I'm Sorry, Dave, but I Can't Stop There

ALTHOUGH THE MTA has been talking about a computerized subway system for quite some time now—and is even testing it out on the L line—it wasn't until last week that someone on the city council finally said, "Hey, wait a second…"

Subway trains without an actual human crew on board would be much more efficient, the MTA has argued. (Cheaper, too, we imagine.) If they were to run things with a combination of onboard computers and radio signals, underground traffic would flow more smoothly and trains would be able to run more closely together. Why, the subway system would become a futuristic wonderland!

Then last week Brooklyn councilman Lewis Fidler had a flash of apocalyptic insight. If there were a fire on the tracks, he wondered, who would lead passengers through the smoky tunnel?

It's a good question, but there's no need to stop there.

Will these new smart trains come equipped with sensors that could detect a person on the tracks?

If a crime takes place in one of the cars, whom would you tell?

What if there's a sick passenger?

If someone pulls the emergency brake, will straphangers now have to wait even longer for workers to show up and inspect the train?

What if someone leaving the train gets a shoe stuck in the door? How will trains know when it's safe for them to close the doors? Will there be timers?

And most importantly:

What happens when the computers become sentient and start to get ideas of their own?

As anyone who rides the 6 can tell you, the MTA is still having trouble with simple computerized stop announcements. They might want to see if they can figure that one out before they start mucking around with driverless carriages.