OK, one year and 4 days - I'm a little late.
But referring back to this thread last May: http://cs.trains.com/trn/f/111/t/205704.aspx?sort=ASC&pi332=6
Mr. Bucyrus typed:
Bucyrus Gee, it almost sounds like a problem you don't want to solve. Maybe it is really not that big of a problem after all. Earlier, some had suggested that I was not taking the problem seriously enough. So now I get serious, and I am told that we just will live with this problem. It sounds almost like a pet. But technologically, it won't be hard to fix. I'll bet you that we actually hear about this breakthrough development within a year. It will be like a dead man control, but it will be far more sophisticated. It will be able to detect whether a person is sleeping, fatigued, exhausted, or tired. It is really not far fetched at all. I'll have to think of a good name for it.
Gee, it almost sounds like a problem you don't want to solve. Maybe it is really not that big of a problem after all. Earlier, some had suggested that I was not taking the problem seriously enough. So now I get serious, and I am told that we just will live with this problem. It sounds almost like a pet.
But technologically, it won't be hard to fix. I'll bet you that we actually hear about this breakthrough development within a year. It will be like a dead man control, but it will be far more sophisticated. It will be able to detect whether a person is sleeping, fatigued, exhausted, or tired. It is really not far fetched at all. I'll have to think of a good name for it.
Emphasis mine - zug.
I replied that we'd revisit that thread in a year. Can't post to it anymore since it was locked, but that's irrelevant.
I haven't heard any breakthroughs in development of sleep management, though. Some small things were done on my road - like text message updates for those on extra lists, and 2 rest days per week (and guarantees) for the extra list guys, but neither one really that impressive.
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
Where's the discussion of USAF/SAC 'power naps' or wolf-naps when you need it?
I think the 'breakthrough approach' is already rolled into the implicit structure of PTC, with its emphasis on keep-you-irritated "vigilance controls" with enforced penalty braking or whatever if you're too sleepy to jump through the hoops in time.
Lots of work done on detecting driver fatigue on the road could be easily applied to this, too -- if the money's provided for it. Not rocket science to implement, either. But until the 'alert modality' is changed from buzzer-in-the-ear (and canned attractive voice in the ear is not different after the first few instances, like the supposedly-attractive ding-dong bells for subway doors or that lady who says last-minute stuff to airline pilots just before they crash) don't look for this approach to do much about the underlying problems. Not least among them, the substitution of learned reaction, or concentration of attention on the task of shutting up a vigilance system, for proper attentiveness in running trains.
The only real 'system' that addresses the underlying problem would be one that alerts the van people for a 'mandatory' crew change ASAP. That gets you into whole new worlds, not just cans, of worms...
As long as it does not involve one sleeping with goats in the fog...that's just fine by me...
Actually, it does seem that it is going to have to be piece meal approaches that will 'work'...whatever that means...
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/
Just to review:
I started that thread with the point that the NTSB had blamed the Iowa BNSF fatal rear end collision on sleep disorders without any proof; obviously using the crash to push an agenda. We had a very substantive 12-page discussion about the whole issue of sleep disorders and what policies and technology it would lead to. The thread was locked because it contained debate over controversial issues, and apparently some members reported abuse because others disagreed with their position on the issues.
There seemed to be a fair amount of resentment created by the topic, and this became manifested in nonsense, silly-talk posts for the purpose of distracting the discussion and getting the thread locked for degenerating into off-topic frivolity.
Overall, I see a fair amount of denial about the larger implication of what sleep disorders have evolved into, and how that limits the options for eliminating the peril caused by sleep disorders. It has grown into a very prickly problem. Thirty years ago, the remedy was sleep. Today, it has turned into a medical condition that has no clear remedy other than to take the employee out of train service and other positions where spontaneous sleep could be dangerous. It is a medical condition that has to be diagnosed and the diagnosis is highly complex and somewhat subjective. So I can see why anyone facing this prospect might feel threatened and in denial.
When the thread was locked I was told I could start another one, so I did. That thread is called Deadly Sleep Disorders 2.0
It is here: http://cs.trains.com/trn/f/111/t/206079.aspx?sort=ASC&pi332=1
The same resentment expressed in the first thread manifested in this second thread. Apparently some members really went over the top by insulting others, necessitating the deletion of the offending posts, and the thread was also locked. Apparently the reason for locking was simply the fear of the topic. There was no intrinsic reason to lock the thread since the offending posts had been removed. I never saw the offending posts, but was told about them by the editorial department when I inquired as to why the second thread had been locked.
