After following this and several other threads, I've been dismayed by the adversial reactions of multiple forum members to the actions and reports of the National Transportation Safety Board. The role of the NTSB is that of accident prevention and the promotion of safe operation in various transport modes. It has little to no enforcement power and its reports are not admissible in court. It has no axe to grind and judging by the reactions on this forum, is not afraid to ruffle feathers.
Why is safety so controversial??
CSSHEGEWISCH After following this and several other threads, I've been dismayed by the adversial reactions of multiple forum members to the actions and reports of the National Transportation Safety Board. The role of the NTSB is that of accident prevention and the promotion of safe operation in various transport modes. It has little to no enforcement power and its reports are not admissible in court. It has no axe to grind and judging by the reactions on this forum, is not afraid to ruffle feathers. Why is safety so controversial??
Because jumps to conclusions do not safety make.
I take issue with anybody just making up a result that fits an agenda. In this case, accusing a dead crew of sleeping when we know for a fact at least one was awake 1:11 prior to the wreck. Were they sleeping? Who knows - but they have no way of knowing that.
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
I don’t think anybody is opposed to safety. Certainly no railroaders are opposed to safety. And because nobody can be opposed to safety, it can encourage opportunistic overreach in the name of safety. I think some railroaders are wary of that especially if it entails a sort of “big brother” intrusiveness into their private lives in a way that can threaten their employment.
For instance, the unions on behalf of workers, do not want inward facing cameras because they worry that the personal information might be used unfairly. The NTSB does want them in the name of safety. How do you feel about inward facing cameras?
BucyrusTherefore, if the engineer of the striking train collided with the train ahead because he was asleep, he had 1 minute 11 seconds to fall asleep.
This is not so. He could have been asleep for a half an hour or more. It is not problem at all to operate a locomotive in your sleep.
On NYCT that throttle in front of you has a built in dead man's switch. I can assure you that it will not stop your train if you just fall asleep. You do not loose your muscle tone while you sleep.
I have a teddy bear and I hold on to him every night. No matter how I toss and turn during the night, the bear stays in my arm where I put him all night long.
Now think about your train. How hard is it to touch the alerter with your eyes closed. How hard is it to make minor throttle adjustments with your eyes closed. The sad truth is you CAN operate a train in your sleep, and if you *can* do it then it *does* happen.
It is YOUR OWN LIFE in that cab, you darn well better do it right. To bad you cannot stand up, brew some coffee, or do other normal human things while you are running a locomotive. You have TWO people in there, the BOTH should be qualified to run the locomotive, and they should spell each other every 30 to 60 minutes or so.
ROAR
The Route of the Broadway Lion The Largest Subway Layout in North Dakota.
Here there be cats. LIONS with CAMERAS
BroadwayLionBucyrusTherefore, if the engineer of the striking train collided with the train ahead because he was asleep, he had 1 minute 11 seconds to fall asleep. This is not so. He could have been asleep for a half an hour or more. It is not problem at all to operate a locomotive in your sleep. Now think about your train. How hard is it to touch the alerter with your eyes closed. How hard is it to make minor throttle adjustments with your eyes closed. The sad truth is you CAN operate a train in your sleep, and if you *can* do it then it *does* happen.
I believe it is accurate to say that he had 1 minute 11 seconds to fall asleep. I understand your point that he did have more time if he was able to reset the alerter while asleep. And I understand your point that it is possible to reset the alerter while nearly asleep.
But I associate sleep with a complete suspension of cognitive or conscious action, so I don't know if it is technically possible to reset the alerter while fully asleep. After all, the alerter does alert. So when a person resets it, it is because the alerter alerted them to the need for reset. So it seems to me that there has to be some conscious action in the reset response.
The main characteristic that I associate with the action known as “sleeping on the alterter” is that a person is able to reset it and immediately fall back into total sleep. In the case of this collision, the engineer had 1 minute 11 seconds between the last throttle adjustment and the impact. Now we don’t know if something else might have occurred capable of waking him up during that span. If he happened to get stung by a wasp 41 seconds after resetting the throttle, then he had on 30 seconds to fall asleep before impact.
