TTC: Other Items (catch all)

[RapidTransit]

Ok........while I think this discussion should move on.............I feel the need to say here, I don't actually see the contradictions some of you seem to between various posts/posters.

This incident occurred with the train still mostly or entirely in the tunnel, on approach to Union, as I understand it, from the witness account.

In that context, the operator would be expected to remain with the train so long as passengers are on board. Particularly true if the cab had not physically entered the station, which is unclear to me, from the post.

Which is what I believe Dan was suggesting.

Remember that Line 1 is now Single-operator, no guards. So you're not going to leave a loaded train of passengers unattended.

Once the train is moved into a station, they can be easily relieved, I'm sure relief would be brought to the train if the operator were unable to manage. Which would be understandable, but will also take time.

At a station, the train would be evacuated, and with the doors closed, the operator could exit and leave the train unattended while station staff and supervisors takeover.

The rule book description is correct, but applies to an in-station scenario. Where evacuation to the platform is possible. Clearly once EMS and other help had arrived the choice was still made not to offload at Union.

***

No one posting here had ill intent, this starts as an explanation to a poster who was on scene, first hand, wondering why things were handled the way they were. There was an attempt to give answer to that, and while the wording might be quibbled with the substantive answer was correct in the context of the situation.

If anyone who works for TTC here feels procedure was not correctly followed, you have an internal mechanism for flagging that.

Elsewise, its sufficient to say that procedure was followed, and yes that's hard on the operator, for whom we all ought to have sympathy, in addition to the person whose life was lost.

***

Now let me return to.........full-height Platform Edge Doors are what would, to a near certaintly prevent 90% of these incidents from ever happening, at a minimum. It should be close to 100%, but nothing is 100%.

The primary need is to address this as preventable. However one feels about the TTC, or those suffering mental illness or engaging in irresponsible conduct (being at unauthorized track level for a reason other than suicide) or TTC management of this or any other situation..........the object should be that it never happens in the first place which remedies the situation.

Believe it or not, even with one person operation, they are still required to put the train in emergency and cut the power.

But like you said, it's best to move on.

 

[PL1]

If only MAiD were available to everyone (not just terminally ill people), this person would've had the option to end their life in a peaceful & dignified manner (if they were certain that's what they wanted), without having to attempt something like this and risk it going horribly wrong as well as traumatizing other people in the process. Anyone who opposes MAiD is partly to blame for why things like this happen (they claim to be against it out of compassion & regard for human life, but in reality they have none, because they couldn't care less if people off themselves in such a violent manner, but heaven forbid they have access to a much better option )

I believe in and support MAiD, but it (I believe correctly) doesn't help those that decide on a spur of the moment to end their lives. The process for approval takes some time. And I have been involved in autopsies of MAiD users.

 

[nfitz]

@nfitz brother, I was referring to incidents involving the platform at the station.

Please be respectful and not address me by an assumption of my gender identiy.

Again, you are pulling made up stats out of nowhere, because your gut feeling and vibes without a shred of research make you think ummm aCtUaLly iT's mOrE LiKe 90%.

How is making it clear that my guess is 90% a stat? How is this any different than you saying "I would be fairly certain the number is closer to 100% than 90%" in the post I replied to? I didn't make up either number - I simply used the numbers you'd already presented.

When I brought up fatal incident rate, instead of only suicide, it was in good faith to address the fact full height PSDs very rarely hurt people while also preventing suicide.

The vast majority of track-level deaths are suicides, with the rare industrial accident (normally outside of public operation times) and the very, very, rare murder.

Full height PSDs are not 100% fool proof, but they are far far more effective than 90% at reducing suicides and other deaths, like accidents and homicide on the subway system. The idea with PSDs isn't to prevent all suicides in general from happening, but to prevent them affecting subway operation.

PSDs will significantly help. But when you put them at, for example, Davisville station - nothing stops someone walking out of the door, and onto the nearby bridge, and ... well you know. Or jumping a fence nearby, going down the hill, and ... well you know.

