 |
Re: Very Plausible that He Just Made Mistake, and we may never know?
Author: Ed Workman
Date: 06-14-2015 - 08:05
Even at low speed the 'help' of a second person, whether sitting alongside the engineer or looking at a monitor is highly doubtful.
Go and re-read the Metrolink v BNSF incident near Rialto. Two qualified engineers in the cab. The second man asked the operator something akin to 'um, are you gonna stop?' but too late.
Tests and cameras are not solutions, but they are deterrents, as already noted.
If one is recorded screwing around, termination will prevent future behavior that might lead to accident, particularly by the terminatee. Others can make informed decisions about their own behavioral choices. That non-fatal head-on of BNSF trains north of Fresno?? Another , older TMITC was the 60mph rear ender at Indio.
To be 'fair' the second man was a very green brakeman,
but one wonders how he missed the fact the the engineer was asleep.
Neither survived to explain, but post-mortem blood tests were helpful.
One may consider near-misses in which a second person DID prevent disaster.
Those are very seldom made public, for many obvious reasons, thus AFAIK there is little positive evidence of effectiveness. One of those 'it seems like a good idea' things.
The union has again proposed to FRA that two folks be put in cabs.
After Chatsworth it got Feinstein to say it out loud , but Congress rushed to a PTC mandate instead . Perhaps the union does have such data
Does anyone know if some/any has been made available?
I have doubts about PTC being a cure-all. People [ bastids] make hardware and software.
As expensive as it will be, I hope it will pay off by greatly reducing accidents.
Too many folks think it will eliminate accidents- not possible
Go and re-read the Metrolink v BNSF incident near Rialto. Two qualified engineers in the cab. The second man asked the operator something akin to 'um, are you gonna stop?' but too late.
Tests and cameras are not solutions, but they are deterrents, as already noted.
If one is recorded screwing around, termination will prevent future behavior that might lead to accident, particularly by the terminatee. Others can make informed decisions about their own behavioral choices. That non-fatal head-on of BNSF trains north of Fresno?? Another , older TMITC was the 60mph rear ender at Indio.
To be 'fair' the second man was a very green brakeman,
but one wonders how he missed the fact the the engineer was asleep.
Neither survived to explain, but post-mortem blood tests were helpful.
One may consider near-misses in which a second person DID prevent disaster.
Those are very seldom made public, for many obvious reasons, thus AFAIK there is little positive evidence of effectiveness. One of those 'it seems like a good idea' things.
The union has again proposed to FRA that two folks be put in cabs.
After Chatsworth it got Feinstein to say it out loud , but Congress rushed to a PTC mandate instead . Perhaps the union does have such data
Does anyone know if some/any has been made available?
I have doubts about PTC being a cure-all. People [ bastids] make hardware and software.
As expensive as it will be, I hope it will pay off by greatly reducing accidents.
Too many folks think it will eliminate accidents- not possible
