Anyone else see the show on PBS "Nova" "Why Trains Crash"?
There was information about the Chatsworth, CA UP-Metro collision and the Philadelphia, PA Amtrak derailment that I had not picked up from discussions here. With respect to the Amtrak accident resulting from excessive speed into a curve, and whereas the Amtrak train was not hit by a rock, a SEPTA train had been hit by a rock that had injured its driver. The claim was that the Amtrak driver was distracted by listening to the radio conversations regarding the rock-throwing incident.
Someone might weigh in with "not his job" for the Amtrak driver to be listening in, but if someone is throwing rocks at trains that injures train drivers, it is in my view very much appropriate for the Amtrak driver to know what is going on, provided, however, that they mind their own signals and speed restrictions.
The Chatsworth accident, according to the program, was very much blamed on the Metro driver, who was texting from a cell phone while driving, and texting on something that was very much not in his job description (allegedly offering cab rides to interested parties). That Chatsworth accident is described as the impetus for Congress to pass the PTC mandate, and the industry foot-dragging in implementing PTC (because of "concern regarding standards") was blamed by the TV show for the Phily accident.
Am I the only person bothered by PBS' version of this? First of all, just like the self-driving automobile that is supposed to prevent car accidents, how do we know the accidents won't result from failure of the PTC itself. Technology is not a silver bullet that solves all problems, and I thought that was pretty disingenous of PBS Nova to blame corporate foot dragging when PTC has potential shortcomings.
The other thing is that railroads are a very minor player in passenger transportation whereas they are major players in freight transportation, especially in bulk goods what are more expensive to ship in cost and energy usage than other modes. It is this role of railroads as "iron waterways" that make PTC problematic with respect to the handling of long, heavy trains?
Finally, the Philly Amtrak accident was on the Northeast Corridor owned and managed by Amtrak as a (mostly) passenger line. There was nothing holding Amtrak back from upgrading their signalling system, but we had a thread discussing this because they were short the money because the tightwads in Congress?
If GM "killed the electric car", what am I doing standing next to an EV-1, a half a block from the WSOR tracks?
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.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.