All human beings share a need for economic security. Every last one of us. But to suggest that employees of the National Safety Transportation Board fabricate results when those results do not in fact exist strikes me as a bit of a stretch.
John WR All human beings share a need for economic security. Every last one of us. But to suggest that employees of the National Safety Transportation Board fabricate results when those results do not in fact exist strikes me as a bit of a stretch.
Raw data can be represented to prove any and every side of a argument. Figures lie and liars figure.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
BaltACDw data can be represented to prove any and every side of a argument. Figures lie and liars figure.
Balt,
If we do not use data as the basis for our decisions on what shall we base those decisions?
John
John WR BaltACDw data can be represented to prove any and every side of a argument. Figures lie and liars figure. Balt, If we do not use data as the basis for our decisions on what shall we base those decisions? John
All decisions are suspect. Research who is making the decision and what their overriding agenda is when evaluating the decision and the data used to support the decision.
I didn’t say they were fabricating results, as you pointed out, there are no “results” to look at.
What I said is they have fabricated a problem from intentionally skewed and inclusive, selectively picked data that supports their position.
They have fabricated an “industry wide problem”, including a pre-determined blanket diagnosis of sleep disorders, based on a relatively small number of accidents when viewed against the sheer number of trains ran from origin to destination with no incidents.
In essence, they have made a mole hill into a mountain, not by miss representing the facts, but by simply omitting the remaining facts.
They only provide the part of the equation that benefits their agenda.
Truth is, outside of the rail fan community, most folks, unless they live nearby the accident, are totally unaware of train accidents.
Without looking on Google or Bing or whatever search engine you use, can you tell me about the last head on accident that happen in Texas?
Odds are no, you can’t.
Now, you can toss out the old Mark Twain quote all you want, but sometime numbers do present a real, very clear picture.
I can almost guarantee you that over 99% of the trains that started moving today reached their final destination, or ran the 12 hours allowed by law, and had zero accidents of any kind between the time the crew got on board and the time they tied it down or handed it off.
Be aghast at me implying that a government agency could bend or even break the law, but also bear in mind that today, the DOJ was ordered by the US Attorney General to start a criminal investigation of a fellow government agency, the IRS, for illegally targeting and overly aggressively auditing several nonprofit conservative fund raising groups because of said groups political inclination.
Oops….
And call me cynical, but I would almost make a bet that the most that comes out of that is the head of the IRS (a political appointee) is forced to resign, a few division managers get canned, one or two mid-level supervisors take a hit for the team and serve a few month in jail, and the issue goes away.
Another rule of government survival is don’t bite the hand (or agency) that feeds you.
23 17 46 11
Some researchers once proved, using accepted methods, that dimes cause cancer. Dimes were implanted into the abdominal cavities of research mice, and apparently enough cancer, or cancerous conditions, resulted that the researchers could make that claim.
Since no one had an agenda to get rid of dimes the exercise ended as little more than a novelty, but research has proved...
Larry Resident Microferroequinologist (at least at my house) Everyone goes home; Safety begins with you My Opinion. Standard Disclaimers Apply. No Expiration Date Come ride the rails with me! There's one thing about humility - the moment you think you've got it, you've lost it...
The NTSB has the promotion of safety as its goal but has little to no enforcement power. I suppose there are going to be more than a few cynical gripes and wisecracks about the latest suggestion from the NTSB that the BAC threshold for legally impaired driving be reduced to 0.05%. It is actually an excellent idea and I hope that it gets taken up by the legislatures of the several states.
tree68Some researchers once proved, using accepted methods, that dimes cause cancer. Dimes were implanted into the abdominal cavities of research mice, and apparently enough cancer, or cancerous conditions, resulted that the researchers could make that claim.
If they had used nickels, the rate might have been even larger!
Of course, if you can't explain how the cancer develops, studies like this are crapshoots. (And I don't really mean dice in the analogy.) I look at the whole lamentable history of the cyclamate ban (and the saccharin non-ban) in this general framework. Delaney was dumb (and, tying more or less directly back into the topic here, passed in the wave of revulsion over Radithor) -- but what would you replace it with?
Meanwhile, the pedantic scientist in me screams "in no way does this PROVE dimes cause cancer'. In order to make that claim absolutely, ALL the mice would have to develop cancerous conditions, in ways that could be associated with the purported cause. Even if using eased statistics: what percentage of the mice actually developed the condition -- taking out any 'adjustment for seriousness of the outcome' or other weasel words often found in risk-benefit analysis.. Also be interesting to see the sample size, heteroscedasticity observations, etc.