From basically the only relevant review on this topic afaik:

"After screening 623 studies and their references, 51 studies were included; 26 empirically assessed rail-related prevention interventions and 25 provided relevant qualitative insights. [...] Full-height PSDs eliminated all suicides" emphasis mine

Strategies for Reducing Suicide at Railroads: A Scoping Review of Evidence and Gaps - PMC

This review aims to systematically evaluate existing literature on reducing suicides along railroads, with specific focus on effectiveness, limitations, and research gaps in the current evidence base. Database searches were conducted in PubMed, ...

pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Which sounds great, until you read that the 25 of those studies "comprised epidemiological studies or purely theoretical assessments of intervention. So we are down to 26 studies of actual installations. And those studies only related to 15 different systems, some of which weren't actually full-height doors, but were half-height doors, fencing improvements, lighting changes, and suicide pits. The only example that supports the 100% stopping is Shanghai - which as I've pointed out is completely meaningless data, due to the corrupt nature of the communist government. Do you really believe that Stalin would get 100% of the vote with a 95% electoral turn-out? Even with no other candidates, it's hard to believe that not one person erroneously marked their ballot.

Again, I did the napkin math for Shanghai's case, the last fatal platform screen door incident was in 2022 ...

And why after it's been made very clear how unreliable data from that genocidal regime is, do you persist as using it to prove anything!

... when you included jumping in front of the train after spidermanning down from the Prince Edward Viaduct. I exaggerate, but even including oranges, the vast vast majority of incidents happen at the platform.

"There's certainly spots you could jump off a bridge in front of a train, or just hop a fence and climb down/up a bank."

Those examples you listed are practically infinitesimal. The average Canadian is not even fit enough to climb the tall fences surrounding above ground subway tracks.

The exaggeration is fine - but why refer to Canadians? In many countries there are people who look more like Winnie the Pooh than Spiderman!

The disingenuity of choosing the Prince Edward viaduct as your example is interesting. Given it has suicide barriers in place! I don't recall it being a particular hotspot before that - it's easier just to jump. Still, if you did, you won't access it from above. You'd go down the TDSB staircase between Rosedale high school and the tracks, hop the low fence, and walk to the edge of the arch, where there's a service walkway you can get to. There's probably other ways in you can get around there; but that's the one where I walk. Along the open sections - I'd hardly call a 4 or 5 foot chain link fence high. I remember as a kid climbing 8 to 10-foot fences to get across the tracks, to save the 3-minutes necessary to walk around them! Along GO tracks there's invariably holes cut in the fences, that they never fix.

And then there's Roxborough - even Winnie the Pooh could get over that 3-foot high rail at the west end, where there's virtually no drop down to the hill.

They're not hiding anything per se, but stats on these tragic events aren't widely disseminated in mainstream news. And certainly not every incident is reported on.

Very few individual incidents are reported on - except when there's a bigger story about the victim. But TTC has in the past released annual stats at the request of the board. And the mainstream news has widely disseminated them. Why do you suggest otherwise. Do you have an example of when TTC has released such stats at the boards request and they haven't been widely disseminated?

The numbers remain pretty static. Of course there are other benefits to doors. Particularly in papers, etc., getting onto the track, and leading to fire incidents.

 

[81-717]

I believe in and support MAiD, but it (I believe correctly) doesn't help those that decide on a spur of the moment to end their lives. The process for approval takes some time. And I have been involved in autopsies of MAiD users.

By all means, have some safeguards in place to ensure it's not just a "spur of the moment" decision, and that the person genuinely wants to go through with it (and are not being coerced into it). But everyone should still have access to go through this process of approval if they've made up their mind, regardless of whether or not they're terminally ill. It's outright inhumane that only terminally ill people are granted this luxury, while leaving everyone else condemned to either attempt doing something themselves (like jumping in front of trains), or worst of all being killed against their will (accidents, murder, etc). No offense, but terminally ill people have the opportunity to jump in front of a train too, but they're rightfully given a better option, and the same option should be extended to everyone who's determined enough.

As far as I'm concerned, a person's right to autonomy to choose the time & manner of their own death (rather than leaving it to things outside of their control) is not up for debate and non-negotiable.

