BaltACD DwightBranch: What I can't get past is that the conductor on the westbound had time to bail even though the wreck happened only half a mile past the east end switch where the eastbound was meant to stop. If the conductor would realize that the eastbound was not stopping ONLY when it ran past the switch (at 65 according to the witness) it barely gives the conductor 30 seconds to a) overcome his shock and decide to bail b) open the door (presumably the one behind the engineer) c) run down the gangway d) jump off a moving train f) get up and run far enough to not be underneath the pile. I just cannot believe that all happened in 30 seconds. And so I wonder if there wasn't more warning. Brake failure on the eastbound when they approached east end switch, and they radioed the westbound? Or was the witness way off? I doubt the speed limit in that town was 65 (probably 35 or so) so I don't know how he could be pacing a train through there at 68 as he said. Who says he ran to the engine steps - might have dove right from the door. I am certain the closest we will ever come to what happend and why will come from the NTSB investigation.
DwightBranch: What I can't get past is that the conductor on the westbound had time to bail even though the wreck happened only half a mile past the east end switch where the eastbound was meant to stop. If the conductor would realize that the eastbound was not stopping ONLY when it ran past the switch (at 65 according to the witness) it barely gives the conductor 30 seconds to a) overcome his shock and decide to bail b) open the door (presumably the one behind the engineer) c) run down the gangway d) jump off a moving train f) get up and run far enough to not be underneath the pile. I just cannot believe that all happened in 30 seconds. And so I wonder if there wasn't more warning. Brake failure on the eastbound when they approached east end switch, and they radioed the westbound? Or was the witness way off? I doubt the speed limit in that town was 65 (probably 35 or so) so I don't know how he could be pacing a train through there at 68 as he said.
What I can't get past is that the conductor on the westbound had time to bail even though the wreck happened only half a mile past the east end switch where the eastbound was meant to stop. If the conductor would realize that the eastbound was not stopping ONLY when it ran past the switch (at 65 according to the witness) it barely gives the conductor 30 seconds to a) overcome his shock and decide to bail b) open the door (presumably the one behind the engineer) c) run down the gangway d) jump off a moving train f) get up and run far enough to not be underneath the pile. I just cannot believe that all happened in 30 seconds. And so I wonder if there wasn't more warning. Brake failure on the eastbound when they approached east end switch, and they radioed the westbound? Or was the witness way off? I doubt the speed limit in that town was 65 (probably 35 or so) so I don't know how he could be pacing a train through there at 68 as he said.
Who says he ran to the engine steps - might have dove right from the door. I am certain the closest we will ever come to what happend and why will come from the NTSB investigation.
I don't think UP has any units with doors that lead to the ground, just a nose door to the pilot (or on an older unit, the fireman's side door that leads down to the pilot, with a railing on the side), and the door behind the engineer, which would require climbing over the side railing. The only units I can think of with doors that lead to the ground are Amtrak units or old cowl or carbody units, and UP only has those old E9s which wouldn't be used here.
I found this forum on Sunday night, since I was completely dissatisfied with the vague news accounts of the Goodwell collision. I figured the had to be a bunch of railroad guys yakking about it somewhere.
I have a much better comprehension of the contours of the event after reading the entire thread here, which is what I wanted. The final NRA and NTSB reports don't interest me right now, though I assume they will be definitive and comprehensive. (I may conclude otherwise when I read it, of course.)
I appreciate everyone's opining, analyzing, concluding,speculating, and even guessing. This is a discussion forum, not a formal investigative setting. It's rather interesting to piece the thing together with so much input from so many different folks. I hope there is no move to censor the posters in this thread.
I gotta think that the eastbound crew was not conscious. And I think the survivor will greatly illuminate the picture, as soon as he gets turned loose.
DwightBranch I don't think UP has any units with doors that lead to the ground, just a nose door to the pilot (or on an older unit, the fireman's side door that leads down to the pilot, with a railing on the side), and the door behind the engineer, which would require climbing over the side railing. The only units I can think of with doors that lead to the ground are Amtrak units or old cowl or carbody units, and UP only has those old E9s which wouldn't be used here.
In no way am I meaning anything immediately behind the door leads safely to the ground - it leads to the walkway and going over or under the walkway railing leads to the ground - when you absolutely, positively have to leave the locomotive in the shortest amount of time - that is the only option.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
Bucyrus Zardoz, The sleep disorder connection to this thread started in the post above. Several objected to the poster saying the crew was asleep with no way to know if it were true. I mentioned that the NTSB said the crew of the BNSF coal train in last year's Iowa collision was alseep with no way to know if it were true.
