Norm48327 rjemery Indeed, there are media sources whose journalistic integrity leaves much to be desired. The more sensational the item, the better. However, there are plenty of news sources that get it right, even postponing publishing a story until all facts are checked and double-checked. The New York Times and The Washington Post fall into this latter category. If a controversial quote is included, it usually is balanced with another quote from a different source offering an opposing view. I wouldn't bank on that. Reporters-I won't call them journalists-have to get a story out that sells papers. Most haven't a clue what they are reporting on.
rjemery Indeed, there are media sources whose journalistic integrity leaves much to be desired. The more sensational the item, the better. However, there are plenty of news sources that get it right, even postponing publishing a story until all facts are checked and double-checked. The New York Times and The Washington Post fall into this latter category. If a controversial quote is included, it usually is balanced with another quote from a different source offering an opposing view.
Indeed, there are media sources whose journalistic integrity leaves much to be desired. The more sensational the item, the better. However, there are plenty of news sources that get it right, even postponing publishing a story until all facts are checked and double-checked. The New York Times and The Washington Post fall into this latter category. If a controversial quote is included, it usually is balanced with another quote from a different source offering an opposing view.
I wouldn't bank on that. Reporters-I won't call them journalists-have to get a story out that sells papers. Most haven't a clue what they are reporting on.
Don't lump responsible journalists with the tabloid press. The NY Times and Washington Post get it right by a very high percentage, and if they are wrong, they are quick to print a correction. You won't see that in any media outlet touched by Rupert Murdoch and his ilk.
RJ Emery near Santa Fe, NM
I will agree that the larger the city/market the better chance the journalist will be in getting information and getting it correct. However, what I witnessed concerning this Dec 1 MNRR wreck did not show me that. Identifying jobs by wrong titles, not understanding terminology, and not knowing what was being told to them so they could not ask an intelligent question for clarification or exploration. They leave stories dangling, asking to be explored and exposed because they don't know enough about the subject to recognize a door begging to be knocked on and opened. Getting their pretty or handsome face on camera, out of breath and excited, shouting into a microphone, is not journalism or reporting, it is theatrics to cover up what they don't know and can't do.
And I speak from a platform of 50 years experience on both sides of media: reporting stories, providing stories and information, and being the story,
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.
Am I reading EO 29 wrong?. Is there only an extra required over any restricted trackage ? If so then maybe a rider(s) to / from GCT - first stop ? Of course there may be other locations as well including the NH line ?
Norm
schlimm One would think the 2nd person would be able to react if the engineer "loses focus" (aka, falls asleep). But I seem to recall a crash in Iowa (UP?) in 2013 where both crew were oblivious to their train rear-ending another.
One would think the 2nd person would be able to react if the engineer "loses focus" (aka, falls asleep). But I seem to recall a crash in Iowa (UP?) in 2013 where both crew were oblivious to their train rear-ending another.
There are no perfect solutions to the problems of humanity as long as humans and machines built by humans are involved.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
All the order say is qualified train crewmember….it does not specify the trains conductor be the other person…although with most of the passenger train I have been on, there are 2 conductors, the passenger conductor, who takes/ punched tickets and handles the passenger side, and the train conductor, who is responsible for the train proper.
Regardless, the second person only has to be qualified under Metro North’s rules and such, he could be a conductor off the extra board or out of pool service, he does not have to be that particular train’s conductor, just a qualified train crew member.
23 17 46 11
henry6 ... The media doesn't know the NTSB from anybody else and will run with any statement given them sometimes thinking the NTSB, DOT, MNRR, and the Mickey Mouse club are all the same: a quote is a quote, and if it's inflammatory, all the better.
... The media doesn't know the NTSB from anybody else and will run with any statement given them sometimes thinking the NTSB, DOT, MNRR, and the Mickey Mouse club are all the same: a quote is a quote, and if it's inflammatory, all the better.
edblysard I think what they are implying is that a qualified conductor will be able to determining if the engineer is speeding in a restricted area and inform him of such. Then, if the engineer fails to respond correctly, the conductor will slow and or stop the train. All the conductors I know, myself included, are capable of doing that. Remember the conductor, not the engineer is the “boss” of the train, both in freight and passenger service.
