Edit post

Edit your reply below.

Post Body
Enter your post below.
[quote user="CShaveRR"]Forgive me, but I've never ridden or followed the DC Metro system, so I'm not sure about their equipment (long and low, is all I remember from seeing some a few years ago). But we are dealing with some mighty old cars here. News reports say that the train that rear-ended the other one had old cars that should have been phased out years ago. The fact that the shell split away from the frame in the way it did attests to the lack of crashworthiness of that particular design.   I suspect (at the risk of becoming too political here) that the short-changing of mass transit by past administrations and Congresses is to blame for old equipment being kept around longer than it should have been, given modern safety requirements. Even if the Metro were to become appropriately "stimulated" today, it would take years before these cars could be phased out.[/quote] Along the same lines (sort of): The cause of this crash will be determined by a full investigation that might take weeks.  It is likely to be several days before one or more probable causes emerge and are reported.  We will be told over and over not to jump to any conclusions until the investigation is complete.  Yet today officials are reporting that the equipment comprising the train that struck the other was old and overdue for replacement.  And they add that the failure to replace it was a safety concern.  Specifically, they have linked the insufficient crashworthiness of the obsolete equipment to the damage suffered in this crash.  I have not heard reports of any other linkage of the inadequate safety of the obsolete equipment to the crash, but perhaps there have been some.   <?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p> I have to ask why any official would volunteer this incredibly sensitive and incriminating information before the official investigation has even begun.  I can only conclude that it is evidence of an on-going agenda to lobby the public for more funding by highlighting the premise that inadequate funding increases danger to the public.  What better tool could there be?  It basically tries to blame the crash on the taxpayers.    But, at the same time, this tactic seems incredibly ham-handed for failing to see the unintended consequence.  That is, when you blame unsafe equipment on a lack of funding, you acknowledge that you are placing the public in danger by knowingly running unsafe equipment.
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