Login
or
Register
Home
»
Trains Magazine
»
Forums
»
General Discussion
»
One year later (sleep thread)
Edit post
Edit your reply below.
Post Body
Enter your post below.
<p>[quote user="John WR"]</p> <p>Quote from the NTSB accident report of the Iowa crash:</p> <p><span style="font-size:medium;">"Therefore, the NTSB recommends that the FRA establish an ongoing program to monitor, evaluate, report on, and continuously improve fatigue management systems implemented by operating railroads to identify, mitigate, and continuously reduce fatigue-related risks for personnel performing safety-critical tasks, with particular emphasis on biomathematical models of fatigue."</span></p> <p>I think, Bucyrus, that this is the sentence you find particularly objectionable. </p> <p>John[/quote]</p> <p><span style="font-family:verdana,geneva;font-size:small;">That is not what I am referring to when I said something to the effect that they were reaching for conclusions without direct proof. I was referring to this as quoted from the accident report for the Iowa crash:</span></p> <p><span style="color:#3366ff;font-family:verdana,geneva;font-size:medium;">“The National Transportation Safety Board determines that the probable cause of the accident was the failure of the crew of the striking train to comply with the signal indication requiring them to operate in accordance with restricted speed requirements and stop short of the standing train because they had fallen asleep due to fatigue resulting from their irregular work schedules and their medical conditions.”</span></p> <p><span style="font-family:verdana,geneva;font-size:small;"></span> </p> <p><span style="font-family:verdana,geneva;font-size:small;">Now there is wiggle room in that statement. They use the term, “probable” as opposed to “definite.” But then with the term, “probable,” the statement becomes speculation, and I would expect an accident investigation to refrain from speculation. The NTSB cannot prove the crew was even asleep let alone sleeping due to sleep disorder. In terms of speculation, I would agree that the reason for passing the red signal was probably that the crew was asleep. </span></p> <p><span style="font-family:verdana,geneva;font-size:small;">Now they don’t used the term, “sleep disorder.” They use the term, “fatigue,” and fatigue can be caused by simply failing to stay in bed long enough the day before. Fatigue has to be caused by something, so it is fair to speculate that it was caused by insufficient sleep before going on duty. </span></p> <p><span style="font-family:verdana,geneva;font-size:small;">But then they go on to speculate that the fatigue was caused by irregular work schedules, and that linkage does make it a sleep disorder such as Shift Work Sleep Disorder by definition, thus taking the speculation on the crew being asleep to speculating that the sleep was caused by a sleep disorder caused by working irregular hours, even though not everyone who works irregular hours contracts a sleep disorder.</span></p> <p><span style="font-family:verdana,geneva;font-size:small;">This is pure speculation used to advance an agenda under the guise of an objective, fact-based investigation. </span></p>
Tags (Optional)
Tags are keywords that get attached to your post. They are used to categorize your submission and make it easier to search for. To add tags to your post type a tag into the box below and click the "Add Tag" button.
Add Tag
Update Reply
Join our Community!
Our community is
FREE
to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.
Login »
Register »
Search the Community
Newsletter Sign-Up
By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our
privacy policy
More great sites from Kalmbach Media
Terms Of Use
|
Privacy Policy
|
Copyright Policy