I think what they are implying is that a qualified conductor will be able to determining if the engineer is speeding in a restricted area and inform him of such. Then, if the engineer fails to respond correctly, the conductor will slow and or stop the train. All the conductors I know, myself included, are capable of doing that. Remember the conductor, not the engineer is the “boss” of the train, both in freight and passenger service.
Using the conductor of the train may suffice for inbound push-pull trains, but it won't work for outbound trains, unless a second conductor, not the boss of the train, is in the locomotive cab with the engineer.
edblysard FRA emergency order 29 requires Metro North to have to qualified train crew members in the cab at locations where speed restrictions are in place…so suddenly 2 guys in the cab/control car are safer than only one? But before, depending on what carrier was under discussion, one man crews were perfectly acceptable and just as safe as 2 man crews.
FRA emergency order 29 requires Metro North to have to qualified train crew members in the cab at locations where speed restrictions are in place…so suddenly 2 guys in the cab/control car are safer than only one?
But before, depending on what carrier was under discussion, one man crews were perfectly acceptable and just as safe as 2 man crews.
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
I think what they are implying is that a qualified conductor will be able to determining if the engineer is speeding in a restricted area and inform him of such.
Then, if the engineer fails to respond correctly, the conductor will slow and or stop the train.
All the conductors I know, myself included, are capable of doing that.
Remember the conductor, not the engineer is the “boss” of the train, both in freight and passenger service.
I read the order and it does sound a bit over the top...but we are entering a major political election year, too. The incidents cited are each different in so many ways but I suppose the FRA is attacking an implied attitude toward accidents and safety. The idea of two qualified crew members in cabs insinuates or implies that the other crew member has to be qualified in train handling in addition to knowing the rules. I mean, what good is it to know the train should be doing 30 instead of 80 if one doesn't know how to bring the train down to 30 on the spot? I wonder if this in in effect for Amtrak in the same district and if it applies to MNRR routes operated by NJT. In addition, the question arises if there are enough qualified engineers on the roster to cover these assignments.
Note it say two qualified train crew members, it does not specify both have to be engineers.
http://www.fra.dot.gov/eLib/details/L04879
ACRE was knocked out because of statements made to the news media which tainted what NTSB was trying to do. I applaud NTSB for doing this. And it should be a warning to others in situations like this that in order to get the the truth with the facts in the most expeditious way, is to be in concert with the main investigative group bit it NTSB or anybody else. The media doesn't know the NTSB from anybody else and will run with any statement given them sometimes thinking the NTSB, DOT, MNRR, and the Mickey Mouse club are all the same: a quote is a quote, and if it's inflammatory, all the better.
Update: Federal Railroad Agency Issues Order to Metro-North
The Federal Railroad Administration has issued an emergency order to Metro-North to take immediate action on crew protocol. The FRA says two railroad employees are to operate trains where major speed restrictions are in place until the system is updated
Source: WABC-TV, New York
Norm48327 I wouldn't expect either side, union or management to be impartial; therefor the NTSB.
I wouldn't expect either side, union or management to be impartial; therefor the NTSB.
They have their own agendas as well, unfortunately.
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
zugmann Although it is sometimes nice to have someone to counter the company's own investigation - which isn't always as impartial as it should be.
Although it is sometimes nice to have someone to counter the company's own investigation - which isn't always as impartial as it should be.
tree68Or they'll simply complain (like many of today's entitlement generation) that they're being unfairly shut out of the investigation, and that must surely mean there's something to hide.
I would opine that this may serve as ACRE's "pay attention, I promise your attention will pay" slap-down. If they want to be a player in the event of a future incident, perhaps they'll pay attention to the ground rules.
Or they'll simply complain (like many of today's entitlement generation) that they're being unfairly shut out of the investigation, and that must surely mean there's something to hide.
Let's hope they learn their lesson and can be a productive member of future investigations. I would suggest that their input can be important - it's always good to have someone who will question things since it makes any conclusions reached just that much more thorough.
