Toronto Crosstown LRT | ?m | ?s | Metrolinx | Arcadis

[rbt]

Would unstaffed *trains* but staffed *platforms* be a better solution?

For many situations. Anything medical needs to go to the station anyway. I would certainly prefer the guy taking fares roam through the station and fare-taking be automated.

The guy at the station doesn't help with signal, power, rail issues/work zones/inspections during the day, fire/evacuation procedures during an on-train emergency ('95 crash likely dictates minimum on-train staffing).


A signal failure, for example, fully locks down that point for automated systems. The driver radios control for permission to go ahead and control grants it at a slow speed. Driver is expected to keep close watch for obstacles which 1) may have caused the signal to fail (rail damage, tunnel wall collapse, etc.) and 2) ensure they don't run into a train ahead of them.

Hard to do without someone on board. Before you ask how often this happens, there is debate about making it standard procedure to go through a red signal at Bloor to increase Yonge line frequencies. It was standard procedure (very frequent occurrence) until the '95 crash.

 

[rbt]

The existing Bellamy yard probably can't handle the greatly increased number of trains needed to operate the whole SRT-Eglinton line.

Nor can it handle the increased train length without substantial overhaul.

 

[gweed123]

Nor can it handle the increased train length without substantial overhaul.

Are they going to operate more than 1 yard for the ESLRT, or are they moving everything over to the new yard around Black Creek and centralizing it there? (So as a consequence, abandoning Bellamy)

 

[rbt]

Are they going to operate more than 1 yard for the ESLRT, or are they moving everything over to the new yard around Black Creek and centralizing it there? (So as a consequence, abandoning Bellamy)

Great question. The original plan was to centralize at Black Creek but that was before the SRT became an extension of Eglinton.

The SRT yard is both small and has an odd shape. It could maintain a use as tailtrack storage for 4 to 8 trains similar to what TTC intends to build on the Yonge line.

I don't see any maintenance capabilities existing in that Yard after Eglinton is finished. That will be centralized for cost savings.

 

[CDL.TO]

The London Underground more or less does both: staffed trains and staffed platforms. Essentially the platform guard takes the place of the TTC's in-train guard and signals the driver to let him know it's safe to close the doors.

I'm pretty sure they only do this in busy stations during busy periods. They use CCTV at all other times.

The Docklands Light Rail in London is pretty much completely automated. There is a staff member on board, but not in a booth. They walk around the train checking tickets and ensuring everything is OK, as well as closing the doors at stations through the use of control panels situated throughout the train.

 

[nfitz]

Great question. The original plan was to centralize at Black Creek but that was before the SRT became an extension of Eglinton.

The SRT yard is both small and has an odd shape. It could maintain a use as tailtrack storage for 4 to 8 trains similar to what TTC intends to build on the Yonge line.

I don't see any maintenance capabilities existing in that Yard after Eglinton is finished. That will be centralized for cost savings.

Originally, when the SRT line was going to be a separate LRT line, the yard was at Conlins Road instead of Bellamy. Hard to say what will be the plan in the long-term ... depends what, if anything, every gets built.

 

[accura407]

Despite all the arguments being made...i still do not see why we need anyone on the train itself...

One station manager at each station? Sure...that's a reasonable idea. In this case it would be up to 26 staff members. Fare collection should be automated outright...

Vancouver stations have nothing...no staff on trains or stations...so if the TTC just has staff on stations only i think we've already taken on the best scenerio!

Anything more is just a total waste of money in 2011 and as the last guy put it... "Union excuses" - I agree.

 

[SgtBullmoose]

Despite all the arguments being made...i still do not see why we need anyone on the train itself...

London has people on every train for a reason: if something goes terribly wrong in between stations, there's someone on the train to help. The Central and Victoria lines are all ATO as is the DLR, but there is always still someone in the front cab to make sure accidents don't happen.

Moreover, every station must be staffed by at least one staff member at all times. This is to deter crime. This, too is necessary.

As noted above, in the peak times in busy stations there is also a platform attendant who helps let the drive know when he can close the doors. This would be of great use in Toronto where the drivers usually attempt to close the doors before people have even finished alighting from the train. On the London Overground, there are two people per train as well.

 

[Platform 27]

London has people on every train for a reason: if something goes terribly wrong in between stations, there's someone on the train to help. The Central and Victoria lines are all ATO as is the DLR, but there is always still someone in the front cab to make sure accidents don't happen.

And that "reason" wasn't sufficient for Vancouver to put someone on board.

We're talking about a jurisdiction with pretty interchangeable underlying rules and expectations in terms of safety and liability as Toronto, and they've come to a very different conclusion from London and Montreal's (and Toronto in the case of the SRT) that must massively reduce their operating costs. I'm curious how they got there.

From a customer service perspective, having a human being around (and, preferably, not sealed in a train cab and invisible 99% of the time, but available and accessible) does certainly offer benefits. I'm just curious if it makes more sense to have that person moving with customers between stations on board the train, or whether parking that person on a platform is more useful. Does it make the system substantively less safe and less capable of responding to problems?

Moreover, every station must be staffed by at least one staff member at all times. This is to deter crime. This, too is necessary.

As noted above, in the peak times in busy stations there is also a platform attendant who helps let the drive know when he can close the doors. This would be of great use in Toronto where the drivers usually attempt to close the doors before people have even finished alighting from the train. On the London Overground, there are two people per train as well.

