PBS TV Investigates Train Accidents

[Paul of Covington]

   Keep an eye out for "Why Trains Crash" on NOVA on PBS this coming week.   They will investigate past accidents and discuss crash-prevention ideas.

[Phoebe Vet]

Set it to record.

Thank you.

[tree68]

My local PBS station is showing it Wednesday evening (22nd) at 9PM, and Thursday (23rd) at 2AM.

[tree68]

Nothing really new to those who are familiar with the industry.  They didn't go so far as to say that the railroads were too cheap or too lazy to put in PTC, but I kind of got that as an undercurrent.

They glossed over the "technical challenges" that we know are a large part of the problem with implementation, but did mention that getting the system to work seamlessly from railroad to railroad was an issue.

Not bad, but not great, either.

[RME]

A poster on PRRCatenaryElectrics notes that there is a Web site to accompany the broadcast:

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/tech/why-trains-crash.html

[BaltACD]

RME

A poster on PRRCatenaryElectrics notes that there is a Web site to accompany the broadcast:

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/tech/why-trains-crash.html

Which has a internal link to view the broadcast.

[edblysard]

If you were looking for un-biased objective storylines, this is not for you.

But, if you are a big proponent of the nanny state where big brother knows best, well, here ya go.

Very selective reports on several rail accidents, where they don’t miss- inform you, they just intentionally leave out mitigating factors and pertinent information.

 

Big push on the PTC front, and implied nationalization concepts.

[BaltACD]

A very agenda driven presentation - Everything in USA (and Canada) not good.  Everything in Japan great above reproach.

Somewhat surprised they mentioned the Spanish and German incidents.

Presented PTC as a 'off the shelf' system that railroads didn't install by the original deadline just because they didn't want to, with too many 'bleeding heart' testimonials to 'sway the jury' and no statements or evidence that multiple technologies had to be brought together and work in concert with each other - something that has never been done.  Getting the interactions between the multiple technologies wrong would have recreated the Takata Air Bags in railroad clothing - a safety product that is more dangerous than what it was allegedly protecting. 

A point alluded to, but not driven home, passenger in Japan operates almost exclusively on a network that handles very little if any freight, and that the high speed lines handle absolutely no freight.

Towards the end they did grudgingly state that the US has the best freight system in the World and that it is now operating at a profit (glossing over by omission the damages done to Class 1 carriers by over regulation from WW II (actually before) and the adoption of Staggers in 1980 that fostered the 'rebirth' of American freight railroads.

[Norm48327]

BaltACD

A very agenda driven presentation - Everything in USA (and Canada) not good. Everything in Japan great above reproach.

That's why they are referred to as "Propaganda Broadcasting System". Same applies to "National Propaganda Radio".

[jcburns]

Norm, they're only referred to that way by the voices in your head. The Public Broadcasting Service (not system) and National Public Radio are important, smart, award-winning sources of real objective journalism, as well as opinion and advocacy labeled as such. They're not perfect, but we're lucky to have them.

Most importantly: they don't deserve your cheap namecalling.

[Norm48327]

jcburns

Norm, they're only referred to that way by the voices in your head. The Public Broadcasting Service (not system) and National Public Radio are important, smart, award-winning sources of real objective journalism, as well as opinion and advocacy labeled as such. They're not perfect, but we're lucky to have them.

Most importantly: they don't deserve your cheap namecalling.

You are entitled to your opinion. So am I.

DO I care what you think? No.

[mudchicken]

Which is why they are being threatened with being de-funded after the regime change? Never mind.

[tree68]

jcburns

Norm, they're only referred to that way by the voices in your head. The Public Broadcasting Service (not system) and National Public Radio are important, smart, award-winning sources of real objective journalism, as well as opinion and advocacy labeled as such. They're not perfect, but we're lucky to have them.

It's been known for years that PBS tends to lean to the liberal side.  Not as badly as many of the commercial outfits, to be sure.  

And their programming that doesn't include any potential for politics is second to none.

[edblysard]

No real issue with PBS….in fact my local PBS station, channel 8, KUHT, was the first station in the PBS system.

Nova has several segments with agendas, and most of the time, they point this out with disclaimers….they are not really know for extremes either way for the most part, but they do stray…but then again, the star gazer crowd tends to be sorta socialist, there is not much money in their particular discipline outside of government grants.

 

I was surprised that, towards the end, one of the commentators pointed out the bullet train and the rest of Japans passenger system is popular enough and has more than sufficient ridership to be very profitable, hence it can afford a lot of maintenance that is required for such operations.