Now, I do think there is a much larger problem with fatigue, and even with sleeping crews, than the accident rate indicates. I have heard sleep horror stories from back when Railroad Magazine published them anecdotally. But to use this as a stalking horse to push PTC is not entirely kosher.
What I'm expecting to come next, frankly, is formal 'due-diligence' testing of employees for susceptibility to SA, and perhaps (although I don't want to design a protocol for it) susceptibility to SWSD in different ways. Closely followed by requiring, as a condition of employment, that CPAP be used, and that use verified, for all employees complaining of SA as a potential factor. And that reasonable accommodation, perhaps involving limits to dayparts for call, be "imposed" on all employees who are, or claim to be, susceptible to SWSD. The next step ... and it isn't a large one; NTSB was hinting at it in the BNSF MOW collision report ... is to monitor the employee's day-off and rest activities to ensure normalization of sleep-wake periods to preclude SWSD.
[I have been carefully staying off the subject of 5'4" 221-lb conductors on medication, but sooner or later the industry and the Government are going to have to address that sort of thing where safety is concerned.]
edblysardn essence, they have made a mole hill into a mountain, not by miss representing the facts, but by simply omitting the remaining facts.
Thank you for your clarification, Ed. Were I to encounter a situation where some facts are overemphasized and contrary facts are omitted "fabricate" is not the work I would use to describe the situation. I would describe it as "inaccurate." However you are not me and none of us are writing a PhD thesis here. You are certainly free to use your own words.
You are as familiar with the United States Government as I am and I would not presume to instruct you about the nature of our government. I agree with you that few people if any outside the rail fan community are aware of train accidents and I myself am unaware of the last head on collision by trains in the state of Texas.
Finally, your point that rail transportation is as safe as or safer than any other type is absolutely correct. And if the NSTB is to be true to its mission it should focus on the most dangerous type of transportation by far, over the road vehicles. This is true for sleep related issues and every other issue.
BaltACDAll decisions are suspect. Research who is making the decision and what their overriding agenda is when evaluating the decision and the data used to support the decision.
You give me a pretty daunting assignment, Balt. We are a big society. There are many levels and agencies of government making decisions that effect all of us. And there are many private agencies and companies that do so too. I doubt any of us can even begin to research all those decisions.
For all of that I completely agree with your basic principle that we should suspect everything and not accept it at face value. And we should read critically and question conclusions.
A person that does not spend enough time in bed during their rest period will be tired while on duty during their following shift.
A person that spends enough time in bed, but is disrupted to prevent adequate sleep during their rest period will likewise be tired on during their following shift.
Therefore, the industry does have an interest in monitoring employees during their rest period to make sure they get enough sleep.
But, as I understand it, sufficient sleep during the rest period will not preclude the contracting of SWSD. SWSD is caused by the disruption of circadian rhythms, and not by a lack of sleep.
However, a lack of sleep can be one of the symptoms of SWSD, so I suppose monitoring employee rest performance would help lead to a diagnosis of SWSD.
I guess employees will have to wear their SmartCap while sleeping in bed.
A 100% monitoring of employees’ brain waves 24 hours a day would certainly diagnose any type of sleep disorder that could put them in danger while on the job.
CSSHEGEWISCH I suppose there are going to be more than a few cynical gripes and wisecracks about the latest suggestion from the NTSB that the BAC threshold for legally impaired driving be reduced to 0.05%. It is actually an excellent idea and I hope that it gets taken up by the legislatures of the several states.
I agree completely, Mac.
Bucyrus A person that spends enough time in bed, but is disrupted to prevent adequate sleep during their rest period will likewise be tired on during their following shift.
This was one of schlimm's points about the practical effect of SA on railroading. Not the apnea, but the effect it has on effective sleep, is the problem. Treating the SA so as to give undisturbed sleep may solve the problem without recourse to fancy caps -- simply because there won't be increased risk of sleep disorder RESULTING from upset due to SA.
Not quite, as I understand it. It is the quality of the sleep, not just the 'amount', that is significant. Observation of sleep inertia alone will tell you that.
One problem here is that the Feds concentrate, in time-honored Progressive Era fashion, on one-size-fits-all (aka Procrustean!) regulation: a certain number of hours on, followed by required hours off, but with utterly no regard for the actual circadian rhythm or sensitivity to biorhythm upset of the people concerned.
