In article ,
(Paul Corfield) wrote:

*Unmanned* operation, a step beyond ATO as London operates, has a
significant safety / public confidence / industrial reations hurdle
to get over.

Even though it's already working on the DLR, including Underground
segments...

--
Paul Cummins - Always a NetHead
Wasting Bandwidth since 1981

---- If it's below this line, I didn't write it ----

On Thu, 29 Aug 2013 11:46 +0100 (BST),
(Paul Cummins) wrote:

In article ,
(Paul Corfield) wrote:

*Unmanned* operation, a step beyond ATO as London operates, has a
significant safety / public confidence / industrial reations hurdle
to get over.

Even though it's already working on the DLR, including Underground
segments...

But then the DLR isn't unmanned in the same way that Paris, Lille or
Nuremberg (for instance) trains are. There is a member of staff on
board, as the would be on the Piccadilly.

Richard.

"Richard" wrote

But then the DLR isn't unmanned in the same way that Paris, Lille or
Nuremberg (for instance) trains are. There is a member of staff on
board, as the would be on the Piccadilly.

There was at least one recorded case of a DLR train carrying passengers
running without a member of staff on board. The PSA closed the rest of the
doors then turned the key to close the local door and stepped out on to the
platform. The door closed and the train set off. The PSA had to walk to the
next station at street level.

Peter

"Peter Masson" wrote:
"Richard" wrote

But then the DLR isn't unmanned in the same way that Paris, Lille or
Nuremberg (for instance) trains are. There is a member of staff on
board, as the would be on the Piccadilly.

There was at least one recorded case of a DLR train carrying passengers
running without a member of staff on board. The PSA closed the rest of
the doors then turned the key to close the local door and stepped out on
to the platform. The door closed and the train set off. The PSA had to
walk to the next station at street level.

I hope he ran...

On 29/08/2013 19:19, Paul Corfield wrote:
On Thu, 29 Aug 2013 11:46 +0100 (BST),
(Paul Cummins) wrote:

In article ,
(Paul Corfield) wrote:

*Unmanned* operation, a step beyond ATO as London operates, has a
significant safety / public confidence / industrial reations hurdle
to get over.

Even though it's already working on the DLR, including Underground
segments...

As others have pointed out I said "unmanned" rather than just ATO.

I have used "purpose built" unmanned Metro lines in various places and
have no great issue with them. However their design helps to deal with
a number of safety issues that will arise in London where some
alternative approach, possibly unique and untested, will have to be
employed. Setting aside the industrial relations issues it will be
these alternative approaches that will need to pass the test of public
opinion.


Ridership has skyrocketed on Paris Metro's Line 1 since its automation,
according to a BBC report.

wrote on 29 August 2013
21:47:23 ...
On 29/08/2013 19:19, Paul Corfield wrote:
On Thu, 29 Aug 2013 11:46 +0100 (BST),
(Paul Cummins) wrote:

In article ,
(Paul Corfield) wrote:

*Unmanned* operation, a step beyond ATO as London operates, has a
significant safety / public confidence / industrial reations hurdle
to get over.

Even though it's already working on the DLR, including Underground
segments...

As others have pointed out I said "unmanned" rather than just ATO.

I have used "purpose built" unmanned Metro lines in various places and
have no great issue with them. However their design helps to deal with
a number of safety issues that will arise in London where some
alternative approach, possibly unique and untested, will have to be
employed. Setting aside the industrial relations issues it will be
these alternative approaches that will need to pass the test of public
opinion.

Ridership has skyrocketed on Paris Metro's Line 1 since its automation,
according to a BBC report.

Really? Seems unlikely. The trains are not significantly more frequent
than before, and the trains look exactly the same as the old ones,
except for not having a driver at the front. "Skyrocketed"? A few %
growth at most I would have thought. Do you have a link to this dubious
report?