But, in any case, assuming no disturbance after the last throttle adjustment, the engineer did in fact have 1 minute 11 seconds to fall asleep. He may have had more, so maybe I should stipulate that he had 1 minute 11 seconds minimum.
Bucyrus CSSHEGEWISCH After following this and several other threads, I've been dismayed by the adversial reactions of multiple forum members to the actions and reports of the National Transportation Safety Board. The role of the NTSB is that of accident prevention and the promotion of safe operation in various transport modes. It has little to no enforcement power and its reports are not admissible in court. It has no axe to grind and judging by the reactions on this forum, is not afraid to ruffle feathers. Why is safety so controversial?? I don’t think anybody is opposed to safety. Certainly no railroaders are opposed to safety. And because nobody can be opposed to safety, it can encourage opportunistic overreach in the name of safety. I think some railroaders are wary of that especially if it entails a sort of “big brother” intrusiveness into their private lives in a way that can threaten their employment. For instance, the unions on behalf of workers, do not want inward facing cameras because they worry that the personal information might be used unfairly. The NTSB does want them in the name of safety. How do you feel about inward facing cameras?
In regards to the inward-facing cameras, what personal information? On the job one forfeits many rights to privacy we have as individuals. And again why is there such a tone of hostility toward regulations designed to improve safety?
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
Why?
Probably because so often what begins in the name of "safety" turns out to be or is twisted into just another disciplinary tool. That some safety procedures have holes in them big enough to run a train through them. That some things done in the name of safety don't really make anyone safer, it just gives the appearance of being proactive on safety. Then if you dare question some of the more questionable aspects, someone (especially on on forums like this one) will just say you aren't for safety.
Jeff
"Uphill slow, downhill fast. Tonnage first, horsepower last. The rail is bad, the ties are worse. What's all this about safety first?"
BucyrusBut I associate sleep with a complete suspension of cognitive or conscious action, so I don't know if it is technically possible to reset the alerter while fully asleep.
This is not about what you associate with sleep. It is a matter of being impaired while operating the locomotive. Sleep or even drowsiness is an impairment to safe operation. Tired people are subject to "Micro-Bursts of Sleep" as long as ten seconds or so. These can be dangerous, because you may not know that you are having them.
Without enough sleep, people are in danger while completing their day to day tasks. Drinking and driving is as dangerous as staying awake too long and driving. Using machinery at all can be hazardous on little sleep. Without the right quantity of sleep, reaction times become slower. Inappropriate sleep can occur when someone is excessively overtired. This often means microbursts of sleep that last up to 10 seconds. During those seconds, injuries occur. In the United States, lack of sleep causes 71,000 injuries on the highways. Fatigue regularly causes 1,500 deaths in highway accidents.
BroadwayLion BucyrusBut I associate sleep with a complete suspension of cognitive or conscious action, so I don't know if it is technically possible to reset the alerter while fully asleep. This is not about what you associate with sleep. It is a matter of being impaired while operating the locomotive. Sleep or even drowsiness is an impairment to safe operation. Tired people are subject to "Micro-Bursts of Sleep" as long as ten seconds or so. These can be dangerous, because you may not know that you are having them.
Yes, I understand, but my statement that you said was "not so" was a statement about sleep. It was not about being drowsy or tired.
I said this: "Therefore, if the engineer of the striking train collided with the train ahead because he was asleep, he had 1 minute 11 seconds to fall asleep."
I only made the statement in response to the question posed as to how someone could fall asleep so fast after making a conscious decision to change the throttle setting. My only point was to clarify exactly how much time was available to fall asleep.
BroadwayLionThis is not about what you associate with sleep. It is a matter of being impaired while operating the locomotive.
Lion,
In point 4 of their conclusion the NTSB simply says that the engineer and conductor had "fallen alseep." That is not a technical or scientific phrase but ordinary English which suggests it should be understood as we would understand it in conversation. Nor is any specific definition of the phrase given. There is no clarification about "impairment" or "microbursts" or anything else. Considering that within 2 minutes the engineer was awake and alert enough to adjust the throttle and to press the alerter button, I do wonder about the short period of time between being awake and being asleep.
