‘The Notion of Automation”
( Vancouver Skytrain Operation Centre. [Reddit Picture])
Automation of railroads started in North America as a method to maximize track use for trains and minimize labour. However, our unfamiliarity and concerns about safety stalled the progress while automatic transit is being achieved on a massive scale in Asia and the Middle East.
In One Sentence: Full automation in our public transport system (in the context of North America, specifically Toronto), is critical and valuable to maximize efficiency, removing the scepticism of the subject.
(Transit experts please be advised about the generalization of the subjects involved- this article is intended for audiences that have a limited understanding of transit development)
“In the early decade of the 1980’s, Ontario’s Minister of Transportation James Snow announced a revolutionary commuter transit system to minimize vehicle traffic after measures were introduced to halt highway construction in the Greater Toronto Region. The GO-ALRT (Government of Ontario – Advanced Light Rail System) was a multi-billion transit model that stretched the technology of transit at that time- articulated, light rail vehicles that was fully automated and scheduled for every five minutes during the evening and morning commutes. Between Hamilton and Oshawa, it would operate parallel to the diesel-operated GO Trains, being a slower, stopping train that served major roads to allow passengers to get to an express train at select stations to Downtown Toronto. In northern areas of Toronto, it would operate within hydroelectric corridors, serving Mississauga City Centre, Toronto Pearson Airport, North York and Scarborough Town Centre. One hundred and seventy kilometres of additional rail network would be added to a metropolitan population of three-point-seven million residents, which was unprecedented in any modern North American transit planning. The concept of suburban sprawl we visualize in the Greater Toronto Area today was limited in scope - therefore, it was an extremely progressive measure to reduce commuting by vehicle for the near future.
(The plan of GO-ALRT: Solid lines were existing GO lines, and broken lines are TTC rapid transit lines (incl. RT).)
Unfortunately, progressive measures between the Government and companies stalled during the late 1980’s, and political changes in the Ontario Parliament resulted in the axe of the GO-ALRT. Scarborough Rapid Transit (affectionately known as the RT- in a manner of civility) was a prototype (to an extent) line that would become a large-scale project throughout the Greater Toronto Region. The transit line remarkably humiliated the original concept of the GO-ALRT into a dinosaur service that mocked the advanced technology achieved during the 1980’s.
Automated guideway transit (AGT) and the concept of automated transit was developed during the mid 1960’s as a low-cost, moderate solution between a high-traffic subway/metro service and a bus service using computers to separate vehicles and altercate the speed. The intention was focused to be an alternative for a traditional rapid transit service, although reality pressured AGT technology into smaller markets such as airport inter-terminal and amusement park shuttle services.
( Toronto Pearson International Airport’s LINK train is currently the only automatic train in Toronto, and 2nd in automatic operation after the Toronto Domain Zoo Ride. The bumpy ride lasts three minutes, and uses cables for movement. LINK is one of many AGT systems in North America confined to airports or other large facilities. [Wikipedia Picture])
AGT took twenty-years to serve its original purpose. Kobe had the first mass-transit AGT during the early 1980’s, while a more successful AGT design had a Canadian development process. Bombardier’s INNOVIA had a slight difference with the pre-existing AGT technology during that time, notably the traditional steel rail incorporation compared to monorails, rubber-tyre, experimental magnetic levitation. Bombardier’s INNOVIA became undoubtedly the most popular AGT platform, serving cities such as Detroit, Vancouver, Bangkok, Yongin, Beijing, and New York in the maximum extent of the technology. Toronto, the first city that utilized the technology, on the other spectrum, used the INNOVIA in a half-hearted measure that did not achieve its full expectation. The RT was opened to much public fanfare, although there were financial troubles (doubled the original budget) and service decreased as it went on, due to cost-cutting measures, including sharp curves, lack of heated rails (which the system froze during the Winter), and a computer system that was malfunctioning (In safety protocols, brought drivers into a cramped compartment not suitable as a typical metro train). The result impeded the future of automated transit in Toronto, and the market was shifted elsewhere.
In present day, fully automated transit in North America is generally limited to airports (there are exemptions- Vancouver has the second-longest driverless transit system in the world). However, in the Middle East and Asia, entire rapid transit systems (most notably Dubai) are to embrace a fully automated attitude, deriving on a Canadian technology using the sophisticated computers of today. Semi-automated transit (automated service with drivers on-board in case of emergencies or small duties) is becoming extremely popular in Europe, while North America is slowly rolling out automatic train operation.
The main resistance of a driverless, automated transit is the importance of safety – union, political, and financial matters aside, safety concerns limited the Scarborough RT’s intent and significant labour costs occurred.
