Edit post

Edit your reply below.

Post Body
Enter your post below.
I have no way of knowing whether they can deliver the promised cost savings.  They say they can, so it is up to them to prove they can.  I don’t expect to be asked to believe they can do what they say they will do without them proving their case economically. As far as a lower cost resulting in lower quality, and thus lower reliability, they will have to prove that works too.  But their premise at this point is that railroad owned systems have more quality than they need due to the railroad bearing the liability.  So they are not presenting this as eliminating necessary quality.  Nevertheless, I would be skeptical of a claim that significant cost could be saved by eliminating quality that is not needed.   However, there might be the calculation that society is collectively safer if we signalize all the passive crossings even if it is with systems that are ten percent less safe.  Interestingly, I had found another report that attempts to thoroughly discredit this one.  And it does it a year earlier than the date of this report.  So this idea must have been circulating a bit.  Maybe I can find it.
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