fighting, ledigation , media etc. attempt to keep my emotions entact, and keep my dignity and not lower myself to their mannerisms.

Having said this, things are about to change. Is it right for a public organization to spend 3 BILLION when they can spend under 50 million to achieve the same and superior results. This is the real issue. this whole issue is not just about me and my invention. This is far bigger than this. This is about every commuter's welfare, pocket book, time schedule, etc. NOT JUST ABOUT SAFETY, even though safety is a large concern.

The bigger issues are TIME, RELIABLITY, EFFICIENCY, FAIR COST, ENVIRONMENT, RELIEVING GRIDLOCK, AND MOST IMPORTANTLY .........MOVING THE "ULTIMATE MASSES". Safety, and original cost savings just happen to become my springboard, for the original invention. What started out as what you see on my 1st patent application, turns out, can use similar safety products, with a different function and higher efficiency purpose, while only costing about 2 to 5% of the traditional cost (primarily singular method) in the world.

TTC needs to show "due diligence" to research and have an "open door policy" to all methods for the betterment of their patrons.
Their pride has kept me "out", even though impressive referrals sit on their desk.

I will not sit back and be rejected on false pretenses or false information, etc. My story is extremely interesting, however, I always have to be careful as to what I say or not say. I'm sure you can understand. This week will unveil alot.
Sharon.