Again, Vancouver doesn't agree that this is a must. They manage permanently-unstaffed stations paired with roving SkyTrain police in concert with their CCTV. It's possible--likely, even--that this decision does involve trade-offs in terms of safety and response time. Don't quote me on this, but I think many CTrain stations in Calgary also don't have permanently-stationed attendants.

 

[rbt]

Again, Vancouver doesn't agree that this is a must. They manage permanently-unstaffed stations paired with roving SkyTrain police in concert with their CCTV. It's possible--likely, even--that this decision does involve trade-offs in terms of safety and response time. Don't quote me on this, but I think many CTrain stations in Calgary also don't have permanently-stationed attendants.

Toronto has had a subway accident involving a number of deaths and injuries. Our safety standards since that point have been well above what is required by law.

So long as that fear remains, safety will trump costs every time.


When a major skytrain accident occurs and these things really are a matter of time, perhaps decades, then Vancouver too may change their attitudes toward such things.


99.99% of short-haul flights don't need a steward either. Get on, grab a seat, get off at the other end. Aside from Newfoundland, buses don't have anyone to make sure you find a seat and put everything away. Their primary purpose is to assist during that rare occurrence when something goes wrong.

 

[nfitz]

Our safety standards since that point have been well above what is required by law.

Surely, that only speaks to the lack of legislated safety standards.

I'd think some transit systems wouldn't let people stand on the narrow platform you see in some stations ... Yonge comes to mind.

 

[rbt]

From a customer service perspective, having a human being around (and, preferably, not sealed in a train cab and invisible 99% of the time, but available and accessible) does certainly offer benefits.

Just to put perspective on the costs involved I've some some back of the envelope math.

There are about 100 trainsets in the system during peak periods (Bloor, Yonge/Spadina, Sheppard, SRT). 3 to 4 shifts should be enough to cover a week (splits, spares, etc.) and we will pay them a nice $75,000 which is the high-end of TTC driver salaries.

This works out to an upper range of 6 cents per trip for a single person per train. Actual cost may be 3 to 4 cents per trip as I was looking for an upper end of the cost.

Driver + doorman is a maximum of 12 cents per trip.


If automation costs $0, then we can defer a fare increase by about a single year through this. Automation will not cost $0 though.

 

[Platform 27]

Just to put perspective on the costs involved I've some some back of the envelope math.

There are about 100 trainsets in the system during peak periods (Bloor, Yonge/Spadina, Sheppard, SRT). 3 to 4 shifts should be enough to cover a week (splits, spares, etc.) and we will pay them a nice $75,000 which is the high-end of TTC driver salaries.

This works out to an upper range of 6 cents per trip for a single person per train. Actual cost may be 3 to 4 cents per trip as I was looking for an upper end of the cost.

Driver + doorman is a maximum of 12 cents per trip.


If automation costs $0, then we can defer a fare increase by about a single year through this. Automation will not cost $0 though.

Let's assume the per-passenger operating cost for a single subway ride in Toronto is about $2.50 -- I'm basing that on an assumption that average cost of a TTC fare, factoring in metropasses and the like, is about that much, and the subway system alone (not including the bus and streetcar network) is running at around 100% cost-recovery.

If it is really 12 cents per rider for a driver and a guard, then more than 95 per cent of the operating cost is coming from the various overheads like electricity, cleaning, vehicle servicing, and the salary of the guys in the collector booths, while less than 5 per cent is stemming from on-train labour.

Isn't that a little hard to believe?

 

[Amy Rose]

Despite all the arguments being made...i still do not see why we need anyone on the train itself...

One station manager at each station? Sure...that's a reasonable idea. In this case it would be up to 26 staff members. Fare collection should be automated outright...

Vancouver stations have nothing...no staff on trains or stations...so if the TTC just has staff on stations only i think we've already taken on the best scenerio!

Anything more is just a total waste of money in 2011 and as the last guy put it... "Union excuses" - I agree.

Unless TTC has secretly planned bus bays that are in a fare paid zone for each station with a route that crosses it, you will need a fare collector to take a look at the transfers, because the transfers currently and probably will not have anything that would be compatible with the fare automation system, so right off the bat, the line will have less ridership from their feeder routes with the exception of Don Mills, Kennedy, and STC stations.

 

[rbt]

If it is really 12 cents per rider for a driver and a guard, then more than 95 per cent of the operating cost is coming from the various overheads like electricity, cleaning, vehicle servicing, and the salary of the guys in the collector booths, while less than 5 per cent is stemming from on-train labour.

Isn't that a little hard to believe?

You forgot the bus and bus driver they used to get to the subway and (potentially) the bus and driver they used to get away from their destination subway station.

Most TTC trips involve at least one transfer.

The cost per passenger for a bus driver (1 per 60 during rush) is significantly higher than the cost per passenger for a subway driver (1 per 800 to 1100 passengers during rush).


Anyway, yes, I believe it. The TTC has found actual savings to be negligible when reducing train service. The main reason we run trains every 5 minutes at night instead of every 10 is because the actual cost of running the train is a small component of the cost of the subway system.

Various TTC budget documents discuss this point but rarely give specific numbers.


Anyway, make a list of all of the subway staff. Fare collectors, security, medics, garbage pickup, inspections, control, train maintenance, rail repair, tunnel liner repair, painters, cleaning staff, electricians, plumbers, ceiling cleaning crews, escalator repair crews, network engineers/communications, signal repair/installation/inspection crews, management, etc.

Drivers and doormen are in the minority of staff.


Give $1.25 to the bus/tram portion of the trip and 10% of the remainder actually seems on the high side.