One of the great red flags raised in the BNSF report was that the sleep/wake cycle on the engineer's days off "probably" did not match the sleep-wake cycle on the reported duty days. If someone is sensitive to SWSD, this is one of the worst of all possible behaviors -- whether or not the engineer had quality-of-life issues or wanted quality time with his family on his days off, the FACT remains that changing diurnal schedule in rapid fashion is about the worst thing someone susceptible to SWSD should do. I suspect this was in the BNSF 'fatigue training' but the engineer did not take that training, and apparently there is no requirement that any crew take it. In this particular respect, I would think it ESSENTIAL that every crew member at least understand the risk involved in shifting their sleep periods like that -- even if it would require severe effective sacrifice to family life or use of 'private time'.
Only circumstantially. You'd need to know to look at the cycle shift, not 'rest performance' -- in SWSD as I understand it, the "performance" degradation is the result, not something that can be observed in process.
It appeared to me, reading between the lines, that BNSF was at least making an attempt to call crews at the same time on sequential days. If a railroad is interested in a study of SWSD, we therefore have two distinct subtypes:
1) people who are sensitive to any sleep cycle different from a 'typical' diurnal one: up in the morning, active all day, sleep during dark nighttime;
2) people who are sensitive to CHANGING their sleep-wake cycle: this will be familiar as 'jetlag'. Note that in most cases the effects of the lag dissipate over a few hours or days as the 'internal' circadian rhythm resets to the new environmental cues.
This implies, to me, that you treat people who just can't get used to working nights from people who don't do well when switched back and forth between day to night without effective transition. Reasonable accommodation will be quite different for these two hypothetical groups.
Wouldn't make a bit of difference to what the railroads can permissibly monitor *as part of job requirement* Railroads would have to make a business case that detecting periods of non-quality sleep, or determining when sleep-wake cycles are shifting for some reason, are important to job performance, and are non-intrusive for purposes other than those. I think you can see where current events may be going: if you have a diagnosis of a 'preventable condition' that affects safety, the railroad may be justified in screening for it as a condition of employment, or engaging in forms of reasonable accommodation ... specifically including the accepting of some form of performance or sleep monitoring while on duty at 'risky' times.
Well, of course it would -- but how many railroaders would put up with that? Even if unobtrusively stuck inside a fashionable hat? I can see a program that provides additional incentive for people at risk to wear their hats on duty -- but I can see this easily devolving into a program that provides negative incentives for people who inherently behave 'unsafely' by showing up to work 'tired.' (If you think that is ridiculous, consider that New Jersey currently has a law on the books forbidding people to drive tired, which I believe has that time-honored old enforcement means that has been so fruitful for the anti-drunk-driving lobby.
What do the real railroaders on here think about their sleep patterns in relation to how they are called?
John WR CSSHEGEWISCH I suppose there are going to be more than a few cynical gripes and wisecracks about the latest suggestion from the NTSB that the BAC threshold for legally impaired driving be reduced to 0.05%. It is actually an excellent idea and I hope that it gets taken up by the legislatures of the several states. I agree completely, Mac. John
What about making the limit .01%? Would that be even better than .05%?
Bucyrus What about making the limit .01%? Would that be even better than .05%?
Apparently the US has one of the highest DWI thresholds in the world (other than those for whom alcohol is completely taboo), with the great majority of countries using the .05% threshold. On that point, reducing our level to .05% simply brings us in line with our counterparts.
In one respect, what this means is that news reports for the seriously drunk will indicate that their BAC was five times the legal limit, instead of three. I doubt it will have an effect on their level of consumption, though.
It does mean that someone with a drink or two faces the very real possibility of a DWI charge, instead of an impaired charge.
Just what effect a given amount of alcohol has on an individual is subject to debate. Those in favor of lowering the limit seem to have evidence that even a little alcohol is a significant contributor to the number of accidents that occur.
It's easy to argue that such measures will save lives and property - and they probably will. But there may be other costs. A restaurant, for instance, may decide that offering you the opportunity to have an adult beverage with your meal is no longer worth the risk (part of this effort involves knowing who got you drunk).
And in the end, the fellow who blows a .25% won't cut down his drinking at all.
You only have so much enforcement ability available. Using those resources to catch people whose impairment is insignificant to safety leaves fewer resources to catch people impaired to the point where it does compromise safety.
Lowering the threshold below the point where it begins to impact safety is a lot like red light cameras. They make lots of revenue for people who never have enough, but do little to make driving safer.