Zardoz,
The sleep disorder connection to this thread started in the post above. Several objected to the poster saying the crew was asleep with no way to know if it were true. I mentioned that the NTSB said the crew of the BNSF coal train in last year's Iowa collision was alseep with no way to know if it were true.
Dwight,
Have you ever ridden in any locomotive?
Dude, I can be out the door, on the ground and moving in less than 10 seconds...who needs steps if the choice is hitting another locomotive?
It's about 6 feet from the front platform or side platform to the ground.
As for the speed stated, the witness was a truck driver, pretty sure he was right about the speed, he stated he paced trains there all the time, and looking at the aerial view, that's a state highway, so you can assume the speed limit was at least 60mph, even through town, a lot of our small towns here are like that.
23 17 46 11
Jumping off when a collision is impending would probably often be a hard decision to make. You might look at the ground speeding past, and ask if the crash is really going to happen. And people have ridden out the most horrendous crashes and walked away without a scratch. To be faced with a high-speed head on collision might leave a person in denial that it is really happening. But in many cases, it can be completely impulsive. I read a newspaper account of a head-on collision in 1891 near here. They were approaching on a tight curve. One train had eyes on both sides, so they saw it coming and jumped off. The other train had the fireman on the deck leaving the engineer on the blind side. When he first saw the opposing engine, it was only 100 feet away. He went right out the cab window.
I read about a fireman on a steamer pulling a fast passenger train on the D&RGW. They had a traveling engineer riding with them to learn why the train had not been making its time lately. He stood behind the engineer and urged him to run fast. They were approaching a sharp curve and the fireman told the engineer he’d better set some air because he would not make that curve at the speed they were traveling. The traveling engineer chewed out the fireman and told him to mind his own business.
So the fireman went back to the left side, through the gangway, dropped down the steps, and stepped off the engine, which was moving 70-80 mph. That required conviction. But he survived the punishment on his body. And he was right about the curve. The train hit the curve and jumped nearly across the Arkasas River, killing the engineer and the traveling engineer.
Bailed out at 19mph....
got three running steps in before momentum out paced my feet, did a roll or two, came up running and managed to get two tracks over and 5 car lengths behind the locomotive.
My helper, (brakeman) managed to get off ahead of me, he thinks he rolled a few times, he dosent really rember, he made it all the way across the street!
Engineer rode it out, didn't plug the train because he knew it would slide into a plant entrance crossing, so he did a brake reduction, was feathering the independent, and standing on his seat.
The pipe went through the floor, under the engineers seat pedestal, took out the A/C and most of the electrical cabinet.
Also tore up the sides of the cars in the team track next to us.
Second hand info and can't verify accuracy, the conductor went under the walkway railing behind the cab at an estimated train speed of about 30mph. The engineer was preparing to follow (I don't know what that means exactly. Could be he got up from the seat, was at the door, or even on the walkway.) but was too late and got caught by the impact.
Jeff
edblysard Dwight, Have you ever ridden in any locomotive?
Sad to say I spent two years riding around on a yard engine in Bloomington IL, first on one of these and then on one of these when the line was sold to a regional (though the photo doesn't show their normal PC black, rust and leaking lube oil paint scheme). My last two years as an undergraduate, I was more interested in trains than college life. The crew and I new each other well (old GM&O guys close to retirement), there was almost no supervision on either railroad, and so spent almost every weekday as a "fireman" in Bloomington Yard, if I tried that now UP would have me arrested. Oh if I could go back and change things, should have enjoyed being an undergrad more. But yes I know what it takes to get on and off an older unit, and I would guess it would be even harder now going through the nose.
FlaCat I found this forum on Sunday night, since I was completely dissatisfied with the vague news accounts of the Goodwell collision. I figured the had to be a bunch of railroad guys yakking about it somewhere. I have a much better comprehension of the contours of the event after reading the entire thread here, which is what I wanted. The final NRA and NTSB reports don't interest me right now, though I assume they will be definitive and comprehensive. (I may conclude otherwise when I read it, of course.) I appreciate everyone's opining, analyzing, concluding,speculating, and even guessing. This is a discussion forum, not a formal investigative setting. It's rather interesting to piece the thing together with so much input from so many different folks. I hope there is no move to censor the posters in this thread. I gotta think that the eastbound crew was not conscious. And I think the survivor will greatly illuminate the picture, as soon as he gets turned loose.