Line 1 in Paris is, however, the only example I'm aware of where a line
has been *converted* to unmanned operation. It does have double-track
tunnels virtually throughout, which eases evacuations.
--
Richard J.
(to email me, swap 'uk' and 'yon' in address)

In article ,
Richard J. wrote:
wrote on 29 August 2013
21:47:23 ...
On 29/08/2013 19:19, Paul Corfield wrote:
As others have pointed out I said "unmanned" rather than just ATO.

I have used "purpose built" unmanned Metro lines in various places and
have no great issue with them. However their design helps to deal with
a number of safety issues that will arise in London where some
alternative approach, possibly unique and untested, will have to be
employed. Setting aside the industrial relations issues it will be
these alternative approaches that will need to pass the test of public
opinion.

Ridership has skyrocketed on Paris Metro's Line 1 since its automation,
according to a BBC report.

Really? Seems unlikely.

Even if true, correlation does not imply causation.

The trains are not significantly more frequent
than before, and the trains look exactly the same as the old ones,
except for not having a driver at the front. "Skyrocketed"? A few %
growth at most I would have thought. Do you have a link to this dubious
report?

Line 1 in Paris is, however, the only example I'm aware of where a line
has been *converted* to unmanned operation. It does have double-track
tunnels virtually throughout, which eases evacuations.


--
Mike Bristow

On 30/08/2013 00:05, Richard J. wrote:
wrote on 29 August 2013
21:47:23 ...
On 29/08/2013 19:19, Paul Corfield wrote:
On Thu, 29 Aug 2013 11:46 +0100 (BST),
(Paul Cummins) wrote:

In article ,
(Paul Corfield) wrote:

*Unmanned* operation, a step beyond ATO as London operates, has a
significant safety / public confidence / industrial reations hurdle
to get over.

Even though it's already working on the DLR, including Underground
segments...

As others have pointed out I said "unmanned" rather than just ATO.

I have used "purpose built" unmanned Metro lines in various places and
have no great issue with them. However their design helps to deal with
a number of safety issues that will arise in London where some
alternative approach, possibly unique and untested, will have to be
employed. Setting aside the industrial relations issues it will be
these alternative approaches that will need to pass the test of public
opinion.

Ridership has skyrocketed on Paris Metro's Line 1 since its automation,
according to a BBC report.

Really? Seems unlikely. The trains are not significantly more frequent
than before, and the trains look exactly the same as the old ones,
except for not having a driver at the front.

There's no cab.

"Skyrocketed"? A few %
growth at most I would have thought.

I think that the word they used, actually, was soared.


Do you have a link to this dubious
report?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-20989427

Line 1 in Paris is, however, the only example I'm aware of where a line
has been *converted* to unmanned operation. It does have double-track
tunnels virtually throughout, which eases evacuations.

Nuremberg U2?

Many more to come, I'm sure.

wrote on 30 August 2013
23:34:09 ...
On 30/08/2013 00:05, Richard J. wrote:
wrote on 29 August 2013
21:47:23 ...

Ridership has skyrocketed on Paris Metro's Line 1 since its automation,
according to a BBC report.

Really? Seems unlikely. The trains are not significantly more frequent
than before, and the trains look exactly the same as the old ones,
except for not having a driver at the front.

There's no cab.

"Skyrocketed"? A few % growth at most I would have thought.

I think that the word they used, actually, was soared.

It was actually "rocketed". (see below)

Do you have a link to this dubious report?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-20989427

That report is dated 11 Jan 2013, less than a month after line 1 became
100% automated. BBC London's transport correspondent, Tom Edwards, said
that "passenger numbers have rocketed to nearly three-quarters of a
million a day". That sounds to me like a reference to the figure of
725,000 passengers a day that RATP have been quoting since 2010. The
rocketing happened over the last decade, not the last few weeks.

Incidentally that figure of 725,000 passengers a day is greater than any
LU line, assuming that the figures are measured the same way in both
cities. The Northern line appears to be closest; LU quote 660,000
passengers per weekday.
--
Richard J.
(to email me, swap 'uk' and 'yon' in address)