Holly Gibson Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

>snip<

> They were probably asleep. Yes, ALL of them.

So then it really doesn't matter how many people are in the cab, does it. (And by the way, in the Iris collision, they weren't all asleep.)

>snip<

>> But enough is known about Chatsworth to make the
>> claims of a "false clear" rather far-fetched.
>
> I disagree. There have been some other engineers
> working areas maintained by MassElectric who have
> complained about signaling abnormalities.
> Remember, MassElectric is the lowest bidder. You
> get what you pay for. Too bad that the NTSB has
> to confine their investigation to what happened
> solely on September 12, 2008. There has been some
> weird stuff happening involving those signals
> prior to that date --- and since.

If you feel the NTSB should include testimony that's outside the scope of Chatsworth, I encourage you to make your feelings known to them.

>> If Trainorders.com is your "authority" about
>> things... well, maybe you'd like to buy a bridge.
>
> Man, that sounds an awful lot like an insult
> directed at the people who post contributions to
> Trainorders.com. Is the discussion forum on
> Altamontpress.com somehow on a higher plane? So,
> what, exactly, are you saying about the integrity
> / intelligence level(s) of your fellow railfans /
> friends?

First, you seem to be under the mistaken impression that I'm a railfan. While I do have some interest in railroad history, I don't have the same whims and urges of most of the folks who post here or on Trainorders. Now I'm not saying there's anything wrong with that. Different people have different interests. I consider the railroad to be nothing more than a vocation that's permitted me to make a fairly decent living, but my various avocations are not railroad related.

One of the properties of unmoderated discussion boards is that anyone can post anything, whether it's true or not. Trainorders.com often has incorrect information posted on it. I don't subscribe, thus I have limited access and can't post there myself, so what happenes is that several people who do subscribe will send me threads and ask for my comments. That's fine. On occasions when I look at Trainorders, I often find threads that fascinate me. For example, a few years back there was a lengthy one about a teenage railbuff who was reported by a UP train crew for trespassing on railroad property. What aroused the crew's interest was that it was, like, 1:30 in the morning, and in a high crime area where the railroad has a vandalism problem. So, the crew reported it, just like they're required to do. The upshot was that in the end, both the boy and his dad (who didn't have any ID or driver's license) ended up being taken to jail. The thread went on for days and had dozens and dozens of posts, both pro and con. It provided a glimpse of railfan mentality, and I was fascinated (and entertained) by it. Still am.

Like Trainorders, Altamont is an unmoderated site. I participate here and try to offer meaningful responses. But like the stuff I see on Trainorders, I'm fascinated by some of the stuff I see here. In those cases I always encourage the posters to continue posting, and to provide some documentation to support their theories. That's why I've continued this correspondence with you, even though others think it's pointless and silly.

>> In response, I'll simply refer you to posts to the
>> this thread and others made by "Ole Pole Burner."
>
> So, like Metrolink, you're subcontracting out your
> response(s)?

No, it's because he has a vast knowledge of signal systems, and I don't. He understands them; I just use 'em. Since I try not to post stuff that I have no real knowledge about, I referred you to what he's written. Still do.

> Not only would the position of the switch have
> been easy to see (broad daylight, no other
> switches in the area), it would've been audible
> when it was run-through.
>
> Well, again, you're assuming that all engineers
> visually inspect every switch they're about to run
> over (they don't), and you also have to remember
> that, with a lot of the more modern locomotives,
> sound proofing in the cab has been improved and
> it's much harder to hear outside noises.

As I stated, the switch in question was literally the only one for miles. Its position could be clearly seen by anyone in the cab. Even with the windows closed, it would've been possible to hear it when it was run through. But if you say neither of those things are possible, so be it.