[Paul_D_North_Jr]

How complex (routes, differing speeds, number of trains, other types of trains on it, etc.) is the Japanese "bullet train" system ?  My understanding is that when it started, it was long-distance passenger trains only, essentially point-to-point, at a uniform speed (except at stations, of course).  It's a lot simpler to design and build a system for that small set of conditions, as contrasted with the complexities of many of our lines. 

- PDN. 

[edblysard]

Bullet train only...like the French TGV.

 

[MidlandMike]

Norm48327

 

 

BaltACD

A very agenda driven presentation - Everything in USA (and Canada) not good. Everything in Japan great above reproach.

 

 

That's why they are referred to as "Propaganda Broadcasting System". Same applies to "National Propaganda Radio".

 

I guess you guys didn't notice that the major contributor to Nova is the Koch Foundation, i.e., the brothers who funded the founding of the Tea Party.

[BaltACD]

MidlandMike

Norm48327

BaltACD

A very agenda driven presentation - Everything in USA (and Canada) not good. Everything in Japan great above reproach.

That's why they are referred to as "Propaganda Broadcasting System". Same applies to "National Propaganda Radio".

I guess you guys didn't notice that the major contributor to Nova is the Koch Foundation, i.e., the brothers who funded the founding of the Tea Party.

Have always noted PBS programming is 'bought and paid for'. Koch's aren't the dastardly 'lib supporters'.

[schlimm]

I suppose some folks are entitled to their negative opinions re: NPR and PBS, just not alternative facts.

[edblysard]

I would hazard a guess that because the majority of PBS programing is paid for by endowment foundations and groups and as such, this tends to allow the group footing the bill for a given program some license to influence that programs content…after all, none of us would pay to produce and air a show that offered a viewpoint opposite our own.

People tend to watch and listen to programs that closely mirror their own viewpoint, and they tend to promote such programs, its human nature to do so.

That’s one of the reason I enjoy Nova, the program tends to stay away from politics and focus more on science, history and nature.

That’s not to say they don’t get involved in partisan politics, it is that they normally are not as overt about it as this one program seemed to be…although I wonder if any program about PTC can approach the subject in an objective manner…this one certainly resorted to the scare the citizen tactic to further the cause.

 

I didn’t read the closing credits, but I would bet the NTSB had a big part in the content decisions.

[wanswheel]

 

Excerpt from WGBH

http://www.wgbh.org/about/index.cfm

WGBH is proud to be PBS’s single largest producer for television, the Web, and mobile. Some of your favorite series — Nova, Masterpiece, Frontline, American Experience, Antiques Roadshow, Curious George, Arthur, and Simply Ming, to name a few — are produced here in our Boston studios, and we showcase emerging producers on our national multicast World Channel.

[jcburns]

So, okay, you're closed-minded TO the opinion you say I have an entitlement to. Got it. Yeah, you gotta keep things pretty clamped down just in case a new, fresh, different opinion sneaks in there and challenges the land of alternative facts where you're (apparently) choosing to live.

We need as many reporters out there working in the spirit of the first amendment as possible. I want to hear everything that's happening as railroads struggle to implement PTC, deal with changes in what's shipped by rail in the US and elsewhere and how many crewmembers are used by rail companies to get the job done.

I want to hear everything about what the new administration is doing to spend money to maintain and improve our infrastructure. And I certainly want to hear about secret deals and trashing of environmental regulations that would take us back to the age of dirty water and air in the name of productivity and progress.

I want to hear everything reported about the pay, safety, work conditions and health care of rail employees. I'll read the Wall Street Journal, NPR, Fox News, the Detroit News, The New York Times, The Washington Post, and of course Trains to get that information.

I'm grateful for all reporters and the work they do. I need reporting (maybe commentary and so-called "expert analysis", not so much.) 

You need it too, but it does risk challenging a closed-down world view.

[edblysard]

jcburns

So, okay, you're closed-minded TO the opinion you say I have an entitlement to. Got it. Yeah, you gotta keep things pretty clamped down just in case a new, fresh, different opinion sneaks in there and challenges the land of alternative facts where you're (apparently) choosing to live.

We need as many reporters out there working in the spirit of the first amendment as possible. I want to hear everything that's happening as railroads struggle to implement PTC, deal with changes in what's shipped by rail in the US and elsewhere and how many crewmembers are used by rail companies to get the job done.

I want to hear everything about what the new administration is doing to spend money to maintain and improve our infrastructure. And I certainly want to hear about secret deals and trashing of environmental regulations that would take us back to the age of dirty water and air in the name of productivity and progress.