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...
petitnj All of the parties desire an answer and fear the accident will occur again unless something is done. Because of the improbability of these accidents, there is no need to correct the problem today. We can perform a thoughtful, complete investigation and create long term solutions. Our politicians can't provide long term solutions to their problems; but they demand immediate answers to these spectacular accidents when it happens to someone else. The NTSB is designed to do a full investigation and if the politicians would stop grandstanding, it would be easier to do the necessary studies. Politicians should go to the site, console the victims and families and assure them that a full investigation will be done. What is most interesting is that the news never covers the final NTSB report and the changes made by their recommendations. That affects people.
All of the parties desire an answer and fear the accident will occur again unless something is done. Because of the improbability of these accidents, there is no need to correct the problem today. We can perform a thoughtful, complete investigation and create long term solutions. Our politicians can't provide long term solutions to their problems; but they demand immediate answers to these spectacular accidents when it happens to someone else. The NTSB is designed to do a full investigation and if the politicians would stop grandstanding, it would be easier to do the necessary studies. Politicians should go to the site, console the victims and families and assure them that a full investigation will be done.
What is most interesting is that the news never covers the final NTSB report and the changes made by their recommendations. That affects people.
Most interesting observations and statements....very true. And your final sentence says volumes about the three ring circus of wailing and complaints that floods the immediate and which turns into a distant side show sometime in the distant future. My, My, Mass America Cry...until it is all but forgotten.
schlimm The accident was the result of either: 1. Faulty trackage 2. Faulty equipment on the train. 3. Human error. Someone/something is to blame and when lives are lost or maimed, folks have a right to be upset and to find out the truth.
The accident was the result of either:
1. Faulty trackage
2. Faulty equipment on the train.
3. Human error.
Someone/something is to blame and when lives are lost or maimed, folks have a right to be upset and to find out the truth.
Yes, you are right about especially in your last sentence. However, you have to allow for the proper people to make the proper investigation, and the proper comments to the proper people through the proper channels. Otherwise you get misinformation, misrepresentations, miscomprehension, mistakes, and confusion through chaos. Yes, Schlimm, there is this so called right to know the truth. But by having every opinionate and star struck or out to save his own behind buttinsky spewing lies and telling stories out of line, then truth, even when told, may not be recognized or accepted. Do it right or let the inmates shoot everyone in sight.
The problem here I think was that the union spoke to the media making statements that could either not be substantiated at that time or otherwise eroded or diluted the authority of NTSB, MNRR, or others charged with investigating. The union leader was out of line; it was like he was contradicting NTSP and MNRR findings, trying to take the spotlight if not for himself then to cause confusion or discredit to the investigating agencies. It was like a TV police drama circus manipulating the media to manipulate public reaction. There has to be one agency, one power, from which all information flows in order for there to be order. Fine for a journalist to question the information but you don't and can't have everybody spouting things whether correct or not because it causes the dissemination of incorrect information and the formation of wrong perceptions at one point, total mistrust of the truth at worst.
Paul:
Alpa (air line pilot association ) has always participated in accidents involving their members and even other accidents / incidents. However:
1. ALPA never discloses what internal items are discussed during an investigation. The NTSB may have made mistake that the MNRR union would do the same.
2. ALPA will make recommendations to prevent human factor or mechanical causes from occurring again. These recommendations are often an addendum to final NTSB reports.
3. Safe flight is always their goal.
4. Fatigue has been an ALPA goal to prevent for many years.
Very interesting Paul. Thanks for posting.
Links to 2 interesting and provocative blog posts by David Schanoes, a former operating supervisor with about 36 years experience (something like 23 at MNCR), now a consultant ( http://ten90solutions.com/about_us ):
"Connecting the Disconnects" - December 4, 2013: http://ten90solutions.com/connecting_the_disconnects
Note this excerpt of how he views the union's role - most of the rest of the blog post is an expansion on this, and why - in his view - the union is therefore disqualified from participating in the investigative process:
"It is a question of conflicting interests, of, once again, an organizational requirement-- and that is the interest, the obligation of the union, of any union, to defend its members to the utmost of its ability. The representative of ACRE acted in accordance with what he in fact is-- the representative of the union organized around the principle of defending its members."
"Why We Must Do The Things We Must Do" - December 3, 2013: http://ten90solutions.com/why_we_must_do_the_things_we_must_do
Some other very interesting reading there, too - see the left column.
- Paul North.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.