What I do here and all that is do is to try to understand what the NTSB means in their report. I wish they had addressed just what they mean by saying the engineer and conductor had both "fallen asleep" in a very short time.
John
John WRWhat I do here and all that is do is to try to understand what the NTSB means in their report. I wish they had addressed just what they mean by saying the engineer and conductor had both "fallen asleep" in a very short time.
As I said: It is possible to run a train in your sleep. You can move the throttle or push the alerter without ever opening your eyes or being aware of what is around you , or what you are doing. Reflex actions do not require input from the brain, only from the spinal column.
BroadwayLionAs I said: It is possible to run a train in your sleep. You can move the throttle or push the alerter without ever opening your eyes or being aware of what is around you , or what you are doing.
If the NTSB believes that is what happened it would be helpful if they would write that in their report.
This thread is interesting in that it is easy to tell who is a railroader and who is not (although others that work on-call and irregular schedules will fit more into the rail camp), just by their pontifications.
LION is an RN and has worked shifts, and mostly nights. Him has some sleep issues, and can be tired even after getting up. Him must be very careful while driving, and keeps energy drinks handy. Not that caffeine will do much to keep a LION awake. Him goes to bed with a bottle of Diet Pepsi in a special holder built onto the head of his bed. Him has long plastic straw so him need not get up to drink at night.
So, even if LION never drive a train, him *knows* what "sleepy" is all about. The Abbot thinks that his LION sleeps through some of our prayers, but him is actually awake even if he looks asleep. Sometimes he will even turn a page. And now, LION will get himself ready for bed. ZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
John WR BroadwayLionAs I said: It is possible to run a train in your sleep. You can move the throttle or push the alerter without ever opening your eyes or being aware of what is around you , or what you are doing. If the NTSB believes that is what happened it would be helpful if they would write that in their report.
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...
tree68I would opine that NTSB may not want that in their report as it may not square with where they'd like this to go. In fact, it might tend to imply that the problem is even bigger than anyone wants to admit...
I think you have a good point, Larry.
The NTSB also writes several paragraphs about "fatigue management" and gives a detailed history of the waking and sleeping periods for the 2 employees in the days before the accident. What the report fails to say is that the employer has a large amount of control over fatigue management because the employer can and does call people to work at any time with little notice. Employees cannot possibly manage their fatigue when they must respond to an employer calling them to work at will. Perhaps this is part of the problem that is "bigger than anyone wants to admit."
There is no question that you can reset the alerter and quickly fall asleep. And you can sleep right up to the next alerter alarm. So a person can sleep entirely through the time lapses between alerter alarms.
The only question this raises is whether the person sleeping up to and after the alerter alarm reset can actually sleep during the alarm reset. For the answer to that question, we need a definition of sleep.
It is one thing to sleep through the time lapse on either side of a reset; and another thing to sleep continuously through the time lapse and the reset.
But for all practical purposes, either process is problematic. Whether or not a person is actually awake during the reset is not particularly relevant if they are sleeping entirely through the quiet phases between alerts.
The fundamental problem with the alerter is that it creates a false sense of security, which can reassure an engineer that he does not have to struggle to stay awake if he is confident that nothing requiring his attention will arise within the next alerter cycle. Without an alerter, and engineer knows that falling asleep might suspend consciousness long enough get into a train handling situation that requires his response.
If an engineer is sleeping between alerts, and is awake during the reset, it suggests that the engineer would look around and assess the situation to make sure nothing requires his attention before going back to sleep.
However, the more time the engineer spends assessing the situation before going back to sleep, the shorter his next nap will be. So there is an incentive to just reset the alerter with as little sleep disruption as possible. In such a case, there would be a limited awareness during the reset even if one is awake.
I don't think it raises any questions. Anybody who has a snooze button on their alarm clock will tell you that they have hit the snooze button without waking up.
Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.
I gues what is needed is an smart alerter that will know whether an engineer is asleep or awake, and will not reset if he or she is asleep. Such an aleter would know how to define sleep.
Now you're splitting split hairs. What do you want?... an alerter that makes the engineer push a button and then do a sudoku puzzle?
BucyrusThere is no question that you can reset the alerter and quickly fall asleep. And you can sleep right up to the next alerter alarm. So a person can sleep entirely through the time lapses between alerter alarms.
This has nothing to do with sleep as you are trying to define it. It has to do with drowsiness, attention to the railroad, and being alert and aware of your surroundings.
Let me take you back a few years to Chatworth, California. The Engineer in question was indeed wide awake, but he was not alert to what he was *supposed* to be doing. He was trying to put some moves on some teenage kid who liked trains. He did not see the signal, he did not see the turnout, and he did not see the UP locomotives until they landed in his lap.
If you are pulling 100 cars through the middle of nowhere in the middle of the night toward the end of a long shift, you might not be alert to what is happening. The rhythm of the locomotive is very soothing, the desert very memorizing, and your body is craving some sleep. You can tap the alerter for hours and never once look out the window or even open your eyes.
Alert means you know what you are doing up there on the footplates. It means that you are in control of your locomotives and train, and that you are paying attention.
In Japan, the operator must point at each signal, and SING ALOUD its aspect. All of this is being recorded by Big San in the control room. Maybe if we WORSHIP the signals they will act like oracles and tell you what is going to happen to you next.
Murphy Siding,
How am I splitting hairs? The point of an alerter is to wake up the engineer. If it can't do that, what good is it?
What is needed is an alerter that knows when a person is sleeping and only alerts when sleep occurs. It would be like the SmartCap I mentioned earlier.
BroadwayLion In Japan, the operator must point at each signal, and SING ALOUD its aspect. All of this is being recorded by Big San in the control room.
In Japan, the operator must point at each signal, and SING ALOUD its aspect. All of this is being recorded by Big San in the control room.
That's how a disaster was averted near Syracuse a few years ago. Alert ears (including other crews) noted that they weren't hearing an Amtrak train calling signals when they thought they should have been. I don't remember the rest of the details, but that one come to mind.
Before I read the Sodoku comment, it had occured to me that the next step in resetting alerters might be a "password" on a keypad. It might be something as simple as the locomotive number, or something as complex as an individually assigned code.
Another option would be to require some other more complex action (ie, something like CNTL+ALT+DEL on a computer) that would be that much more difficult to complete without being cognizant of one's surroundings.
As things stand now, however, it would still be possible to reset the alerter without having to touch the keypad, simply by bumping the throttle up (or down) a notch, then back to where you wanted it, or by using any of the several other controls that will reset the timer. Time for a two-minute toot, anyone?
Of course, a lot of this keys on how often the alerter has to be reset. On our newest locomotives, that runs to around 20 seconds - a lot of keypad time.
BroadwayLionThis has nothing to do with sleep as you are trying to define it. It has to do with drowsiness, attention to the railroad, and being alert and aware of your surroundings.
You suggest, Lion, that there are a number of alertness techniques. Knowing them could be helpful to many people in situations that locomotive engineers find themselves in.
I once took a memory course. I don't use all of the techniques I learned. For example, I do not need to walk into a room full of strangers and quickly learn all of their names. However, it is helpful to remember the names of people I meet at a party when I may well meet 6 to 10 new people.
Some things I learned are: 1. Listen to the name. I can never remember what I did not know in the first place. If the name is not clear to me I ask the person to spell it. 2. Repeat the name. Having learned your name I will say "It's good to meet you, Lion." 3. Form an image with the name and place that mental image on the person's head or some other obvious place. Some names are harder to form images for than others, especially unusual names. You need to work at it. You have a name that is easy to form an image for; so do I. 4. Look for opportunities to repeat the name. 5. If possible write down the name.
The point of this is that there are also techniques to maintain alertness and you suggest some that I have never heard of. It is woth working on.
