@#$%&'s Advocate Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> What I still don't get is -
>
> If we can rely on professional bus drivers and
> truck drivers to not only steer their vehicles,
> but while doing so, not run into anything or run
> any reds (not to mention pilots and air traffic
> controllers); why the hell can't we just rely on a
> locomotive engineer to do the same. Aren't they
> all human beings, with the same fallibility.
> Why should we need any of this high-falutin' stuff
> only for railroads - just to make it so engineers
> do not need to be vigilant against mistakes -
> everyone else has to be.

Here's one truck driver that was neither viligant nor reliable:

[www.altamontpress.com]

> On another note, doesn't this story about "teenage
> railfans" texting a locomotive engineer about
> their hobby interest seem kind of far fetched. I
> can easily believe a teenager quizing an engineer
> while face to face at trackside. And I can
> believe an engineer being kind enough to answer
> all the inane questions. But at other times when
> they are not face to face? That seems to make
> reason stare! For instance, how did they know his
> cell number? Were they groupies of some sort.
> Wow - a working class engineer has groupies - with
> personal access to him yet?! Does anyone out
> there know of other similar situations - I sure
> don't.

There are railbuffs who have one of my personal email addresses, and many local ones that call me by name when they see me. There's even one that has a handheld radio and calls me on it (took me a while to figure out who it was, but I did). So, what's been alleged as a possible contributing factor in this incident comes as no shock to me.

> Then again, it may not make sense because the
> media failed to get all the facts, or they just
> got it all wrong as usual. Or they didn't report
> it all - it not being PC to do so; as they are
> notorious for that kind of nonsense in California.
> Who knows, but it smells to high heaven, as does
> the notion of firing the messenger, or her
> resigning under fire - or whatever. Obviously,
> something big has not as yet been aired out, and
> is beginning to stink to high heaven.

The facts of this incident have been given to the media by the investigators. I don't believe the media got it "all wrong," but if you could provide some examples, I'd be happy to see them.

> As attempted cover-up of something is obvious
> here; the NTSB is hopefully tough enough and
> independent enough to get the real facts - I for
> one, intend to order a copy of their report when
> it finally comes out.

The NTSB's report will eventually appear on its web site. You won't have to order it.

It seems to me that everything has been pretty transparent. Please explain to us what "cover-up" is going on.