Ant, if in the mind of the jury, you can create that impression, it doesn't matter much, if it is true or not. I have seen cultures of intimidation on the RR, where employee's were into listened to, or worse intimidated into unsafe acts.

I worked for the SP, and I do know that there were many training problems, over the years. That included a period when we even turned at least one individual lose from the stimulator to run an engine, who, it later turned out at the investigation, really had no idea of how the air brakes actually worked.....

So yes, bad training or failure to train adequately can be a real serious problem. But, NO, I would want to think that the principles of good train handling, and safe operation would still apply today, even with all of that extra homework to carry around in your grip.

My most recent copy of the GCOR, which I got working on some RR projects from a UP official, in the late 90's seems to contain most of the same operating rules and regulations, as did my first SP copy of the GCOR, which I received on the SP, and my several editions of earlier SP rulebooks before that.

Until we see the "timeline" and know all of the aspects of the events leading up to "lift off", we don't know very much, at all. This may well have been some kind of mechanical failure, or it may have been some kind of systems failure, that was a primary or contributory cause. We have really been told nothing of much in the way of "facts" at all in the NTSB releases. What few things have been released seem to lack detail or real substance in answering any of the how and why questions regarding this accident.

But, what I do know, is that this "investigator's" "comments" are a very convenient "heads I win", "tales you lose" proposition, from the standpoint of the lawyers he works for in trying to attract clients. As from that standpoint, it doesn't really matter if it is true or untrue. Which is why this particular type of "comment" ("speculation", "spin", "BS"....) should be viewed with skepticism.

We've seen no evidence of how that training was done, how much time was spent, how many runs they made, under what conditions, or of any this (now already being "perceived" as possibly having a "kernel" of "truth" to be real???) purported "culture" of safety problem, or much of anything else regarding any of the operating and mechanical parameters , at this point.

These questions, including about training issues, will be answered by the NTSB investigation given the circumstances here, with a new line. But, this "investigator" should not really be considered a credible source of any "facts" which have been uncovered, thus far, about the accident. Except. that is, for the fact that he'd probably be glad to get you in touch with somebody at the firm, if you were hurt.