FlaCat - Welcome to trains.com!
Sorry for the delay in getting this post approved, had other issues I needed to attend to today...
Darren (BLHS & CRRM Lifetime Member)
Delaware and Hudson Virtual Museum (DHVM), Railroad Adventures (RRAdventures)
My Blog
From these threads the cause of the accident could be:
Missing a signal
Signal failure
Engineer asleep
Dispatch error
Did not enter passing siding
Dust storm/smole
Brake failure
Who knows what else.
Lets wait until the authorities in the know issue their report then we will know the probable cause and can stop all this speculation and wasting computer space.
ccltrains Lets wait until the authorities in the know issue their report then we will know the probable cause and can stop all this speculation and wasting computer space.
Nope..won't happen...somebody is going to claim they now more about the accident than the NTSB does....
Any argument carried far enough will end up in Semantics--Hartz's law of rhetoric Emerald. Leemer and Southern The route of the Sceptre Express Barry
I just started my blog site...more stuff to come...
http://modeltrainswithmusic.blogspot.ca/
edblysard Bailed out at 19mph.... got three running steps in before momentum out paced my feet, did a roll or two, came up running and managed to get two tracks over and 5 car lengths behind the locomotive. My helper, (brakeman) managed to get off ahead of me, he thinks he rolled a few times, he dosent really rember, he made it all the way across the street! Engineer rode it out, didn't plug the train because he knew it would slide into a plant entrance crossing, so he did a brake reduction, was feathering the independent, and standing on his seat. The pipe went through the floor, under the engineers seat pedestal, took out the A/C and most of the electrical cabinet. Also tore up the sides of the cars in the team track next to us.
Admittedly, the photos posted by Ed are nothing like the Goodwell Head-on, but they sure illustrate how circumstances (Fate?) and elements of luck play into incidents such as the one discussed here.
They would certainly qualify a person to comment on the dynamics involved (Thanks,ED!) And I'd bet some of the others who pass here and practice Railroading as their primary careers could cover us up with their own individual 'almosts' 'what ifs' and 'how lucky can one be?'
As many have stated, the tale will be told in the final reports from the NTSB, and FRA after their investigations. So right now all we really have is conjecture, and speculation, and the fact that circumstances got THREE MEN killed and one injured. We need to let the experts investigate and reach their conclusions, and NEVER FORGET that those there crewmen leave behind families who will miss them and grieve for their loss.
And hopefully, the answers provided by this incident will keep others safe on their jobs.
Please give the experienced people on here a little credit. There are a lot of current and former railroaders who know the "how" and the "what" ("why" might be a little tricky). Here's a reality check for you:
ccltrains From these threads the cause of the accident could be: Missing a signal Goes without saying. Why was the signal missed? Signal failure Already ruled out. Engineer asleep Or distracted, or otherwise incapacitated. And this would also apply to the conductor. Dispatch error The dispatcher could not have made this error in CTC territory--setting up conflicting movements is an impossibility. Clear signals between control points can be given in one direction only, at least when this section is occupied. Did not enter passing siding Totally irrelevant. There is only one track where the collision occurred. Which track the eastbound train was on at the siding west of the wreck wouldn't matter. Dust storm/smoke Possible, but unlikely. Pretty sure that such an occurrence would have made an impression on the truck driver who was pacing the eastbound. And how would that have caused the collision? A signal that is missing or defective must be regarded as a stop signal. Brake failure Without a doubt...the brakes failed to stop either train short of the collision. The reason for this failure is probably that they weren't applied in time. If there was a malfunction in the eastbound train's brake system, an alert engineer, would have known that by the time he passed the signal at the west end of the siding (which would have been giving him an approach indication for a stop at the other end). Had he been lined up to take the siding, he would have had to apply brakes sooner yet. Either way, he had the length of the siding (at least 90 seconds) and whatever distance beyond the siding to communicate. We haven't heard yet whether there was any radio "traffic" before the wreck, but I suspect that that would have been brought out already if it had taken place. Who knows what else. There could be other mechanical factors, which will probably be brought out when the event recorders are checked. I doubt that there will be any surprises. The surviving conductor will be able to give his version of events, but about the only thing they would add to the event recorders is a little idea of reaction time. If other freaky things come from the event recorders, those would probably be the basis for more operating or safety rules for already-overburdened operating personnel to think about. Lets wait until the authorities in the know issue their report then we will know the probable cause and can stop all this speculation and wasting computer space.