 

[nfitz]

By all means, have some safeguards in place to ensure it's not just a "spur of the moment" decision, and that the person genuinely wants to go through with it (and are not being coerced into it). But everyone should still have access to go through this process of approval if they've made up their mind, regardless of whether or not they're terminally ill. It's outright inhumane that only terminally ill people are granted this luxury, while leaving everyone else condemned to either attempt doing something themselves (like jumping in front of trains), or worst of all being killed against their will (accidents, murder, etc). Terminally ill people can always jump in front of a train too, but they're rightfully given a better option, and the same option should exist for everyone who's determined enough.

In my experience few of those jumping in front of trains are either mentally ill, or severely compromised and can't face the consequences for their actions. Neither of which I think should be MAID criteria.

 

[urbanclient]

The paper I cited derived its full height PSD conclusions from Shanghai, Japan, and Seoul. According to @nfitz all 3 regimes might be cooking their data to mislead these poor researchers? Let's be real here. it's not easy at all to get hurt with full-height PSDs.

@nfitz in italics "The vast majority of track-level deaths are suicides, with the rare industrial accident (normally outside of public operation times) and the very, very, rare murder."
The last 4 years have seen 4 homicides at TTC stations with subway service, with one of them being at platform level. The risk of homicide being reduced with regard to full height PSDs is relevant, since pushing someone is an obvious risk. Industrial accidents in the last 5 years have clearly been rarer than homicide at platforms.

"PSDs will significantly help. But when you put them at, for example, Davisville station - nothing stops someone walking out of the door, and onto the nearby bridge, and ... well you know. Or jumping a fence nearby, going down the hill, and ... well you know."
This is a fallacy by exception, and not a good one at that because again, we are talking about full height platform screen doors eliminating platform suicides as was the thread's context prior to @Northern Light 's post. You admit the PSDs will significantly help, but you won't budge from 90% which is just an arbitrary number you admit you got from @Northern Light . All because there are cases where jumping onto the tracks outside the station is feasible. There is no logical disagreement with my argument here. I never said full height PSDs would eliminate 100% of deaths in the subway system. If I have to add some variation of "on the platform" to remind a reader that I am talking about situations involving the platforms, it starts to get old fast. Evidently, I should've done this just to cater to your reading comprehension. That was clearly a misjudgement on my part. Me: "The idea with PSDs isn't to prevent all suicides in general from happening, but to prevent [platform suicides from] affecting subway operation." https://leanlogic.online/glossary/exception-the-fallacy-of/

"The only example that supports the 100% stopping is Shanghai - which as I've pointed out is completely meaningless data"
The paper doesn't cite Shanghai as the only study to back full height PSDs. If you bothered to check the paper, or look into what I wrote, you would know this. Me: "The paper I cited derived its full height PSD conclusions from Shanghai, Japan, and Seoul." That some of the research is coming out of China does not mean it is meaningless data. Believe it or not, hundreds of Canadian, American and European universities are cooperating with Chinese universities to do research as we speak, even in sensitive fields. To almost imply that the Chinese would cook the data all the time to sabotage their own cooperative efforts with western counterparts is ridiculous. It doesn't appear that you knew that, even today, in spite of global tensions, scholarly collaboration is a mainstay between the West and China. For them to have ulterior motives in this specific case is even more ridiculous, since it's now widely accepted industry knowledge that full-height PSDs eliminate platform-to-track suicides.
Seoul: "Full-height PSDs completely eliminated subway suicides"
Japan: "7 suicides occurred after installation, and all were at stations with half-height PSDS [none at stations with full-height PSDS]."