I understand the fact that bureaucracies are always looking for new reasons to justify their existence. And that does not necessarily mean that they are fabricating investigative factors that do not exist.
However, the NTSB has stated that the crewmembers lack of response leading to the Iowa crash was caused by those crewmembers having sleep disorders. This is pure speculation stated as fact. And it is in the context of what is held up to be an official investigation based on fact and not on speculation.
And it is very significant speculation because if the crewmember were asleep due to sleep disorders, the crash was not their fault. If the crewmembers were asleep due to a non-sleep-disorder cause, then the crash was their fault.
BucyrusHowever, the NTSB has stated that the crewmembers lack of response leading to the Iowa crash was caused by those crewmembers having sleep disorders. This is pure speculation stated as fact.
Bucyrus,
I'm not familiar with the report you refer to so I will not comment on it. John
http://www.ntsb.gov/doclib/recletters/2013/R-13-005-008.pdf
I like the hand held detection device…which would require the carriers to do a form of body and personal baggage (grip) search.
Just what I want, a pat down before I get on my train.
“Hey, who has the box of latex exam gloves?”
John WRI'm not familiar with the report you refer to so I will not comment on it.
Read it here, as Bucyrus posted it on Monday. Much of the foregoing discussion makes less sense if you have not read this in detail. It should not take you long.
I find it interesting that the SmartCap technology was already being marketed (in mining applications in Australia) well before the original post a year ago that inspired this thread. So an advanced form of solution to the "Magic Bullet" question was already developed, tested, and commercialized (for mining vehicles).
It would be interesting to see exactly how the Fatigue Processors are programmed, and what algorithm and weighting are used to produce the five levels. It's a little amusing to see that EdanSafe is proud of the claim that they can detect within 5 seconds when somebody takes their hat off...
I do note that the downloadable information file section has had reports on most of the connectivity 'pending' since February 2012. If anyone knows where these .pdfs actually can be downloaded, let me know. They also indicated they were developing a hardhat version of this cap. Be fun to see how advanced any marketing attempts in the United States might be...
Bob,
I looked at every report posted and every current investigation posted on the link you provided. I found no reference to anything happening in Iowa on the lists.
John WR Bob, I looked at every report posted and every current investigation posted on the link you provided. I found no reference to anything happening in Iowa on the lists. John
John, here ya go...
http://www.ntsb.gov/doclib/reports/2012/RAR1202.pdf
Odd how the NTSB states the engineer on the coal train had, for the previous 3 days, been awake during the day and slept at night, then went to work at night on the day of the accident, thus he was “possibly” fatigued due to the altered scheduled….yet the following paragraph on the conductor states she had worked nights the previous 4 days, was again working a night shift, yet somehow, because she had been working nights, her alertness level was low?
Also note that 1 minute 53 seconds before the collision, there was a throttle adjustment, so the engineer was awake then.
Two minutes before the collision, the alerter sounded, and was reset by depressing the reset button, so he was awake at least two minutes before the collision, awake enough to both reset the alerter and reduce the throttle.
John WRI looked at every report posted and every current investigation posted on the link you provided. I found no reference to anything happening in Iowa on the lists.
Funny, it worked for me. I just tested it again and it seems to be downloading correctly. Is anyone else having trouble with it?
The following is a quote from the accident report of the Iowa crash. It gives a lot of insight into the concern of the NTSB. From work load to cognitive demand; and from lighting, temperature, noise level, caffeine, to adrenaline changes due to stressors; and from time pressure, social friction to monotony and repetitive motion-- the NTSB is leaving no stone unturned.
The NTSB is aware, however, of some general limitations regarding the use of these models. For instance, in general, biomathematical models have been calibrated to represent a population average rather than real-time fatigue levels of a specific NTSB Railroad Accident Report 50
individual.62 It is unclear how individual differences (such as age, sex, and operating experience) may affect the output of these models. Additionally, biomathematical fatigue models predict risk factors for an average healthy person; thus, the output may not accurately predict the risks to a crewmember who may have medical conditions or otherwise not be fully fit for duty. The NTSB further recognizes that biomathematical models may not consider all factors affecting fatigue such as workload (mental or physical, high or low cognitive demand), the operating environment (including lighting, temperature, and noise level), and pharmacological agents, for example, caffeine and changes in adrenaline levels due to stressors. Other factors that may not be represented in biomathematical models include stressors in the workplace (that is, time pressure, social friction) and aspects of the work (such as monotony and repetitive motion).63 Studies have pointed out the need for additional research to determine whether one or more of these work-related factors are important alone or in interaction with sleep/wake cycles and circadian dynamics, especially for risk-focused models.64 The NTSB notes that several studies have concluded that fatigue model predictions cannot be the sole means upon which fatigue risk management operational decisions are made.65 The NTSB concludes that because biomathematical models of fatigue are relatively new to the railroad industry, the use of this technology should be evaluated for its effectiveness within the context of railroads‘ fatigue management plans through independent scientific peer review. Therefore, the NTSB recommends that the FRA establish an ongoing program to monitor, evaluate, report on, and continuously improve fatigue management systems implemented by operating railroads to identify, mitigate, and continuously reduce fatigue-related risks for personnel performing safety-critical tasks, with particular emphasis on biomathematical models of fatigue.