Goes without saying. Why was the signal missed?
Already ruled out.
Or distracted, or otherwise incapacitated. And this would also apply to the conductor.
The dispatcher could not have made this error in CTC territory--setting up conflicting movements is an impossibility. Clear signals between control points can be given in one direction only, at least when this section is occupied.
Totally irrelevant. There is only one track where the collision occurred. Which track the eastbound train was on at the siding west of the wreck wouldn't matter.
Dust storm/smoke
Possible, but unlikely. Pretty sure that such an occurrence would have made an impression on the truck driver who was pacing the eastbound. And how would that have caused the collision? A signal that is missing or defective must be regarded as a stop signal.
Without a doubt...the brakes failed to stop either train short of the collision. The reason for this failure is probably that they weren't applied in time. If there was a malfunction in the eastbound train's brake system, an alert engineer, would have known that by the time he passed the signal at the west end of the siding (which would have been giving him an approach indication for a stop at the other end). Had he been lined up to take the siding, he would have had to apply brakes sooner yet. Either way, he had the length of the siding (at least 90 seconds) and whatever distance beyond the siding to communicate. We haven't heard yet whether there was any radio "traffic" before the wreck, but I suspect that that would have been brought out already if it had taken place.
There could be other mechanical factors, which will probably be brought out when the event recorders are checked. I doubt that there will be any surprises. The surviving conductor will be able to give his version of events, but about the only thing they would add to the event recorders is a little idea of reaction time. If other freaky things come from the event recorders, those would probably be the basis for more operating or safety rules for already-overburdened operating personnel to think about.
Again, this is a discussion, not the investigation. We all know that. I'll be as interested as anyone else in what comes out. But to just hear the events unfold and think or say nothing wouldn't be right. And some of us have an idea of what railroads are like. The wrecks I've seen or been involved in didn't have much to do with head-on collisions, but I've learned (sometimes the hard way!) about the investigative process.
Edit: Many pages ago on this thread, I mentioned that I'd bet that they'd find the east siding switch trailed through. This hasn't been mentioned yet, but you can bet that someone knows the answer by now.
Carl
Railroader Emeritus (practiced railroading for 46 years--and in 2010 I finally got it right!)
CAACSCOCOM--I don't want to behave improperly, so I just won't behave at all. (SM)
From the railroad sources I know, the following was ascertained regarding the collision.
1. The eastbound Z-train was to hold the main at E. Goodwell on a stop signal to meet the westbound autorack train that would take the siding. The switch at E. Goodwell was already lined against the Z-train for the siding. (siding length: 9,070')
2. The crew of the Z-train, for whatever reason, ignored both the approach signal at W. Goodwell and the stop signal at E. Goodwell. It went through town at approximately 68mph (track speed is 70mph for intermodals); this was confirmed by a truck driver "pacing" on adjacent Hwy. 54. The connection rods between the switchpoints and the switch machine at E. Goodwell were damaged after the Z-train forced the switchpoints back into alignment for the mainline.
3. Approximately one mile east of E. Goodwell, it collided at speed with the autorack train who was already slowing down to below 30mph in anticipation of taking the siding at Goodwell. The conductor on that train jumped off; the engineer tried to do so after setting the emergency brakes, but didn't make it in time.
From this point, the speculation begins. What happened to the crew on the Z-train. Why did the alerter in the lead unit not kick in and stop the train; it's designed to do just that after 15-20 seconds if the engineer doesn't do something to the controls or push the alerter cancel button. (which will go off again after another 15-20 seconds of inactivity) The NTSB has supposedly recovered a "black box" from the lead unit of the Z-train that will hopefully contain undamaged video footage showing exactly what happened along with whether the crew even put on the brakes before the collision.
In the meantime, my condolences go to the three crew members who died in the collision. Maybe one of these days, PTC or some other technology will prevent this from happening again.