I want to hear everything reported about the pay, safety, work conditions and health care of rail employees. I'll read the Wall Street Journal, NPR, Fox News, the Detroit News, The New York Times, The Washington Post, and of course Trains to get that information.

I'm grateful for all reporters and the work they do. I need reporting (maybe commentary and so-called "expert analysis", not so much.) 

You need it too, but it does risk challenging a closed-down world view.

 

Wow, you deduced all that without ever speaking with me….cool deal Kreskin.

 

I have zero issue with the reporting of facts, as opposed to “reporting” opinions that’s are paraded as facts.

If you are going to talk about PTC, talk about all aspects of PTC, both the pro and the cons…this program implied it was a existing and functioning technology that American railroads choose to ignore….

It contrast a passenger only rail line in Japan with freight railroading in North America…there is no comparison, there can’t be, they are two completely different operations, about the only thing they have in common is round wheels!

But hey, if screaming and obliquely insulting other posters is what floats your boat, then knock yourself out…do ya need a safe space with coloring books and crayons just in case some micro aggressions start to get to you?

[BaltACD]

jcburns

You need it too, but it does risk challenging a closed-down world view.

In the case of this NOVA presentation it provided the closed down world view.

Nothing was stated about there NOT BEING a PTC product in existance when the mandate was put into law in 2008.  Nothing was stated that the product had to be designed from scratch to be operatable on all carriers and lines that it is required to be installed on.  Nothing was stated about the OBSTRUCTION of the Washington bureauacy in obtaining radio spectrum for the system to operate upon.  Nothing was stated about the hundreds of millions of man hours and billions of dollars "the foot dragging" railroads had invested in trying to meet the 12/31/15 deadline.  Nothing was stated about suppliers having to develop and produce required products for the designed system to operate. 

In the interests of FAIR reporting some of these issues could have been mentioned.  None were which is typical of a hatchet job.

[jcburns]

edblysard, I wasn't talking about the content of your post, I was talking about Norm saying:

"DO I care what you think? No"

Which I think was kinda closed-minded.

As for your comments, I completely agree that reporting the facts--pro and con--of PTC is important, and if the documentary presented only one side, it wasn't doing it's job.

I also think, for what it's worth, that the NTSB had ZERO to do with determining the content of the program. That's just not how the land of television works.

[jcburns]

edblysard, let me just (carefully) take one more try at explaining my thinking about the Nova episode.

Again, I agree with you that a "good job" of discussing PTC would involve discussing the pros, the cons, the costs, the uncertainties.

But as to the program itself, as you say, Nova has a good reputation for independent science reporting. But I gotta disagree: its funders do not get to come in and "influence" the content. The influence they have is by either spending the money or not, and for most programs that aren't one-offs, they fund the entire season of a show--all the episodes. They don't get to say "do one on PTC." They don't get to review scripts or edits. They just get to say "I'll pay for some of Nova" or not.

(With all due respect.)

[samfp1943]

jcburns

edblysard, let me just (carefully) take one more try at explaining my thinking about the Nova episode.

Again, I agree with you that a "good job" of discussing PTC would involve discussing the pros, the cons, the costs, the uncertainties.

But as to the program itself, as you say, Nova has a good reputation for independent science reporting. But I gotta disagree: its funders do not get to come in and "influence" the content. The influence they have is by either spending the money or not, and for most programs that aren't one-offs, they fund the entire season of a show--all the episodes. They don't get to say "do one on PTC." They don't get to review scripts or edits. They just get to say "I'll pay for some of Nova" or not.

(With all due respect.)

 

Posted by jcburns on Friday, February 24, 2017 7:43 AM{ Stated in part, previously, earlier in this Thread}by jcburns:

"...So, okay, you're closed-minded TO the opinion you say I have an entitlement to. Got it. Yeah, you gotta keep things pretty clamped down just in case a new, fresh, different opinion sneaks in there and challenges the land of alternative facts where you're (apparently) choosing to live..."

We need as many reporters out there working in the spirit of the first amendment as possible. I want to hear everything that's happening as railroads struggle to implement PTC, deal with changes in what's shipped by rail in the US and elsewhere and how many crewmembers are used by rail companies to get the job done.

I want to hear everything about what the new administration is doing to spend money to maintain and improve our infrastructure. And I certainly want to hear about secret deals and trashing of environmental regulations that would take us back to the age of dirty water and air in the name of productivity and progress..."