BucyrusTherefore, the NTSB recommends that the FRA establish an ongoing program to monitor, evaluate, report on, and continuously improve fatigue management systems implemented by operating railroads to identify, mitigate, and continuously reduce fatigue-related risks for personnel performing safety-critical tasks, with particular emphasis on biomathematical models of fatigue.
I think, Bucyrus, that this is the sentence you find particularly objectionable.
I see it a little differently than you do. The NTSB says it will do nothing but it thinks someone else -- in this case the FRA -- should do something about the problem. However, the FRA sets its own agenda so whether or not is will is another question. In any event, the NTSB indicates no interest and what the FRA does or does not do.
You know more about this than I do. I have never heard of a "fatigue management system." Do you know what they mean?
I am about to retire to my own personal fatigue management system. I call it going to bed. I hope you don't loose any sleep over it.
In the report, I recall that the alerter was nearly at the end of its quiet interval, and was scheduled to sound something like 7 seconds after the time of impact. So the timing of the circumstance was relatively unfavorable by allowing almost the maximum quite cycle ahead of the point where the engineer’s action was called for. It is just a matter of chance, but a different position of the alerter cycle in relation to the crash might have prevented the crash.
It will be interesting to see how much time transpired between the last alerter reset and the time of impact in the Goodwell, Oklahoma collision. One would expect a relatively long time interval. What would the NTSB conclude if the alterter was reset 5-10 seconds before impact?
I think I figured out what the agenda is here - get rid of night-time trains. If there were no night trains, sleep cycles would not be disrupted, there would be no night-time noise issues/complaints, and there would always be daylight to work in (night operations, especially switching, are pretty dangerous).
You may think this sounds silly, but the folks in the ivory towers have been known to come up with sillier ideas...
My mother (86, bless her soul) gave up driving some years ago because she discovered that she would "zone out" while driving - however, it had nothing to do with sleep. She would simply, occasionally blank out. She may have had an accident as a result - none of us really know for sure. I was never riding with her when it happened, but she was riding with me one time and announced, out of the blue, that she had just done so. I hadn't noticed anything, aside from the fact that she hadn't said anything for a brief, which was not unusual. As we have already discussed, it's entirely possible that a person could do some rote action, like clearing the alerter, while in such a trance.
We also can't rule out the possibility of simple daydreaming. I've done it myself - get so wrapped up in whatever I'm thinking about that I realize that I have no recollection of passing a certain point, or something similar. In all likelihood, "the cap" would not alert on that situation - the brain would be showing waking activity.
Even a well-rested person could get so wrapped up in their thoughts that they would lose touch with their surroundings, all the while doing what had to be done (resetting the alerter, making control adjustments, etc). If they are very familiar with the line they are running, and there are no operational distractions (ie, train handling badly), the situation would be that much worse.
I was wonder the same thing….given the rear of the work train was under the overpass, in a slight curve, and a flat car at that, by adding in the possibility that the engineer was “zoned out” he simply may not have recognized that what he was looking at was the rear of the other train. He quite simply might not have seen it for what it was. And I agree, part of the NTSB agenda seems to be doing away with night time railroading.
edblysard And I agree, part of the NTSB agenda seems to be doing away with night time railroading.
That does seem to be the case. The way they have framed the total problem of sleep disorders, eliminating nightshift work would probably be the cheapest solution.
It is interesting because the choice of eliminating night work versus the intrusiveness (and job insecurity) of employee monitoring would be as clear as a bell in terms of preference by labor.
Ramu is getting TIRED of the discussion.
LION is always tired. Him can curl up and go to sleep right next to any work that tries of involve him.
Bottom Line: They will automate the railroad long before they will be able to keep people from falling asleep, especially at night.
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.