Joe H. (Milepost S256.0; NS Griffin District)
Pictures: http://anb740.rrpicturearchives.net
Youtube: http://www.youtube.com/anb740
anb740 From the railroad sources I know, the following was ascertained regarding the collision. 1. The eastbound Z-train was to hold the main at E. Goodwell on a stop signal to meet the westbound autorack train that would take the siding. The switch at E. Goodwell was already lined against the Z-train for the siding. (siding length: 9,070') 2. The crew of the Z-train, for whatever reason, ignored both the approach signal at W. Goodwell and the stop signal at E. Goodwell. It went through town at approximately 68mph (track speed is 70mph for intermodals); this was confirmed by a truck driver "pacing" on adjacent Hwy. 54. The connection rods between the switchpoints and the switch machine at E. Goodwell were damaged after the Z-train forced the switchpoints back into alignment for the mainline. 3. Approximately one mile east of E. Goodwell, it collided at speed with the autorack train who was already slowing down to below 30mph in anticipation of taking the siding at Goodwell. The conductor on that train jumped off; the engineer tried to do so after setting the emergency brakes, but didn't make it in time. From this point, the speculation begins. What happened to the crew on the Z-train. Why did the alerter in the lead unit not kick in and stop the train; it's designed to do just that after 15-20 seconds if the engineer doesn't do something to the controls or push the alerter cancel button. (which will go off again after another 15-20 seconds of inactivity) The NTSB has supposedly recovered a "black box" from the lead unit of the Z-train that will hopefully contain undamaged video footage showing exactly what happened along with whether the crew even put on the brakes before the collision. In the meantime, my condolences go to the three crew members who died in the collision. Maybe one of these days, PTC or some other technology will prevent this from happening again.
Thanks for the info, I think all of us don't want to jump to conclusions until the facts are in (that is how mistakes are made in investigations) but everything you say makes sense.
It appears that soome form of ATS or ATC could mitigate these types of head ons. Metrolink certainly bit the bullet and installed ATS on all their owned track after Chatsworth.
blue streak 1 It appears that soome form of ATS or ATC could mitigate these types of head ons. Metrolink certainly bit the bullet and installed ATS on all their owned track after Chatsworth.
And ALL the carriers are presently involved in spending upwards of $20 BILLION to comply with the PTC mandate caused by Chatsworth.
Stated earlier as to what might have prevented this: P T C.
RIDEWITHMEHENRY is the name for our almost monthly day of riding trains and transit in either the NYCity or Philadelphia areas including all commuter lines, Amtrak, subways, light rail and trolleys, bus and ferries when warranted. No fees, just let us know you want to join the ride and pay your fares. Ask to be on our email list or find us on FB as RIDEWITHMEHENRY (all caps) to get descriptions of each outing.
anb740 From this point, the speculation begins. What happened to the crew on the Z-train. Why did the alerter in the lead unit not kick in and stop the train; it's designed to do just that after 15-20 seconds if the engineer doesn't do something to the controls or push the alerter cancel button. (which will go off again after another 15-20 seconds of inactivity) Maybe one of these days, PTC or some other technology will prevent this from happening again.
From this point, the speculation begins. What happened to the crew on the Z-train. Why did the alerter in the lead unit not kick in and stop the train; it's designed to do just that after 15-20 seconds if the engineer doesn't do something to the controls or push the alerter cancel button. (which will go off again after another 15-20 seconds of inactivity)
Maybe one of these days, PTC or some other technology will prevent this from happening again.
Better alerter technology might prevent this from happening again too.
In the thread called, Deadly Sleep Disorders 2.0, I linked a report on locomotive alerter technology. It covered something called “alerter naps” where it has been demonstrated that engineers can reset the alerter while sleeping, or so close to sleeping that they are oblivious to what is happening around them. Because resetting the alerter is so repetitive and so reflexive, it can be done while being nearly completely asleep.
henry6 Stated earlier as to what might have prevented this: P T C.
and if someone is NOT born - they won't die.
The carriers are complying with the unfunded mandate for minimally developed technology that is known as PTC to the tune of almost $20 BILLION of their own investment capital. It is tough to have spent and installed technology retroactively - especially technology that is still under development.
Bucyrus Because resetting the alerter is so repetitive and so reflexive, it can be done while being nearly completely asleep.
Because resetting the alerter is so repetitive and so reflexive, it can be done while being nearly completely asleep.
Bad design.
Yes, one could argue that, as an unintended consequence, the alerter actually creates a more dangerous situation than not having an alerter. This is because an engineer might assume that he can get rest, but the alerter will protect him by not let him really go to sleep.
FlaCat Bucyrus: Because resetting the alerter is so repetitive and so reflexive, it can be done while being nearly completely asleep. Bad design.
Bucyrus: Because resetting the alerter is so repetitive and so reflexive, it can be done while being nearly completely asleep.
Better than a deadman pedal.
-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/)
But is it better than a deadman pedal? I really don't know the answer, but I know that there is no routine involved with resetting a deadman pedal, so that dangerous element of resetting while half or more asleep does not exist.
