Hacker News
points by amiga386 1 day ago | 0 comments
That's a "nobody's dead yet" scenario. Safety standards require full platform doors at all stations for attendant-free operation, i.e. the platform has wall-to-ceiling barriers, the train arrives perfectly aligned (which means zero variation in train configuration, which rules out almost all mainline stations that accept different operators services), and the platform doors open and close in sync with the train doors.

Anything less is begging to get someone wedged in there as the train drives off, even if it's just a limb or a trailing bag strap.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Platform_screen_doors

> In June 2023, the operator of the Vancouver SkyTrain, TransLink announced a feasibility study into installing platform screen doors on the Expo and Millennium lines. Such installation was previously deemed infeasible, due to SkyTrain's diverse fleet and different door positions. However, with the acquisition of the Alstom Mark V trains, which will replace the ageing Mark I, the door positions allow for a feasibility study to proceed.

EDIT: I found some SkyTrain stats for you. 2016-2025, 1 fatal train-passenger interaction on the platform, 36 fatal in the guideway. Most were intentional suicide attempts.

https://www.technicalsafetybc.ca/technologies/railways/skytr...

[–] katbyte 1 day ago
I am aware, iirc the rate doubled after covid with most being self harm which is why the platform door discussion has started again. Primarily to prevent suicides and the resulting system shutdowns as the number of unintentional major injuries or deaths has been pretty low over its 40 years of no drivers or attendants and being the 4th busiest in canada/usa. The two new lines currently under construction right now will also not have platform doors.

So despite being fully automated is comparable with most other major metros/train systems that have a driver/attendant with the only metro's performing significantly better being the ones with platform doors - hence my comment of asking "why is an attendant needed for automation?" when it doesn't significantly improve safety in the same way doors would.

in the end we still may not end up with platform doors even thou the study can proceed now as the cost will be astronomical and always with safety systems there might not be the appetite for it.

[–] amiga386 1 day ago
So in the end it comes down to cost-benefit.

As Skytrain has no attendants, there's a certain level of risk of passenger injury and death no matter how good the sensors are. If Skytrain had platform doors, there would likely be less, but probably never zero, and TransLink baulk at the cost (for now).

Other systems, e.g. the Docklands Light Railway, which has attendants that can also drive if needed, are OK with paying those attendants (for now). I presume they've done a cost/benefit analysis and decided that it's cheaper to keep paying humans to ensure every train departs safely, and to operate the manual controls if the automation fails, than it is to upgrade the system to the point that doesn't require them and is also considered safe.