Bucyrusand apparently some members reported abuse because others disagreed with their position on the issues.
I'll bet the same type people burn books in their (miserable) spare time.
Bucyrus Just to review: I started that thread with the point that the NTSB had blamed the Iowa BNSF fatal rear end collision on sleep disorders without any proof; obviously using the crash to push an agenda. We had a very substantive 12-page discussion about the whole issue of sleep disorders and what policies and technology it would lead to. I thoroughly resent the fact that the thread was locked because the action was unjustified by any forum rules. The thread was locked because it contained debate over controversial issues, and apparently some members reported abuse because others disagreed with their position on the issues. There seemed to be a fair amount of resentment created by the topic, and this became manifested in nonsense, silly-talk posts for the purpose of distracting the discussion and getting the thread locked for degenerating into off-topic frivolity. Overall, I see a fair amount of denial about the larger implication of what sleep disorders have evolved into, and how that limits the options for eliminating the peril caused by sleep disorders. It has grown into a very prickly problem. Thirty years ago, the remedy was sleep. Today, it has turned into a medical condition that has no clear remedy other than to take the employee out of train service and other positions where spontaneous sleep could be dangerous. It is a medical condition that has to be diagnosed and the diagnosis is highly complex and somewhat subjective. So I can see why anyone facing this prospect might feel threatened and in denial. When the thread was locked I was told I could start another one, so I did. That thread is called Deadly Sleep Disorders 2.0 It is here: http://cs.trains.com/trn/f/111/t/206079.aspx?sort=ASC&pi332=1 The same resentment expressed in the first thread manifested in this second thread. Apparently some members really went over the top by insulting others, necessitating the deletion of the offending posts, and the thread was also locked. Apparently the reason for locking was simply the fear of the topic. There was no intrinsic reason to lock the thread since the offending posts had been removed. I never saw the offending posts, but was told about them by the editorial department when I inquired as to why the second thread had been locked.
I started that thread with the point that the NTSB had blamed the Iowa BNSF fatal rear end collision on sleep disorders without any proof; obviously using the crash to push an agenda. We had a very substantive 12-page discussion about the whole issue of sleep disorders and what policies and technology it would lead to. I thoroughly resent the fact that the thread was locked because the action was unjustified by any forum rules. The thread was locked because it contained debate over controversial issues, and apparently some members reported abuse because others disagreed with their position on the issues.
So, no breakthrough developments like you bet were going to happen?
I never seen any of those huge developments here....
Oh...btw...any talk of insults or such...from EITHER side will result in deletion of said posts
If man has had side effects from lack of sleep since before he walked upright, it seems kind of bold to suggest that the problem could be overcome in less than a year using technology. Bucyrus seems to suggest that the answer would be some kind of system that monitors when the mind falls asleep, and - I don't know- sets off an alarm clock? Wouldn't such a system had to be bolted to the engineer's head? Bucyrus mentions that he has a vision of what works, but no name. May I suggest calling it the the Harrison Bergeron Bonnet?
Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.
Murphy Siding If man has had side effects from lack of sleep since before he walked upright, it seems kind of bold to suggest that the problem could be overcome in less than a year using technology. Bucyrus seems to suggest that the answer would be some kind of system that monitors when the mind falls asleep, and - I don't know- sets off an alarm clock? Wouldn't such a system had to be bolted to the engineer's head? Bucyrus mentions that he has a vision of what works, but no name. May I suggest calling it the the Harrison Bergeron Bonnet?
My idea seems better...the creation of a cyborg race that will take over the overnight jobs....
Yes, as I recall, I had predicted that the solution would be portable, compact, real-time fatigue monitor, and then zugmann said:
Serious? By proposing some magical bullet? And now you are proposing this bullet will be ready in a year?
Give me a break, Bucyrus. We're discussing actual proposals (And their downfalls) and all you can do is play make-believe with some magical invention.
Still, me and the rest of the operating guys will await eagerly for this magical bullet. Let's all come back to this thread in one year. How about it?
So in honor of zugmann, I dubbed the device the MAGIC BULLET.
So here you go. Here is the SmartCap, which seems to exactly correspond to my predicted MAGIC BULLET. It looks like it is way ahead of my one-year prediction. In the vehicle application, some of the components appear to be built into the vehicle, but I gather that the components could be carried by the wearer for non-vehicle applications such as for switchmen. Note the benefit of not requiring any scalp preparation.
http://www.smartcap.com.au/index.html
Quote from the link:
“The SmartCap, a baseball cap containing sophisticated sensors concealed in the cap lining, uses an operator’s brain wave (EEG) information to calculate a measure of drowsiness, which is wirelessly communicated to a display in-cab, or to any Bluetooth enabled device. This has been made possible by the development of small sensors capable of reading EEG through hair, without the need for any scalp preparation. With the look and feel of a typical baseball cap, the SmartCap overcomes the operator acceptance problems experienced by sites that in the past have implemented camera or response based technologies.”
