MTARegional Bus Posted December 11, 2012 Share #1 Posted December 11, 2012 With the L line and soon to be 7 line be full auto by 2016, Do you think it a good idea to have robots instead of motorman to Drive the trains? personally I don't think its a good idea, with the introduction of the metrocard back then it easy to see why they got rid of most token booth in the city in favor of Metrocard vending machines, leaving the token booth clerk out of a job, I have the feeling it will be the same for motorman to, I know that the motormen will be there at all times in case of emergency if the CBTC doesn't work, but I Feel that the MTA will cut corners but not having a MTA crew on board to save money. while we pay more. But I don't know the future but what do you guys think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orion VII 4 Life Posted December 11, 2012 Share #2 Posted December 11, 2012 I think, even with CBTC, there should always be a T/O there to take over in case something goes wrong with the CBTC system. The Subway isn't the f**king AirTrain, with millions of daily riders if something goes wrong with the CBTC and there's no T/O on board the trains to manually take over things can and will go very bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peacemak3r Posted December 11, 2012 Share #3 Posted December 11, 2012 Doesn't San Francisco's BART system don't have any motorman's in it as well? I'm sure by the time our CBTC is on the same level of BART's then, motormen's would probably be out of the picture. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BreeddekalbL Posted December 11, 2012 Share #4 Posted December 11, 2012 Doesn't San Francisco's BART system don't have any motorman's in it as well? I'm sure by the time our CBTC is on the same level of BART's then, motormen's would probably be out of the picture. BART has motormen if i am not mistaken. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RTOMan Posted December 11, 2012 Share #5 Posted December 11, 2012 With the L line and soon to be 7 line be full auto by 2016, Do you think it a good idea to have robots instead of motorman to Drive the trains? personally I don't think its a good idea, with the introduction of the metrocard back then it easy to see why they got rid of most token booth in the city in favor of Metrocard vending machines, leaving the token booth clerk out of a job, I have the feeling it will be the same for motorman to, I know that the motormen will be there at all times in case of emergency if the CBTC doesn't work, but I Feel that the MTA will cut corners but not having a MTA crew on board to save money. while we pay more. But I don't know the future but what do you guys think. 2016 Huh? Where did you see this? CBTC has nothing to do with ATO... We dont drive we operate the trains.... As for the MTA Having"Robots(Or insert insane idea here). Heres something to chew on.. ATO=Automatic Train Operation, which entails the doors as well, so why is there CR's still on the train when you technically dont need them? I do agree its not a good idea want to know why? Theres ONE word that they always want to have hanging around.. Accountability... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MTARegional Bus Posted December 11, 2012 Author Share #6 Posted December 11, 2012 2016 Huh? Where did you see this? WIKI, Silly me We dont drive we operate the trains.... Well you know what I mean. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RTOMan Posted December 11, 2012 Share #7 Posted December 11, 2012 WIKI, Silly me BBBwwwhhhaaaaaaa Wiki!!!!!! Well you know what I mean. Well as long as you didnt get it from Wiki! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Minato ku Posted December 11, 2012 Share #8 Posted December 11, 2012 I think, even with CBTC, there should always be a T/O there to take over in case something goes wrong with the CBTC system. The Subway isn't the f**king AirTrain, with millions of daily riders if something goes wrong with the CBTC and there's no T/O on board the trains to manually take over things can and will go very bad. Most errors and failures are human made, an automatic train operation is more reliable than a man based one. Having million of passengers or not don't change this fact. The CBTC system is not for driverless operation, there is still be a driver on board but it is possible for busy line to be driverless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamaica Line Posted December 11, 2012 Share #9 Posted December 11, 2012 Call me what you want but I personally dislike CBTC solely because it gives off the idea that trains must be easy as hell to operate. I know I go off on this a lot but what gives people the idea that operating hundreds of tons of machinery rolling on steel rails is as easy as driving a car... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Lance Posted December 12, 2012 Share #10 Posted December 12, 2012 I know I go off on this a lot but what gives people the idea that operating hundreds of tons of machinery rolling on steel rails is as easy as driving a car... I blame the media. Answering the question, no, the trains shouldn't be operating themselves without human supervision. It's not all that safe. For example, I can't see a computer evacuating a train, regardless of how "smart" they are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justin08 Posted December 12, 2012 Share #11 Posted December 12, 2012 I think it's crazy and don't like it..computers are a way of the future but they glitch and mess up as well and like someone metioned..if something did go wrong and glitch and ppl got hurt the MTA would b looking at a huge lawsuit like metioned no accountability..the NYC system really isn't made for ATO to many lines intersect I believe the 7 doesn't intersect w others..I could b wrong but to implement that system wide no one alive or yet born will see that in their lifetime WIKI, Silly me Well you know what I mean. Hahahaha this is classic u knew u were gona get the R U KIDDING ME LAUGHS WIKI ahhhhh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TwoTimer Posted December 12, 2012 Share #12 Posted December 12, 2012 Wiki lmao Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Minato ku Posted December 12, 2012 Share #13 Posted December 12, 2012 This been more than 30 years that driverless trains exist on commercial service. Kobe 1981, Lille 1983, Vancouver 1985 and much more since then. I haven't heard any major accident on driverless line despite carrying several million passengers everyday. Some driverless line carry a lot of people, the line 14 of Paris metro has a daily ridership of 500,000. There even been a conversion of an 110 years old line, the line 1 of Paris metro. http://vimeo.com/45074330 (don't worry if the text is in German, the video is in English) The major argument against the automation is the price, depending the network it can be expensive. About glitch, if anything goes wrong there are many security feasures preventing an accident. We shouldn't forget that if there isn't anybody on board, there are still people on the operation room centers and a driverless train can be driven manually. In decades of operation, driverless operation has proven its efficiency. