I would be more inclined to try out automated light rail/subways first, seeing as they don't need to navigate traffic.
The Copenhagen Metro is driverless (and there are probably many others around the world). Works like a charm.
The [London Docklands Light Railway](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Docklands_Light_Railway) is also driver-less. However travelling everyday on it, the journey is not smooth. Especially when it starts or stops, the acceleration and deceleration is very jerky. And also the train lurches forwards quite a few times.
Not what one would expect on any train especially an automated train.
Vancouver's SkyTrain ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SkyTrain_(Vancouver) ) is driverless and very smooth. I have a feeling the unpleasantness of the ride of the LDLR has more to do with characteristics of the track or technology, rather than the driver's actions.
After riding this train I started to wonder why driverless trains are not more prevalent. It seems so obvious now.
You can't tell the transit unions, "you all have 1 year of employment left before we replace you with computers."
I don't know what it's like on the LDLR you mentioned, but I regularly ride the (very) human dependent 'L' in Chicago, and that's not a smooth ride either. So I'm not sure how much it has to do with the computer drivers.
Could this not be the same thing you sometimes get on the human-driven tubes - for some reason (bizarre safety?) apparently if people lean on the doors they brake suddenly (have heard drivers say that over PA, googled for some kinda explanation but couldn't see anything except speculation).
You'd think it'd be cheaper and more reliable to make the doors sturdier.