zugmann NTSB has been pushing in-cab cameras and PTC for years. They have been working that into their reccomendations for years. They already know the ending, they just have to present the facts to match that conclusion.
NTSB has been pushing in-cab cameras and PTC for years. They have been working that into their reccomendations for years. They already know the ending, they just have to present the facts to match that conclusion.
Murray - I don't find anything blantantly obvious that their spokesman was giving out any details, but since this has to cause speculation among the news people, would it be better if they just kept quiet and went about their job? If, bottom line, they didn't really say anything, why say anything at all.
She who has no signature! cinscocom-tmw
The opinions expressed here represent my own and not those of my employer, any other railroad, company, or person.
Euclid Well if that is their charge, why don’t they limit their activity to just that? They act like an investigative body who is running for president. Maybe Norm could chime in and set this straight.
Well its readily apparent you do not understand the investigative and analytic responsibilities of the NTSB.
The rest of us understand it just fine.
Norm
Euclid Here are the made public high points of the investigation so far. It is obvious that the NTSB is walking a very fine line to protect the engineer’s constitutional rights:
This is an absolutely ridiculous statement. The NTSB is an investigative body who is charged with finding the cause of and assessing the responsibility for an accident.
Mookie...The NTSB was awfully loose lipped in this case right after it happened...
Sadly, this is becoming all too common for investigations these days, especially if someone thinks there's some political advantage to be gained by it.
IMHO, any time an investigator says anything other than that he cannot comment on an ongoing investigation, he either has an agenda, is trying too tease out some fact he can't nail down, or he's a fool. Mostly, it's the same as trampling on evidence (and upon rights,) so far as I'm concerned.
That is all pretty fresh in our minds. Did we really need a recap?
Norm48327 ... CNN beat the story to death for months with misinformation and speculation.
Dave H. Painted side goes up. My website : wnbranch.com
MookieThe more your lips flap, the more the media will find to fill up that 24/7. More supposition for everyone.
Truer words never spoken. Think Malaysia Airlines (MH370). Lots of garbage information from the investigators, and CNN beat the story to death for months with misinformation and speculation.
schlimm Mookie Why can't they keep it quiet until their final report and then let the whole world see the final report in its full context. If their track record is to - at some time in the future - release the report, then why do we need to have anything from them before that? The NTSB often releases preliminary reports as they go along in air accidents. I feel reasonably confident that if the Amtrak train had derailed because a "Darwin Award" person had hit the engine at a crossing, few on here would be complaining about releases of info.
Mookie Why can't they keep it quiet until their final report and then let the whole world see the final report in its full context. If their track record is to - at some time in the future - release the report, then why do we need to have anything from them before that?
The NTSB often releases preliminary reports as they go along in air accidents. I feel reasonably confident that if the Amtrak train had derailed because a "Darwin Award" person had hit the engine at a crossing, few on here would be complaining about releases of info.
MookieWhy can't they keep it quiet until their final report and then let the whole world see the final report in its full context. If their track record is to - at some time in the future - release the report, then why do we need to have anything from them before that?
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
In this day and age of information overload - my question is why does the NTSB have to discuss anything. Why can't they keep it quiet until their final report and then let the whole world see the final report in its full context. If their track record is to - at some time in the future - release the report, then why do we need to have anything from them before that?
(Sorry, Euclid - I typed this all out before I found your reply.)
wanswheelNTSB has a moral, ethical, and I believe legal obligation to abstain from the piecemeal chipping away of Bostian's presumption of innocence. Say he did or didn’t cause the crash or shut up.
I think my concern is a little bit different from this.
The NTSB has a remit to determine the causes of this crash, and indicate ways to prevent the recurrence of any problems it finds. One very likely cause is that Bostian is responsible. If the NTSB finds he is, then they will report accordingly.
If the NTSB has some reason to believe that Bostian is responsible, and can enunciate it, they are justified in saying so as they report on the progress of their investigation.
Where the NTSB, or anyone else, is NOT justified is in commenting on actions they are taking that presuppose 'guilt' or 'innocence', or that create an impression of guilt on innocence purely in the way they're semantically expressed. And that is what this whole business with the cell phone "investigation" says to me, as I've already said.
It's one thing to say 'We believe the engineer may have used his cell phone improperly' -- and given reasons for that, or backed it up with actual cell-phone data and then introduced the questions about times and dates in the records. It is quite another thing to trot out a fishing expedition -- knowing full well not only that cell phone use'in service' is highly impermissible under railroad rules, but also that use of cell phones while driving is illegal for the general public to engage in while 'driving'. The conclusion I drew is that a responsible Government agency was looking for cell-phone use that might be related to the accident; therefore, a good likelihood existed that Bostian was using his phone improperly. And I cannot help but believe that the pattern of 'information' the NTSB, and the press reporting on the NTSB, have engaged in since then is conscoiusly wrong.
My own opinion hasn't really changed much since the very early part of the investigation: Bostian forgot where he was and accelerated his train into an accident. Was this as 'criminal' as Ricky Gates running a red signal into an accident (for which he was criminally prosecuted and convicted)? Remains to be seen if violation of nominal speed limit is comparable to the American equivalent of a SPAD. And that will be determined after the NTSB final report is in, and whatever criminal charges are actually filed. There will be plenty of time to 'speculate' about who did or didn't do what when those things actually happen.
Euclid: Now that I am done pulling on your shoe laces, I do have to agree w/you on one item:
I commented to the Driver right away - The NTSB was awfully loose lipped in this case right after it happened. They seem to generally treat cases like state secrets until they have their findings - which is as it should be.
EuclidWhy is there a presumption of innocence?
In part, because slander is illegal.
EuclidSo the engineer broke a rule about the speed limit on the curve. Can there be any legitimate excuse for that?
He could have been unconscious.
EuclidWould the engineer be exonerated from the rule violation if he says he fell asleep?
We have no idea of his state of consciousness. We may never.
-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/)
wanswheel NTSB has a moral, ethical, and I believe legal obligation to abstain from the piecemeal chipping away of Bostian's presumption of innocence. Say he did or didn’t cause the crash or shut up.
NTSB has a moral, ethical, and I believe legal obligation to abstain from the piecemeal chipping away of Bostian's presumption of innocence. Say he did or didn’t cause the crash or shut up.
As dhusman stated, "They [the NTSB] have mostly said things that were "not" and very little about what "was". A criminal trial may or may not occur, so direct conclusions about the engineer are not being stated. However, the public also has rights to know about the safety of Amtrak trains, as ultimately that is one of the missions of the NTSB:
"The NTSB is an independent federal agency charged by Congress with investigating every civil aviation accident in the U.S. and significant accidents in other modes of transportation—railroad, highway, marine and pipeline. The NTSB determines the probable cause of each accident investigated and issues safety recommendations aimed at preventing future accidents. In addition, the NTSB carries out special studies concerning transportation safety."
Well if they are trying to protect his rights they don't seem to be very sucessful at it.
Euclid Well who says this is a criminal investigation, if the is what you are referring to?
Well who says this is a criminal investigation, if the is what you are referring to?
You truly are ignorant. The NTSB must protect his rights in this investigation should criminal behavior be later found and he is prosecuted. If you don't understand that you are naive beyond comprehension,
You just don't comprehend very well do you?
They are referring to the legal aspects of the INVESTIGATION.
Good grief; read the Constitution.
EuclidWhat else needs to be proven?
Again; read the law.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.