Conductor From "The Polar Express" Wrote:
> . . .would you at least agree with me on the following that I wrote?
> In the case of taxpayer funded-commuter operations, we have a bunch of clueless
> politicians micro-managing and trying to "play with trains." A conductor without a
> name tag is apparently a really big deal, so much so that data must be collected and
> tabulated on such an event.


No disagreement with any of that. But no spin either! I wrote it as I saw it - pure and simple. I don't get all flummoxed over all the silly "window dressing" in the reports, because I understand why it's there - all the fuss and bother and charges of incomplete reporting and even bias, that would result if it was left out. We all know the irrelevant data doesn't mean anything. So it's there - BFHD!


Instead, let's worry about something that IS really serious - such as blatantly false statements often offered to hopefully gullible investigators. Don't say that doesn't happen regularly! It really gets embarrassing sometimes to hear such things; especially when it is often, so damned obvious. It can get as silly as a small child declaring so loudly, that he didn't get into the bread and jam; when in fact, the jam is still smeared all over his frickin face.

So don't get me started on the likes of Ricky Gates, or others that commit gross criminal negligence, or lie like rugs. His ilk belongs right where they put him - Federal Prison. Thankfully, very few railroad screw-ups fall into that category.
--------------------------------------------------------------------

As to NTSB bias. Duh! Especially at the "Board Level" in the last few years. But not so much at the peon investigator level. Why? Duh again - double duh even! The board is appointed by those useless stupid politicians you all complain about - Presidents; and are confirmed by even stupider and more useless politicians you also complain so much about - Senators! And they do have the final say - don't they.

If you want a good example - just follow the PTS debacle; and follow the lobbyist money while your at it. Start with this month's Trains Magazine - for just the tip of the iceberg. It started years ago in Washington (not at Chatsworth) at the behest of a particular vendor who wanted congress and the NTSB, to force the private railroad industry to buy their products - without first having to convince anyone they actually work; and without having to prove their concepts and designs are safe, in full peer review.

( Now please don't mis-construe - the FRA rule requiring for automatic protective devices, should have been for 39mph and above all along - not 79mph. Such systems already exist - and are well proven, and one tenth the cost. PTS needs to wait until it is as well proven).

AREMA signal engineering committees are still doing that peer review of PTS, and still have many safety critical issues unresolved, with no recent progress and none likely anytime soon. This is especially so on multi-track territory. And they hardly have even begun industry discussions on "Interoperability Standards" (like the NMRA's DCC Standard), another GInormous nightmare in the making.

And so what if humans can no longer make a mistake; when instead, a flawed, ill conceived, non peer reviewed, rushed into service, chaotic, politically chosen machinery, starts making its own fatal errors. Humans will still be just as dead, even it was that "Blutto Done It!"

And no - at the current state of the art - PTS will not result in any material capacity improvements, nor train movements without regard to fixed blocks (except under restrictive aspects - same as now). That is decades off - if it ever happens. In fact, current Full PTS installations will be totally dependent upon those blocks on several counts, and will be for the foreseeable future.

So: is there bias in those NTSB reports? Yep! right there, as obvious as the child with the jam all over his frickin face. With the NTSB's continuing scientifically fallacious claim, that PTS "would have prevented" running a red, it is fair to question if there might be other biases as well. - Sadly!

Not one shred of evidence to support these assertions has ever been presented in the reports - just the naked unsubstantiated claims. That is because there is no such evidence; nor even general peer acceptance of the idea; just a hope that it might someday be so. Emotional assertions like that do not belong in any official report - but they are there to trick the congress - to the benefit of this particular technology vendor.

But I can tell you that for bias to happen at my level (engineering), someone would have to first shut me up, being the big blabbermouth that I am. But no one has ever even dared to hint at such a thing in forty years. And since I still get assigned to such tasks, it is very unlikely that my immediate superiors are harboring much bias. Moreover, everything I do on the job is peer reviewed before it is presented - making that hard to get away with anyway.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Thankfully, most railroad screw-ups are usually just honest human errors, that anybody at any time could make - including me. I maintain that it is critically important that we come to understand how these mistakes happen, and how laxness creeps in on otherwise diligent employees, and how to prevent it (re: the Rialto Accident - not setting the brake, right as you pass a yellow signal - as was required at the time).

The signal system is designed specifically around this concept - to immediately begin braking at the yellow signal, to bring the train under control at a moderated speed - specifically to assure that there is as much margin for error available as practical, at the stopping end of the block. The solution to the Rialto incident was and is simple - Just do what the damn yellow signal tells you to do - get that margin of safety by promptly applying the frikkin brakes. Didn't apply them in time to afford an unexpectedly needed safety margin? So who the hell did do that - the green Ghost!

OK - S happens! so now wouldn't it be nice if managements could actually take causal information, as fast it can be learned, to actually help their employees stay vigilant, avoid common mistakes, and so forth. But sadly, everybody wants to say "I didn't do it!" - even if they did, or "Blutto Done It!" - even if he didn't. And managements are always looking for a scapegoat it seems; firing the same guy that just learned the very lesson they should want us all to get - the very same guy that is most likely to never make that same mistake again (assuming he survived and stayed employed). Instead, someone else without that lesson under his belt, is hired to replace him - STUPID.

Accidents will just keep on happening that way! PTS or no PTS!

The only difference with PTS might be, that instead of the locomotive engineer getting the sack, it will be that poor stupid signal engineer, that caved in and signed his name, safety certifying the PTS installation that just screwed up. And why did he sign - because those damn ignorant politicians dictating all this, will get him fired if he doesn't. Fired if you do - fired if you don't!

I am personally fed up with all the filthy politics interfering with my job as a signal engineer. But they soon can all go to hell! ----- When I retire!

And who will replace me? Probably the same guy that replaced the last fifteen I know that left the profession - Mr NOBODY! There is now a critical shortage of signal engineers - and it is playing havoc with PTS - as well as every other major project in America.

In view of that earlier "John Galt" thread - I suppose I am now, to just shrug and say "Who is John Galt!"

But this ain't just some book I had to read in college. . . . .

It is painfully real! . . . . . Who'd a thunk it! I didn't!

OPB