Re: Safety Vs. Saving Money --- Guess Which Comes Out On Top?
Holly Gibson Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> J wrote:
>
> I'm sorry but I'm not buying in to the novel term,
> lonesome cab. A thousand or more trains operate
> daily in the US with one person in the cab. This
> includes many trains operated by Amtrak, METRA,
> etc.
>
> I'm not disputing that. The question is: Is
> safety being compromised? I say "yes." With
> lonesome cab, there was no one to monitor Rob
> Sanchez' actions. All of the examples you cite
> above could be plagued, right as we speak, with
> "Rob Sanchez syndrome." Is that safe?
>
> I notice you've conveniently glossed over the most
> important characteristic of lonesome cab. It
> saves on labor costs.
>
No need to state the obvious. Of course a major factor in such decisions is to save money.
> This is in addition some short lines (including
> one that handles 140+ car coal trains with
> distributed power at speeds of up to 40 mph)
>
> Which short line are you talking about?
INRD
>
> and Class 1 helper and engine exchange crews.
> These movements operate with control systems
> ranging from ACSES/Cab Signals to non-signaled
> Track Warrant Control.
>
> But it's all about saving money, isn't it? And in
> the next breath, railroad managements will preach
> to us about how concerned they are about safety.
This thread has alredy discused several serious accidents involving more than one person in the cab. Do your homework and present data demonstrating a solo crewmember is more dangerous
>
> Commercial airliners no longer operate with second
> officers, navigators and flight engineers
>
> Give it time. I imagine we'll see lonesome cab on
> commercial airlines in our lifetime. They
> airlines are desperate to find ways to cut costs.
>
>
> and Indy cars no longer race with an on-board
> mechanic.
>
> Did they ever?
See the following - yes, I know it was not photographed at Indianapolis. [
www.shorpy.com]