“The SmartCap processes brain wave information and determines the wearer’s level of alertness every second.”
So it lets you know when you are tired. I don't need a cap for that.
Doesn't really solve the fatigue issue.
Bucyrus wins the prize! Hooked up to an alarm or possibly some throttle control, it would be an improved "deadman's control."
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
schlimm Bucyrus wins the prize! Hooked up to an alarm or possibly some throttle control, it would be an improved "deadman's control."
You've never had to go to work tired, Schlimm? What are we going to do - fire someone if they had trouble sleeping last night on their extra list schedule?
Still not a magic bullet. Neat toy. But the real question = what comes next? How is this implemented to ensure crews are rested?
So, now the engineer will have to wear a smart cap that knows when he's tired, or at least fatigued. Then what? Does it give him a good shock to wake him up? Or maybe it just beeps or buzzes? I suppose it could be customized- perhaps when the hat sense the engineer dozing off, it could play Smoke on the Water real loud. Then what happens? Like an alerter, does he have to push a button to make the music stop. (snooze button anyone?) Down the tracks he goes. Tired, fatigued from lack of sleep. Every few minutes of so, he hears Smoke on the Water really loud, yelps, and hits the snooze button. What we have is a startled, tired, fatigued engineer, with a growing hate for Deep Purple. Now, what can be done about fatigue and lack of sleep in train crews?Dunt-da-da, Dunt dot-dun-ah, Dunt-da-da ,,Du-na
I'm not too keen on wearing stuff that is watching my brain waves constantly .
Probably get cancer or something. Screw that.
zugmann schlimm Bucyrus wins the prize! Hooked up to an alarm or possibly some throttle control, it would be an improved "deadman's control." You've never had to go to work tired, Schlimm? What are we going to do - fire someone if they had trouble sleeping last night on their extra list schedule? Still not a magic bullet. Neat toy. But the real question = what comes next? How is this implemented to ensure crews are rested?
Zugman and Murphy Siding,
You are missing the point by downplaying the sleep disorder issue as simply being tired on the job. It is not about working while tired or fatigued. It is about spontaneously falling asleep despite even vigorous levels of activity, without any warning, and sometimes with no pre-awareness of drowsiness or other signs that sleep is imminent. It is not necessarily related to a lack of sleep, being tired, or feeling fatigue. Instead, it is due to a medical condition developed over time by nightshift work. And more explicitly, it is a medical condition that amounts to a natural predisposition to being susceptible to this influence of nightshift work. That is the sleep disorder problem as it has evolved to exist today.
In last year’s locked thread, I predicted that the problem will be solved technologically rather than by experience diagnosis and treatment. I said this:
The more I think about it, I see this problem being addressed with a technological solution. Re-structuring the work so that everybody works regular shifts is just way too much to bite off. And even if you did all that, you would still have people working nightshifts, so the problem will persist from that cause alone. You could spend a fortune trying to diagnose who is and is not subject to sleep disorders, and then medically treating those people affected. And even all that is not going to be a surefire remedy.
No, what is needed is a personal monitoring system. The battle needs to be fought right where the employee falls asleep on the job. It would be like a personal dead man control. It won’t prevent people from falling asleep. But it will prevent them from getting killed if they do fall asleep. We are right at the doorstep of this technologically, so it should not be any big deal to perfect. End of problem.
The baseball cap monitor is exactly what I was referring to in the second paragraph. It will do two things:
1) It will give a warning that will trigger an automatic or supervisor response to immediately take the employee out of danger.
2) It will develop a profile to show which employees are susceptible to sleep disorders produced by nightshift work, so they can be successfully treated or taken out of services where sleep disorder could pose a safety risk.
Item #2 is very important because it will replace the current only available approach to diagnosis, which is complex and partly subjective testing and questioning of employees about their sleep habits, lifestyle, diet, work experience, etc.
The main point of this technological breakthrough is that it is carried on the person. You could almost call it a Pocket Trainmaster.
Equip all engines with a stripper on Crystal Meth.. no one will fall asleep..
Randy Stahl Equip all engines with a stripper on Crystal Meth.. no one will fall asleep..