But the question I can't answer is this:
Can an engineer sleep while holding down the deadman pedal? It seems like it would be possible, but I don't know.
Bucyrus But is it better than a deadman pedal? I really don't know the answer, but I know that there is no routine involved with resetting a deadman pedal, so that dangerous element of resetting while half or more asleep does not exist. But the question I can't answer is this: Can an engineer sleep while holding down the deadman pedal? It seems like it would be possible, but I don't know.
Question....is a Deadman Pedal like a brake pedal?
My view is that it might be possible...if one considers that someone can drive a long distance and not remember actually driving that long a distance..sort of like road hypnosis....
blownout cylinder Bucyrus: But is it better than a deadman pedal? I really don't know the answer, but I know that there is no routine involved with resetting a deadman pedal, so that dangerous element of resetting while half or more asleep does not exist. But the question I can't answer is this: Can an engineer sleep while holding down the deadman pedal? It seems like it would be possible, but I don't know. Question....is a Deadman Pedal like a brake pedal? My view is that it might be possible...if one considers that someone can drive a long distance and not remember actually driving that long a distance..sort of like road hypnosis....
Bucyrus: But is it better than a deadman pedal? I really don't know the answer, but I know that there is no routine involved with resetting a deadman pedal, so that dangerous element of resetting while half or more asleep does not exist. But the question I can't answer is this: Can an engineer sleep while holding down the deadman pedal? It seems like it would be possible, but I don't know.
Of course you can sleep while holding down the 'Dead Man's Pedal"... just put your tool box on it and you can go outside to sleep up on the roof if ya wants!
Maybe what is needed is for the alerter to be a multi-postion switch that must be moved to some random position specified by a display on the other side of the cab that only the 2nd crew member can see? Maybe two such devices so that the crew members have to be in verbal communication with each other to tell each other what position their own Alerter Switch must be moved to each time?
Even with only one crew member, he would have to walk to the other side of the cab to read the position to set the switch for his own side. He'd read on the right side to set the left side to "1" and go to the left side, set the switch to '1' and read to set the right side to "4" and return to the right side to set it to "4". Repeat this every couple of minutes? Maybe position the displays such that he does not have to actually walk but at least has to lean over to see the displays.
Semper Vaporo
Pkgs.
Yes, I understand that the dead man pedal can be defeated by jamming or weighting, but I am wondering if it can be held down with your feet while sleeping. I suppose that might be possible, but I don’t know. I guess I would have to research dead man pedal technology.
But my point was to compare the dead man pedal to the alerter with both being used as intended. However, even if you defeat the dead man pedal with jamming or weighting, you know you are on your own if you fall asleep. But the alterter provides a false sense of security. A person believes that he is fine if he is able to reset the alerter. And yet it is possible to run several miles resetting the alterter while being so near full sleep that you miss signals, and eventually run into another train. So, I conclude that unless it is easy to sleep while holding down the dead man pedal, the alerter is less reliable than the dead man pedal in preventing sleep accidents.
Alerter technology appears to be evolving away from simple time-and-reset like a snooze alarm, and toward directly monitoring the crew person to see if they are fatigued and tending to fall asleep. Not only would this stop the train so the person could be taken out of service, but it would single out persons needing sleep disorder diagnosis and treatment.
Bucyrus Yes, I understand that the dead man pedal can be defeated by jamming or weighting, but I am wondering if it can be held down with your feet while sleeping. I suppose that might be possible, but I don’t know. I guess I would have to research dead man pedal technology. But my point was to compare the dead man pedal to the alerter with both being used as intended. However, even if you defeat the dead man pedal with jamming or weighting, you know you are on your own if you fall asleep. But the alterter provides a false sense of security. A person believes that he is fine if he is able to reset the alerter. And yet it is possible to run several miles resetting the alterter while being so near full sleep that you miss signals, and eventually run into another train. So, I conclude that unless it is easy to sleep while holding down the dead man pedal, the alerter is less reliable than the dead man pedal in preventing sleep accidents.
A dead man's control will not stop a train if the engineer falls asleep. You can sleep all night long with your foot on the dead man's or with your hands on the controller on your subway train. If you die then your muscles will relax, you will fall off the chair, and you will release the dead man, otherwise, not.
ROAR
The Route of the Broadway Lion The Largest Subway Layout in North Dakota.
Here there be cats. LIONS with CAMERAS
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.