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3railgreg Posted December 12, 2012 Share #14 Posted December 12, 2012 Reminds me of Richard Pryor in "Sliver Streak": "What no driver?" Even in the penny pinching of today, not a good idea. I remember riding the monrail in Disney, they experimented with an automated system as well. Wonder if they stuck with that or not?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BreeddekalbL Posted December 12, 2012 Share #15 Posted December 12, 2012 your video is not working. also to add to your driverless arguement minato there is a safety element to this that if something were to happen on the train and or platform who would help the people? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justin08 Posted December 12, 2012 Share #16 Posted December 12, 2012 I don't even think OPTO is a good idea..on that subj of OPTO how does a TO know if and when to close the doors and that someone isn't caught in the door or something?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Minato ku Posted December 12, 2012 Share #17 Posted December 12, 2012 If something is caught in the doors, trains cannot leave the station. Trains have a lot of information, there are many sensors and other feasures. They have more informations and can handle more informations than a driver. your video is not working. also to add to your driverless arguement minato there is a safety element to this that if something were to happen on the train and or platform who would help the people? Weird, the video works for me, click on the link. There is still staff on the stations and in the operation room center and that's enouth. Are subways less safe than a century ago because there aren't personnel in every cars like before ? The answer is no. Driverless are not more dangerous than manually operated one, it is quite the oposite. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Railfan Posted December 12, 2012 Share #18 Posted December 12, 2012 Most errors and failures are human made, an automatic train operation is more reliable than a man based one. Having million of passengers or not don't change this fact. So tell me, what happens when someone falls on the tracks. Will the train (Under automatic operations, without a T/O) just barrel right over them? The NYC Subway is not the airtrain (as stated in an earlier post) and doesn't have platform screen doors to protect people from falling on the tracks. Plus you simply can't compare the NYC Subway to other systems because of it's size. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trainmaster5 Posted December 12, 2012 Share #19 Posted December 12, 2012 Two words come to mind. Accountability and Evacuation. The proponents of a totally automated system have never worked out that problem because no one can. Their fallback position is that the computer is more reliable than the human being is. The truth is they feel the risk is worth it business -wise. It all boils down to cost/benefit and anyone who disputes my hypothesis should read some of the public and internal documents of companies such as Siemens. They were available via a Google search when the CBTC and ATS contracts were first awarded. Carry on Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Minato ku Posted December 12, 2012 Share #20 Posted December 12, 2012 So tell me, what happens when someone falls on the tracks. Will the train (Under automatic operations, without a T/O) just barrel right over them? The NYC Subway is not the airtrain (as stated in an earlier post) and doesn't have platform screen doors to protect people from falling on the tracks. Plus you simply can't compare the NYC Subway to other systems because of it's size. There are sensors on the tracks (Vancouver or Lyon line D by example), if sombody felt it is imediatly considered and trains stop. If somebody felt when the train arrives, it is true that this person will be killed or heavily injured but having a driver on train will not change anything. Quite the oposite as computers have a faster reaction rate than human.and they do not panic. It is not stupid to imagine installing Platform door. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MTARegional Bus Posted December 12, 2012 Author Share #21 Posted December 12, 2012 Two words come to mind. Accountability and Evacuation. The proponents of a totally automated system have never worked out that problem because no one can. Their fallback position is that the computer is more reliable than the human being is. The truth is they feel the risk is worth it business -wise. It all boils down to cost/benefit and anyone who disputes my hypothesis should read some of the public and internal documents of companies such as Siemens. There goes your motorman job LOL. Anyway we have to stop this idea of Robots are better the humans, at the end of the day there is human programming the Robot, which in turn can make a mistake because someone wrote a the wrong code. I don't want to become those Fat people on wheel chars in Wall-E,always be dependent on machines LOL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justin08 Posted December 12, 2012 Share #22 Posted December 12, 2012 I just saw a vid of how OPTO works..the TO basically has to get up and look out the window and use the controls to open and close doors..the TO put the train in motion and still had his head out the window..to me that's too much the TO should be concentrated on operating Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BreeddekalbL Posted December 12, 2012 Share #23 Posted December 12, 2012 This been more than 30 years that driverless trains exist on commercial service. Kobe 1981, Lille 1983, Vancouver 1985 and much more since then. I haven't heard any major accident on driverless line