How about a stripper named Crystal Meth?
Bucyrus Zugman and Murphy Siding, You are missing the point by downplaying the sleep disorder issue as simply being tired on the job. It is not about working while tired or fatigued. It is about spontaneously falling asleep despite even vigorous levels of activity, without any warning, and sometimes with no pre-awareness of drowsiness or other signs that sleep is imminent. It is not necessarily related to a lack of sleep, being tired, or feeling fatigue. Instead, it is due to a medical condition developed over time by nightshift work. And more explicitly, it is a medical condition that amounts to a natural predisposition to being susceptible to this influence of nightshift work. That is the sleep disorder problem as it has evolved to exist today. In last year’s locked thread, I predicted that the problem will be solved technologically rather than by experience diagnosis and treatment. I said this: Bucyrus The more I think about it, I see this problem being addressed with a technological solution. Re-structuring the work so that everybody works regular shifts is just way too much to bite off. And even if you did all that, you would still have people working nightshifts, so the problem will persist from that cause alone. You could spend a fortune trying to diagnose who is and is not subject to sleep disorders, and then medically treating those people affected. And even all that is not going to be a surefire remedy. No, what is needed is a personal monitoring system. The battle needs to be fought right where the employee falls asleep on the job. It would be like a personal dead man control. It won’t prevent people from falling asleep. But it will prevent them from getting killed if they do fall asleep. We are right at the doorstep of this technologically, so it should not be any big deal to perfect. End of problem. The baseball cap monitor is exactly what I was referring to in the second paragraph. It will do two things: 1) It will give a warning that will trigger an automatic or supervisor response to immediately take the employee out of danger. 2) It will develop a profile to show which employees are susceptible to sleep disorders produced by nightshift work, so they can be successfully treated or taken out of services where sleep disorder could pose a safety risk. Item #2 is very important because it will replace the current only available approach to diagnosis, which is complex and partly subjective testing and questioning of employees about their sleep habits, lifestyle, diet, work experience, etc. The main point of this technological breakthrough is that it is carried on the person. You could almost call it a Pocket Trainmaster.
Bucyrus, I've spent my time on the extra list. How about you?
IS she the one with a sister named Ann Fetomine?
R
zugmann I'm not too keen on wearing stuff that is watching my brain waves constantly . Probably get cancer or something. Screw that.
I mean, even if you are perfectly rested before you go on duty, 12 hours of staring at stop signals, or switching around 100 cars, or walking a 2 mile train 3 times a trip - you will not stay chipper all shift.
So setting aside all the distracting noise in some responses, what is the real objection here to a device like this, if it were refined as I suggested was needed?
schlimm So setting aside all the distracting noise in some responses, what is the real objection here to a device like this, if it were refined as I suggested was needed?
To whose standards is "fatigued" or "tired"?
And if the standards are too strict, who is going to move the trains when everybody is out of service? Plus I'm not too keen on medical thingies stuck to my head taking note of my brain waves. Those are my brainwaves!
Unlike most distracting noise on this forum I actually have 26 years of railroad service (and counting), keep this in mind....
Randy Stahl Unlike most distracting noise on this forum I actually have 26 years of railroad service (and counting), keep this in mind....
Are you counting down the days yet? Or did you move onto the hours?
I started young (18) I'm not even 50 yet so I got a long way to go. If it wasn't for furloughs and layoffs I'd have my 30 years in June.... I'll retire with 45 years of service god willing.
The solution to the fatigue problem ? Shorter runs and more people.. .simple. The railroads own you for 12 hours and they will use you all 12 period. Limbo time bla bla.. it all comes down to not sleeping in your own bed or eating right. Its not technology, its biology
Randy
People? We still need those things?
By the time I'm ready to retire, I'm sure the remote engines will become aware and form their own species. Then they'll probably go get jobs with regular hours.
Randy Stahl I started young (18) I'm not even 50 yet so I got a long way to go. If it wasn't for furloughs and layoffs I'd have my 30 years in June.... I'll retire with 45 years of service god willing. The solution to the fatigue problem ? Shorter runs and more people.. .simple. The railroads own you for 12 hours and they will use you all 12 period. Limbo time bla bla.. it all comes down to not sleeping in your own bed or eating right. Its not technology, its biology Randy
To make you feel better, If all goes well, and I don't stumble in another line of work, I'll need 30 more to retire. If they keep 30/60.
60 isn't really the magic number ..30/ 60 means you can draw full pension but... you gotta buy your own insurance until you are 63 and can draw medicare...
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.