Mr. Frailey, you seem quite vexed today. What is the matter? The damn politicians, is what puts me out of sorts. Up theirs!
Sir! I don’t know what “up theirs” means but it seems ugly. Get control of yourself. What is going on? What is going on, my friend, is that we had a railway accident that was preventable, and the politicians have intervened to superimpose a solution that does not in any way prevent such an accident from happening again.
In other words, business as usual in the United States of America. Precisely! I’m sorry, what is your name? You seem quite intelligent.
Please go on, Mr. Frailey. Every time there is a big railroad accident that costs lives, the politicians try to impose their own pet solutions. Recently, a Metro-North Railroad commuter train overturned at Spuyten Duyvil, N.Y., doing 82 mph on a 30-mph curve. The accident occurred at 7:19 on a Sunday morning, and it’s pretty evident that the engineer of the train was inattentive, quite possibly dozing. The four victims were scarcely buried before Senators Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., and Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., began demanding that the Federal Railroad Administration require inward- and outward-facing cameras aboard locomotives, the inward-facing camera focused upon the engineer for certain and possibly the conductor as well.
That seems like a genuinely good idea. What’s your problem with this? Maybe you are not as intelligent as I thought. My problem with this idea is that it will not accomplish what the senators claim it will. Here is what they said: “Schumer and Blumenthal explained that the recording devices may be used as a deterrent for dangerous behavior, like falling asleep or texting, and allow rail officials to monitor and correct such behavior before a tragic accident occurred.” Let’s start with the first claim, that the inward-facing camera will be a deterrent. I don’t think any railroad engineer ever decided to take a nap while his or her train was moving . . . ever. Yes, they may doze but it is not by intention. And there are devices, such as alerters, that make loud, obnoxious noises if you don’t touch controls, such as whistles or throttles or brakes, every 30 or so seconds. I might add that Metro-North had no such alerter in the cab of the train that overturned. Maybe Senators Schumer and Blumenthal could suggest FRA do a rulemaking requiring them in all cabs, because unlike inward-facing cameras, alerters prevent accidents.
Now, as to these cameras allowing “rail officials to monitor and correct such behavior” before accidents occur, that’s stupid to even imagine. How are they going to do this? Will the Federal Railroad Administration establish real-time monitoring desks to watch the engineers and warn them when their heads drops down? I can see it all now:
Bob Crachit, wake up! This is Washington calling. You have dozed off. I can see you! Snap out of it . . . now! Right now! For the love of god! Oh my goodness, he is definitely asleep! FRA Mission Control, we have an out-of-it engineer. Rally the Air Force to fire warning flares, coordinates to follow . . .
If you do not monitor engineers closely, real time, then the cameras cannot possibly prevent an accident. All they do is add to the trail of evidence after the fact that inattention was the cause of the accident. That makes the jobs of railroad officials and the National Transportation Safety Board easier in assigning blame, but it saves no lives.
I’m starting to see what you mean. Surely the FRA saw the futility of this idea and put a stop to it. It did no such thing. Chuck Schumer is a very persuasive politician. Joseph Szabo, the FRA administrator, wrote the two senators saying "it is our intent" to begin a rulemaking process this year. It’s as if Schumer and Blumenthal staged a coup d’etat and seized control of the Federal Railroad Administration, or if not that, then the mind of Joe Szabo. In that same letter, Szabo said FRA and freight railroads have a pilot program involving inward-facing cameras. It may that railroads want them for rules-compliance reasons. But don't fool yourself and say the cameras will save lives.
Well then, what does save lives? Positive Train Control. I admit that politicians also imposed this system of accident avoidance on railroads, in a law Congress passed in 2008. But when and if it is implemented, PTC will prevent trains from passing red signals, entering the working limits of maintenance people, and operating a train above the speed limit. PTC would have prevented the Spuyten Duyvil tragedy.
Alas, the government is getting in the way of accomplishing PTC. For almost a year, the Federal Communications Commission has refused to issue permits for some 20,000 radio transmitters to be installed on railroad rights of way until Indian tribes have examined each site for evidence of ancient artifacts — a process that could take years. The deadline Congress imposed for completing the installation of PTC is the end of next year. Thanks to the FCC, no large railroad is likely to meet the deadline.
If Senators Schumer and Blumenthal are sincere, they should mount their coup d’etat at the Federal Communications Commission and straighten it out. That or pass a law that sets government priorities: Do we want to save lives by implementing PTC at the earliest possible time, or sift dirt for arrowheads and hachets?
Please, this is all too much to absorb. I’m getting a headache. I take no pleasure in depressing you. -- Fred W. Frailey
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.