Dear, jcburns; 

         You, apparently, have only recently landed on this Planet (ie:Forum)(?)    Generally, many of us around here hew to what amounts to pretty much 'mainstream thinking'; we have liberals, conservatives and libertarians posting around here, mostly they do not try to beat up the others here with their political ball bats.     Like life, politics does creap into 'conversations'; the Forum rules do try to keep things from being overtly political (?); but, like an overfull- bathtub those ideas do tend to 'slosh' out on the floor, from time to time. Your attempt to bring your point of view is appreciated, your ad hiominem attacks, not so much. Then, your ideas about "Climate Whateverthecurrenttermforitisbeingusedtodayis"? into the conversation, just seems to highlight your own prejudices, and attempt to squash other's ideas on that issue, while steering the conversation to highlight your own brand of politics.  Really makes many of us wish you'd pack up your soapbox and move on.   

 It is the current climate of reportage that has damaged any credibility that the print (particularly, liberal) media has squandered daily, as well as  the attempts by the broadcast media to 'steer' that same 'news' to make 'news' rather than reporting that news 'as it happens' further exacerbates their slide towards their being credible resources for the public to stay in tune with current events.

OH! @WiITH ALL DUE RESPECT!

 

[Norm48327]

samfp1943

 

 

jcburns

edblysard, let me just (carefully) take one more try at explaining my thinking about the Nova episode.

Again, I agree with you that a "good job" of discussing PTC would involve discussing the pros, the cons, the costs, the uncertainties.

But as to the program itself, as you say, Nova has a good reputation for independent science reporting. But I gotta disagree: its funders do not get to come in and "influence" the content. The influence they have is by either spending the money or not, and for most programs that aren't one-offs, they fund the entire season of a show--all the episodes. They don't get to say "do one on PTC." They don't get to review scripts or edits. They just get to say "I'll pay for some of Nova" or not.

(With all due respect.)

 

 

 

 

Posted by jcburns on Friday, February 24, 2017 7:43 AM{ Stated in part, previously, earlier in this Thread}by jcburns:

 

"...So, okay, you're closed-minded TO the opinion you say I have an entitlement to. Got it. Yeah, you gotta keep things pretty clamped down just in case a new, fresh, different opinion sneaks in there and challenges the land of alternative facts where you're (apparently) choosing to live..."

We need as many reporters out there working in the spirit of the first amendment as possible. I want to hear everything that's happening as railroads struggle to implement PTC, deal with changes in what's shipped by rail in the US and elsewhere and how many crewmembers are used by rail companies to get the job done.

I want to hear everything about what the new administration is doing to spend money to maintain and improve our infrastructure. And I certainly want to hear about secret deals and trashing of environmental regulations that would take us back to the age of dirty water and air in the name of productivity and progress..."

Dear, jcburns; 

         You, apparently, have only recently landed on this Planet (ie:Forum)(?)    Generally, many of us around here hew to what amounts to pretty much 'mainstream thinking'; we have liberals, conservatives and libertarians posting around here, mostly they do not try to beat up the others here with their political ball bats.     Like life, politics does creap into 'conversations'; the Forum rules do try to keep things from being overtly political (?); but, like an overfull- bathtub those ideas do tend to 'slosh' out on the floor, from time to time. Your attempt to bring your point of view is appreciated, your ad hiominem attacks, not so much. Then, your ideas about "Climate Whateverthecurrenttermforitisbeingusedtodayis"? into the conversation, just seems to highlight your own prejudices, and attempt to squash other's ideas on that issue, while steering the conversation to highlight your own brand of politics.  Really makes many of us wish you'd pack up your soapbox and move on.   

 It is the current climate of reportage that has damaged any credibility that the print (particularly, liberal) media has squandered daily, as well as  the attempts by the broadcast media to 'steer' that same 'news' to make 'news' rather than reporting that news 'as it happens' further exacerbates their slide towards their being credible resources for the public to stay in tune with current events.

OH! @WiITH ALL DUE RESPECT!

 

 

[schlimm]

I fail to see where Mr. Burns insulted anyone, has anger management issues or made an ad hominem attack.  I do see a great deal of negativity directed by certain posters, such as sam, who are hardly the mainstreamers they suggest they are. Telling Mr. Burns "Really makes many of us wish you'pack up your soapbox and move on" is very insulting, as was his contemptuous remark on climate change.  But on this forum, rightwingers think they are mainstream paragons of neutrality and objectivity and anyone who reads and cites the publications you mentioned or PBS/NPR is considered some leftist or envirowacko.

[Murphy Siding]

 

Geez!  I'm an odd one, as I truly don’t watch television. It looks like I might have to start, just to see what I’ve been missing. By the way, did Gilligan ever get off that island?