rbt
Senior Member
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.
Last edited: