Railway Man Ulrich At the very core on board cameras and Postive Train Control are a vote of nonconfidence in the people who run the trains. In essence the people who are pushing cameras and PTC as well as other technology are saying that they need this so that a serious accident can be averted in the event the crew is asleep, drunk, stoned, or simply "makes a mistake". They understand that every railroader can't be a professional and so the railroad career will be dumbed down to become a McJob that annyone can do. This accident only makes the case for dumbing down the job that much stronger...In 5 or 10 years it really won't matter as much if the on board people are pros or not becuase they really won't be expected to be... On-board cameras are a means of laying off risk onto the train crew. They incent the crew to perform better, because if something goes wrong, there will be less equivocation about cause, and if cause can be better established to be the fault of the crew, then there a stronger case for the railway not to shoulder the full liability. But in and of itself, the camera does nothing to prevent an accident, and it doesn't automate anything. PTC is a method of eliminating single-point failure. Does PTC enable greater automation and less requirement for skill, knowledge, and experience on the part of the train crew? Absolutely. RWM
Ulrich At the very core on board cameras and Postive Train Control are a vote of nonconfidence in the people who run the trains. In essence the people who are pushing cameras and PTC as well as other technology are saying that they need this so that a serious accident can be averted in the event the crew is asleep, drunk, stoned, or simply "makes a mistake". They understand that every railroader can't be a professional and so the railroad career will be dumbed down to become a McJob that annyone can do. This accident only makes the case for dumbing down the job that much stronger...In 5 or 10 years it really won't matter as much if the on board people are pros or not becuase they really won't be expected to be...
At the very core on board cameras and Postive Train Control are a vote of nonconfidence in the people who run the trains. In essence the people who are pushing cameras and PTC as well as other technology are saying that they need this so that a serious accident can be averted in the event the crew is asleep, drunk, stoned, or simply "makes a mistake". They understand that every railroader can't be a professional and so the railroad career will be dumbed down to become a McJob that annyone can do. This accident only makes the case for dumbing down the job that much stronger...In 5 or 10 years it really won't matter as much if the on board people are pros or not becuase they really won't be expected to be...
On-board cameras are a means of laying off risk onto the train crew. They incent the crew to perform better, because if something goes wrong, there will be less equivocation about cause, and if cause can be better established to be the fault of the crew, then there a stronger case for the railway not to shoulder the full liability. But in and of itself, the camera does nothing to prevent an accident, and it doesn't automate anything.
PTC is a method of eliminating single-point failure.
Does PTC enable greater automation and less requirement for skill, knowledge, and experience on the part of the train crew? Absolutely.
RWM
Are we talking about on-board cameras that watch the track ahead, but not the crew, or are we talking about cameras that watch the crew? I am not advocating on-board cameras watching the crew, but would they not add a measure of rules compliance? Is it not probable that Sanchez would have refrained from text messaging if he knew a camera was watching him?
I give professional railroaders alot of credit....however, as is so often the case, a few rotten apples spoil the bunch. I feel sorry for those career railroaders who will see their jobs dumbed down and who will be treated like five year olds due to the actions of the few out there who can't/won't do their jobs.
Awe come on Ulrich. Now, you're not giving proffessional railroaders enough credit. Instead of giving credit for the millions of things they do right, you're focusing one thing that went wrong. I contend, that railroaders probably make the right decisions 99.9999% of the time, but it only becomes an issue the other .0001% of the time.
Railroading has to be like most other occupations, except the consequences of a mistake have bigger stakes involved. One trucker making a serious mistake does not mean all truckers are making serious mistakes. One lumber salesman making a serious mistake does not mean all truckers are making serious mistakes. Over the lifespan of the American raolroad industry, I'd say the industry has always been moved toward eliminating those behaviors and those people who have a tendency to cause big mistakes.
Besides, I can visualize how having a camera in the cab would do anything except provide after the fact evidence when a problem occured. For it to have any kind of deterent effect, someone would have to be monitoring the camera while the train is in operation, and communicating with the crew.
"***Big Brother to conductor, train 52........quit picking your nose.....over****" I don't think so.
Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.
kolechovski Sorry if that was already read by everyone, but that'll make things much worse for railfans. The idea of installing cameras watching crewmen's every move is also ridiculous. They'd really waste all that money to make sure the occasional railfan doesn't get a ride? Especialy in this money-tight economy? Not to mention the big-brother effect of watching every single movement any crewmember makes? Would employees really agree to that severe monitoring willingly? At least on the TV show Big Brother, you can actually win money for having your every move watched...
Sorry if that was already read by everyone, but that'll make things much worse for railfans. The idea of installing cameras watching crewmen's every move is also ridiculous. They'd really waste all that money to make sure the occasional railfan doesn't get a ride? Especialy in this money-tight economy? Not to mention the big-brother effect of watching every single movement any crewmember makes? Would employees really agree to that severe monitoring willingly? At least on the TV show Big Brother, you can actually win money for having your every move watched...
I don't see how cameras would be an issue for railfans. As long as we're obeying the law and not trespassing, vandalizing, etc., what would we have to worry about?
As far as the cameras watching the train crews, I can't see it as a problem there either. If a crew member is doing nothing wrong, they would have nothing to worry about. I doubt that every second of footage captured will be reviewed unless there's an incident, which is where the cameras can definitely help with showing what happened, what was done, etc. In regards to the incident with the Metrolink crash, it would help to with issues like the complaint that the conductor had made about the engineer's misuse of his cell phone while running the train. The railroad could review the footage and find out for sure if the claims were valid or not.
Kevin
http://chatanuga.org/RailPage.html
http://chatanuga.org/WLMR.html
kolechovski http://www.trains.com/trn/default.aspx?c=a&id=4694 Sorry if that was already read by everyone, but that'll make things much worse for railfans. The idea of installing cameras watching crewmen's every move is also ridiculous. They'd really waste all that money to make sure the occasional railfan doesn't get a ride? Especialy in this money-tight economy? Not to mention the big-brother effect of watching every single movement any crewmember makes? Would employees really agree to that severe monitoring willingly? At least on the TV show Big Brother, you can actually win money for having your every move watched... I still don't have all the facts on the Metrolink crash. so I can't comment any further on it, but it also seems railroads are getting more lawyer-y, eh? It's like they're looking for anything to make trouble about. That one employee sounds like he had a history of carelessness. They'd actually consider their camera solution over simply dealing with the carelessness of employees the way they should have from the start.
http://www.trains.com/trn/default.aspx?c=a&id=4694
I still don't have all the facts on the Metrolink crash. so I can't comment any further on it, but it also seems railroads are getting more lawyer-y, eh? It's like they're looking for anything to make trouble about. That one employee sounds like he had a history of carelessness. They'd actually consider their camera solution over simply dealing with the carelessness of employees the way they should have from the start.
Sure it can...if we all had the same perspective (i.e point of view) there would be no need for debate as we'd all agree on everything. My perspective hasn't changed.
UlrichSure...however thats a matter of perspective.
A point cannot be debated if the perspective keeps changing, however.
Murphy Siding Ulrich I dunno..they just do. Compare that to the 148 milion, billion, zillion times during that 21 years when railroaders did their jobs without a hitch, and the importance of those 2 times starts to diminish.
Ulrich I dunno..they just do.
I dunno..they just do.
Sure...however thats a matter of perspective. If you lost a child, husband, or wife on that Amtrak train 21 years ago you might think otherwise. Likewise drunk driving isn't a serious problem until it's your kid..
How sensitive are the drug tests? For instance, if someone went to a concert(Haven't been to one in years-I guess this might still be happening) didn't partake in pot smoking but was surrounded by the smoke of those who were. The concert goer is drug tested. Would the test be positive for drug use?
Jay
UlrichHe was texting while he was supposed to be doing his job...how does that make him a railfan? And I too would say the industry is doing pretty good IF...
He was texting while he was supposed to be doing his job...how does that make him a railfan? And I too would say the industry is doing pretty good IF...
He texted with railfans about train activity. It does not necessarily make him a railfan but does make it likely that he was one.
Again, I ask why would two incidents 21 years apart, involving three people pique your interest?
"No soup for you!" - Yev Kassem (from Seinfeld)
trainfan1221 I couldn't get the link for the text messages to work, but from what was quoted it seems to add a bit different light to the story. I saw something on the news and had to check to see if we were discussing this subject here.
I couldn't get the link for the text messages to work, but from what was quoted it seems to add a bit different light to the story. I saw something on the news and had to check to see if we were discussing this subject here.
The transcript link appears to have been taken down. I could not find it again, but maybe somebody else can. I saved the PDF, but I don’t know how to post it here, or if that would even be permissible. Here is the identification from sheet 1 of 67.
By Doug Brazy
zardoz Ulrich I'm a little surprised, however, to hear that the UP conductor was in rehab. And I wonder if the same would be extended to an airline pilot. I really hope not... Why?
Ulrich I'm a little surprised, however, to hear that the UP conductor was in rehab. And I wonder if the same would be extended to an airline pilot. I really hope not...
I'm a little surprised, however, to hear that the UP conductor was in rehab. And I wonder if the same would be extended to an airline pilot. I really hope not...
Why?
I fly alot and would hope that they are held to a higher standard. I just don't buy into everythng being "just a mistake" .
It's my understanding that the teens were the ones to bring to light the cell phone conversations.
Would the NTSB have ever known if the teens kept slient? As a general rule would the NTSB look for cell phone records if no phone was found at the site? Would this accident have been blamed on fatique or something else? I also wonder if the teens regret that they revealed the cell phone factor?
p.s. I too was getting a creepy feeling.
Bucyrus I think that anyone who wants to really understand what happened should read the transcript of the text messages. They are rather hard to read because they are cryptic and somewhat redacted. But there are a lot of them, and together, they produce a larger overall picture of what was going on. Maybe it’s just me, but I get a kind of creepy feeling from reading them.
And I thought I was the only one getting a creepy feeling. The ones you quoted especially gave me that feeling, and it wasn't just the illegal activity they were planning. I'm not a parent, but those messages give me an impression that there was more to it.
TrainManTy chatanuga Also, I refuse to call the teenagers involved "railfans". To me, a railfan observes railroad operations and does not interfere. These kids were repeatedly texting this guy when they knew he was at work as well as going for unauthorized cab rides, working with this guy to sneak into the cab. I realize that they're young, but they are still old enough to know better. Thank you, Kevin, for recognizing that not all teen railfans are like that! I'm a teen railfan (although I would not call myself a foamer), and I definitely have a whole lot of respect for the industry and the men and women who are part of it. I try not to block platforms when railfanning or cause any worry to the train crews, and there's no way I'd conspire with even a member of the train crew to operate a train! But I don't know if the general public will recognise that...
chatanuga Also, I refuse to call the teenagers involved "railfans". To me, a railfan observes railroad operations and does not interfere. These kids were repeatedly texting this guy when they knew he was at work as well as going for unauthorized cab rides, working with this guy to sneak into the cab. I realize that they're young, but they are still old enough to know better.
Also, I refuse to call the teenagers involved "railfans". To me, a railfan observes railroad operations and does not interfere. These kids were repeatedly texting this guy when they knew he was at work as well as going for unauthorized cab rides, working with this guy to sneak into the cab. I realize that they're young, but they are still old enough to know better.
Thank you, Kevin, for recognizing that not all teen railfans are like that! I'm a teen railfan (although I would not call myself a foamer), and I definitely have a whole lot of respect for the industry and the men and women who are part of it. I try not to block platforms when railfanning or cause any worry to the train crews, and there's no way I'd conspire with even a member of the train crew to operate a train! But I don't know if the general public will recognise that...
No problem, although I was referring to railfans in general, not just teenagers. Everytime I've read the articles on this crash and it's mentioned that the kids were "railfans", I cringe because it paints a bad image of all of us.
It is one thing to test positive in a random drug test...it is another thing to test positive after an accident killing 25 people and injuring 100 more. I also read that the UP conductor repeatedly used his phone on duty also. (As did railroad engineers and conductors around North America before this accident) I missed the Conductor's interview, and I see the Docket has now been taken down....I wanted to see if he was calling signals also per Metrolink rules. UP crews were good at it when the order first came out after the Glendale accident, but are complacent now.
You can see where this is all heading from this afternoon's statements:
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2009/03/ntsb-chair-blas.html
"Kathryn O'Leary Higgins noted that at least four serious violations of safety regulations have been exposed in the examination of the Sept. 12 head-on collision between a commuter train and a Union Pacific freight train: on-duty cellphone use, a failure to confirm signal colors, unauthorized ride-alongs and marijuana use by a train crew member."
This accident not only sped development of positive train control deployment, it might bankrupt/dissolve Metrolink in the process, and probably ding Union Pacific to some extent also.
My train videos - http://www.youtube.com/user/karldotcom
If a rail employee admits his addiction, then yes, the railroads will send that person to rehab (for both drugs and alcohol). They can return to work when they successfully complete the program. Now if they get caught pissing hot again, then yes, they will be subject to termination.
I suspect the airlines may have similar setups.
UlrichGood point Mr Cummings, and I don't mean to sound heartless or heavy handed. I'm a little surprised, however, to hear that the UP conductor was in rehab. And I wonder if the same would be extended to an airline pilot. I really hope not...
Good point Mr Cummings, and I don't mean to sound heartless or heavy handed. I'm a little surprised, however, to hear that the UP conductor was in rehab. And I wonder if the same would be extended to an airline pilot. I really hope not...
It's been fun. But it isn't much fun anymore. Signing off for now.
The opinions expressed here represent my own and not those of my employer, any other railroad, company, or person.t fun any
That would be my take on it. I think there were issues.
Murphy Siding I don't know if we're talking about the same creepy feeling, but reading the transcripts made me think of Peter Graves, as the pilot in the movie Airplane! "Bobby- do you like gladiator movies?"
I don't know if we're talking about the same creepy feeling, but reading the transcripts made me think of Peter Graves, as the pilot in the movie Airplane! "Bobby- do you like gladiator movies?"
I think you are correct regarding Sanchez's motivation, and I'll be interested to see if the final report deals with the topic.
Ulrich You're right...the conductor is not responsible for the accident...although he is still a dodo for testing postive.
You're right...the conductor is not responsible for the accident...although he is still a dodo for testing postive.
OK, I guess we got that issue put to bed. Read the text messages.
Ulrich Bucyrus UlrichAll I've stated is that it might be worthwhile for the investigation to look at everything...including the conductor who tested postive. What are you asking for? Apparently it was the investigation that looked at the conductor and tested him for drugs. What more do you want? not asking for anything.. just arguing a point..
Bucyrus UlrichAll I've stated is that it might be worthwhile for the investigation to look at everything...including the conductor who tested postive. What are you asking for? Apparently it was the investigation that looked at the conductor and tested him for drugs. What more do you want?
UlrichAll I've stated is that it might be worthwhile for the investigation to look at everything...including the conductor who tested postive.
What are you asking for? Apparently it was the investigation that looked at the conductor and tested him for drugs. What more do you want?
not asking for anything.. just arguing a point..
I think you are clouding the issue. In an earlier post on page 1, you said:
“If he [the engineer] were interested in his job he would have been interested in following the rules, and he would have been interested in noticing signals on his route. And the UP conductor would also have shown some interest in follwoing the safety rules of his employer. I've stated nothing unfair here...these dodos are responsible for what happened. Period. "
(My emphasis added)
On this page, you said:
“I'm giving the investigation credit...I'm arguing with the folks who seem to think the pothead should be disregarded as not important to the investigation.”
Nobody has said that the investigation should have disregarded the conductor or the result of his drug test. Nobody said that was not important. But you began your argument by claiming that the engineer and the conductor were responsible for the wreck. That is the point on which I disagree with you.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.