despite carrying several million passengers everyday. Some driverless line carry a lot of people, the line 14 of Paris metro has a daily ridership of 500,000. There even been a conversion of an 110 years old line, the line 1 of Paris metro. http://vimeo.com/45074330 (don't worry if the text is in German, the video is in English) The major argument against the automation is the price, depending the network it can be expensive. About glitch, if anything goes wrong there are many security feasures preventing an accident. We shouldn't forget that if there isn't anybody on board, there are still people on the operation room centers and a driverless train can be driven manually. In decades of operation, driverless operation has proven its efficiency. i also forgot to add work rules also prevent driverless trains. recently the L train at 480 feet tried going driverless also read these stories and it could explain why there is no automation. also i think i mentioned the saftey element is there is opposition to it after what happened in london http://gothamist.com..._conductors.php http://secondavenues...verless-trains/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GojiMet86 Posted December 12, 2012 Share #24 Posted December 12, 2012 So tell me, what happens when someone falls on the tracks. Will the train (Under automatic operations, without a T/O) just barrel right over them? The NYC Subway is not the airtrain (as stated in an earlier post) and doesn't have platform screen doors to protect people from falling on the tracks. Plus you simply can't compare the NYC Subway to other systems because of it's size. T/Os already have barreled over people on tracks, even if they never intended too. Every 12-9 that has occured (at least to my knowledge) has happened with a human operator. I don't understand why people are automatically barred from comparing New York to other cities. Yeesh, the usual rebuttal to said comparison is "apples and oranges, apples and oranges". Why can't you compare them? Because of size? Tokyo is just as big and even more denser than New York, yet it has several driverless lines. Age? London is preparing to use it on its Northern line, which opened in the 1890s, and with is latest segment built in the 1920s. New York is just unique? Every city is unique. The only thing I see that's a comparison problem is that Toyko has those glass doors to prevent people from falling. Oh, and unions, of course. Also, don't forget that many systems with ATO still use operators just in case of an emergency and that ultimately, humans retain control over the system. As far as I'm know, ATO is more efficient and better in delivering more frequent trains. Now I'm just waiting for someone to say that those suits at the helm of the MTA just don't know crap about the system and picked a horrible system in ATO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trainmaster5 Posted December 12, 2012 Share #25 Posted December 12, 2012 T/Os already have barreled over people on tracks, even if they never intended too. Every 12-9 that has occured (at least to my knowledge) has happened with a human operator. I don't understand why people are automatically barred from comparing New York to other cities. Yeesh, the usual rebuttal to said comparison is "apples and oranges, apples and oranges". Why can't you compare them? Because of size? Tokyo is just as big and even more denser than New York, yet it has several driverless lines. Age? London is preparing to use it on its Northern line, which opened in the 1890s, and with is latest segment built in the 1920s. New York is just unique? Every city is unique. The only thing I see that's a comparison problem is that Toyko has those glass doors to prevent people from falling. Oh, and unions, of course. Also, don't forget that many systems with ATO still use operators just in case of an emergency and that ultimately, humans retain control over the system. As far as I'm know, ATO is more efficient and better in delivering more frequent trains. Now I'm just waiting for someone to say that those suits at the helm of the MTA just don't know crap about the system and picked a horrible system in ATO. You have made quite a few good points in your rebuttal to the previous posts. I have no doubt that some form of ATO will be implemented by the in the future but you haven't answered my point and that of RTOman. Whom will be held accountable in the event of any mishap that may occur when this system is put in ? I notice you mention a few systems where there is a human aboard the train in case of an unforseen incident. I have been on trains that have been involved in fire, smoke, and blackout conditions. My C/R and I have lead our passengers to safety in every one of those conditions, with no injuries, panic, or loss of life. I noticed you mentioned 12-9s. If you've ever operated a train, car, bus, or train I'm sure you realize that there is no human or computer that can stop a vehicle on a dime to save a person's life, especially one who is determined to end said life, for whatever reason. Someone, not you, mentioned sensors on the track to warn an automated train of objects on the track. In theory that's a sensible feature to have. Imagine said feature being in place when school lets out around some of our illustrious junior or senior high schools. Train senses object on roadbed. Train stops. No movement. If a human is present he/she removes said object, if possible. No human. No movement.Wait for help to remove said object. God forbid if someone has a more sinister idea in mind. Under full ATO a group of determined individuals can bring a line to a standstill. To me the idea of ATO has many benefits as far as the scheduled movement of trains. My problem is the over reliance of the computer at the expense of on the scene human interaction. I must bring up one "apples to oranges" comparison. I don't know the legal systems in effect in the cities which have ATO, full or partial implementation, but here in NY state, with a legislature run by lawyers, with laws written by lawyers, someone must be held accountable. If there is no human element on the scene to blame the , meaning you, the taxpayer, will ultimately pay. The TA lawyers, the lawyers, the NYPD lawyers, the DA's lawyers, even schoolcar instructors, will all say the same thing. I doubt if that can be programmed in software yet. ATO in NYC is a good idea. Has it's time come? I really don't know. Carry on Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.