BroadwayLionIn Japan, the operator must point at each signal, and SING ALOUD its aspect. All of this is being recorded by Big San in the control room. Maybe if we WORSHIP the signals they will act like oracles and tell you what is going to happen to you next.
PS. Lion, I find your idea here fascinating. We might also use it when driving or other parts of our lives. I drive my 3 year old grandson home from nursery school. When we come to a stop light or even a stop sign I point it out to him simply because I want him to learn about his surroundings. But maybe I am also increasing my own alertness to these signals.
tree68 BroadwayLion In Japan, the operator must point at each signal, and SING ALOUD its aspect. All of this is being recorded by Big San in the control room. Before I read the Sodoku comment, it had occured to me that the next step in resetting alerters might be a "password" on a keypad. It might be something as simple as the locomotive number, or something as complex as an individually assigned code. Another option would be to require some other more complex action (ie, something like CNTL+ALT+DEL on a computer) that would be that much more difficult to complete without being cognizant of one's surroundings.
That is an improved type of alerter known as the “Cognitive Alerter.” It requires an engineer to prove he is awake by performing some process that requires enough thought that the reset cannot be done as automatic reflex when asleep.
But there is another step in alerter evolution in which the alerter is connected to brain function and eye movement, so it can simply know whether the engineer is sleeping or awake, and also know degrees of alertness while being awake.
This is not too difficult to execute with a person sitting at the controls of a locomotive because the monitoring equipment does not need to be portable. It would be more difficult to make it portable for use by switchmen, for instance. I am not sure if the SmartCap can be used in that portable mode. But if they have it built into a hat, portability can’t be too far off.
Bucyrus Murphy Siding, How am I splitting hairs? The point of an alerter is to wake up the engineer. If it can't do that, what good is it? What is needed is an alerter that knows when a person is sleeping and only alerts when sleep occurs. It would be like the SmartCap I mentioned earlier.
Here is a paper discussing alerters:
http://www.ntsb.gov/doclib/recletters/2007/R07_8.pdf
Here is a quote from the piece that discusses resetting alerters by reflex action:
“Alerters installed on new locomotives today require about the same level of cognition as those that existed when the Safety Board closed Safety Recommendations R-99-53 and -59. Typically, alerter alarms occur more frequently as train speed increases.13 Unlike the Sugar Valley accident in which the train had slowed and entered a siding before overrunning a signal, the northbound train in the Anding collision remained on the main track at higher speeds. Had an alerter been installed, there was a 4-minute time period after passing the approach signal during which the alerter would have activated four to five times. It seems unlikely that the engineer could have reset the alerter multiple times by reflex action without any increase in his awareness. Therefore, an alerter likely would have detected the lack of activity on the part of the engineer and sounded an alarm that could have alerted one or both crewmembers. Had the crew been incapacitated or not responded to the alarm, the alerter would have automatically applied the brakes and brought the train to a stop. The Safety Board concludes that had an alerter been installed on the lead locomotive of the northbound train, it may have prevented the collision in Anding.”
Maybe we can just train the cap to run the trains?
John WR BroadwayLionIn Japan, the operator must point at each signal, and SING ALOUD its aspect. All of this is being recorded by Big San in the control room. Maybe if we WORSHIP the signals they will act like oracles and tell you what is going to happen to you next. PS. Lion, I find your idea here fascinating. We might also use it when driving or other parts of our lives. I drive my 3 year old grandson home from nursery school. When we come to a stop light or even a stop sign I point it out to him simply because I want him to learn about his surroundings. But maybe I am also increasing my own alertness to these signals. John
There is, and has been for many years, a rule requiring crew members to call signals to each other when they come into view. We don't have to point, yet. Some railroads require signals to be called over the radio. (We don't have to call all signals, only certain ones.) Conductors on our freight trains are required to keep a Conductor's Log that (among other certain items) includes all signals more restrictive than a clear. Under certain conditions, they must even log a clear signal. I would think other railroads also require some sort of log being kept.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.