"The disingenuity of choosing the Prince Edward viaduct as your example is interesting. [...] I remember as a kid climbing 8 to 10-foot fences to get across the tracks, to save the 3-minutes necessary to walk around them! "
Why are you accusing me of being disingenuous when I already quickly disclaimed that it was hyperbole, not that this disclaimer was even necessary for the vast majority of readers. You and I and anyone else on UT were all younger when obesity rates were lower than now, and we all lead a more active lifestyle. This is just riddled with anecdotes and denials by exception. You managed to climb a tall fence as a young, fitter version of yourself, that doesn't disprove the fact that the average Canadian is overweight and unfit now. Me: "We're comparing apples to apples here, not apples to oranges+apples when you included jumping in front of the train after spidermanning down from the Prince Edward Viaduct. I exaggerate, but even including oranges, the vast vast majority of incidents happen at the platform."

"Why do you suggest otherwise. Do you have an example of when TTC has released such stats at the boards request and they haven't been widely disseminated?"
Again quibbling about semantics and/or failing to read what I even posted. I even linked two cases where stats were released. And quoted the TTC's statement of apprehension to release them. The media doesn't give monthly or annual reports on suicides on the TTC, the stats come out once in a blue moon by today's news cycle standards. You can disagree and think once in 2009 following a freedom of info request and once in 2021 that was released in a scholarly journal 3 years later should be considered widely disseminated, but my meaning was that this is not transparency on a regular basis, but the TTC being pressured or forced to do so by law. The stats being picked up by many outlets after said freedom of info release is normal and not denied by me. Could I have worded it better, absolutely, but I explained this in my reply to @txlseries4 which you clearly didn't understand.

"Brother" is an expression, like "oh brother"; not a pronoun or gender identity, which you never had a problem with me using previously in a reply to you. I repeatedly used "they" and "their" directly in the context of replying to you since my very first reply to you, without any prompting. Quit trolling.

I've tried telling you multiple times to slow down, actually read what other people write before breaking out into condescension and aggression, when at the end of the day, you don't even seem to significantly disagree, if at all, with the other person's conclusion. As is the case for this conversation about PSDs. This is in the context of you bickering with other members as well as myself.

And in my 6 months of being on UT, I have never seen you apologize for being wrong or own up to jumping to conclusions, despite being proven wrong by evidence from other members or replies from a subject matter expert. You just disappear from the conversation like it never happened. You averaging nearly 5 posts a day over 18 straight years is genuinely shocking. And it feels like 1/5 of your posts are you on your bad days beefing with the rest of Urban Toronto because you don't or can't properly read posts before replying. Just yesterday you were beefing with @nightstreak on the Ontario Line thread. In my case, you demonstrably had trouble understanding the difference between route capacity and demand over a trivial quibble with me on Line 5 after you changed the topic no less than two times. I can only assume that your long tenure here probably makes the moderators more amenable to your sarcasm, strawmanning, and bad faith, time wasting arguments. Not to mention you keep dragging your personal politics into this, when we're trying to keep the topic on the TTC getting platform screen doors. Noone wants to debate you about politics here, and if you have that bad of an itch to be a China-hawk on a transit forum, then go to the relevant politics thread.

I genuinely hope newspapers are written at a 6th grade level for people like you because I am wholeheartedly giving you the benefit of the doubt, since I hope that it's not malice coming from you. Why else would you have even condescended to TTC subway operators on how subway operations work recently. You appear to be a dilettante in transit, just like the majority of Urban Toronto. If I get banned for calling you out like this, so be it. I have already seen someone else's post get deleted by mods for calling you out just today. Your conduct has a chilling effect on those with more conflict-avoidant personalities and that's a real harm for this community. I can only hope you've been formally warned for such consistent and frequent negativity and condescension towards other members, because if not, I don't want to be on a forum that enables this behaviour, whether I can block people or not.

I'm very confused as to what you are comparing the LRT to? I never mentioned streetcars, and the subway does in fact run faster than streetcars since you have brought that up.

It honestly feels like you are barely skimming everything you are responding to, leading to very confusing responses

It's not like you can trust any information about civilian deaths that the lying corrupt communist party in China says. They still claim that there was few if any deaths in the Tiananmen Square, with multiple reliable reports of more than 10,000+ dead, and the evil tyrannical dictator Xi Jinping being aware that bodies of victims were crushed by armored personnel carriers until they were "ground up" and the remains hosed down into the drainage and sewer systems to dispose of the evidence.

ad nauseum