(The Scarborough RT in current time. Although TTC has substantially increased maintenance of the RT, the RT still falls under the reliability goal of all other lines using the same technology, including Vancouver Skytrain and AirTrain JFK. [Wikipedia Picture])
Although the presence of a driver onboard mitigates crime, surveillance cameras, transit police offers and a harsh punishment for even minor crimes will deter crime similar to a driver on-board. In most circumstances, drivers would not intervene directly with the situation, only controlling the train and monitoring the incident before dispatched officers arrive. CCTV has increased in quality to a point where facial recognition into a police database is possible, although not foolproof. As for collisions, automatic train control has multiple fail-safe systems to deter any serious crashes. Breakdowns in public transport using automatic train operation are extremely rare, often having a reliability rate of ninety eight percent or above. Constant maintenance and upgrading the system would reduce the opportunities of a failure, unlike the RT’s unfortunate calamity.
A level of technology similar to an automatic train would be a less-controversial modern fly-by-wire aircrafts of today. Pilots would prepare the plane by typing in the navigation system, including altitude, speed, and destination. Pilots would make minor alterations if the air traffic control requests them to (change due to aircraft impeding in the course, weather, and the alike). Unlike public transportation, where the automation would be directly seen by the public en-masse, usage and implication of aircraft technology is directly confined to the cockpit and the air traffic control center, creating fewer negative speculations. Most jet airliner incidents today are pilot-orientated or material fatigue, not the fault of the computer. In a successful case, full automation technology would eventually be achieved in airplanes, with pilots outside of the flight deck and as a service director, only intervening if the plane has a malfunction.
(Planes like the Boeing 777 use modern fly-by-wire technology to guide the plane to its intended destination. So far, only known fatalities of the Boeing 777 were caused by human or external error, not the fault of the computer. [Wikipedia Picture])
Toronto’s political and financial crisis with introducing additional lines could result in a full-scale automatic transit operation for future lines if progress is achieved, primarily the financial benefits and political gain. Automatic train operation would need to be separated from at-grade traffic, being an elevated or underground system. The Downtown Relief Line*, substantially revived in the political realm after twenty years of minor bickering, would be most suitable platform to introduce modern driverless trains.
[* The Downtown Relief Line is a propositional rail line to improve transit services in Toronto’s Downtown area- relief of two high-traffic interchange stations, transit line that is over-capacity during peak hours in the downtown sector, and to attract transit riders in a neighbourhood that should not take thirty minutes to accomplish three kilometres.]
However, the encouragement of automatic trains would be highly contested- Unions and commuters would fiercely challenge automatic trains, using the knowledge of safety and all the ramifications once introduced, and use the RT as a shining example of an automatic transit in its glory (In sarcastic speech). Other automatic transit systems, to their misfortunate understanding, have introduced measures to improve safety, both internally and externally. Docklands Light Railway has advisors in every station, primarily as customer service representatives but also as drivers if the system failed to function**. For smaller, low-passenger services, an alternative bus service would be immediately implemented, usually organized by operators at a main control centre. During construction, fail-safe systems would be rigorously checked to comply with maximum operational efficiency. Undoubtedly, constant maintenance is the most critical element to have an extremely high performance rating. In careful consideration, I personally have to agree with the doubting public; although Toronto Transit Commission have significantly invested in maintenance (preventative maintenance) since the past administration, maintenance is still under-funded compared to other major transit organizations. For a Downtown Relief Line that would be fully automated, primitive maintenance procedures would not be acceptable.
( Docklands Light Railway. There is no driver compartment in the train- the system was originally operated without a driver. [Wikipedia Picture])
[**Similar to the RT, Docklands Light Railway had a similar appraisal during its inauguration but issues brought constant malfunctions, making the system extremely unreliable a short time later. Unlike the RT, Transport for London spent time fixing the issues and to this current day, it has the highest performance and punctuality for a rail organization in Great Britain, dominating other British franchises and the London Underground, at ninety-nine percent.]
Public opinion of automated trains shifted in the past thirty years in North America. The once revolutionary and sci-fi development has now become a shroud of uncertainty. The public has forgotten about the positive effects of automated transit, with trains that would arrive on time and at constant speeds to the intended destination. Passengers could glare outside of the front and rear windows, visualizing what a train driver would see. The attempt should not be broken in North America, especially after years of research and development in the location where it once was dreamed and successfully operated. Organizations and civilians can look no further than the repeated successes of Middle East and Asian operations, and how the development of automated technology has come in the previous decades. Toronto can, one day, become an ambitious face of a revolutionary automatic transport. Nevertheless, the face needs to be cleaned and rinsed daily in order to look and perform in the most positive manner.”
OracleofOasis
