Edit post

Edit your reply below.

Post Body
Enter your post below.
[quote user="Overmod"]In practice, I disagree with the whole 'penalty' idea (along with the idea that ATC is a defense against prejudged worker incompetence and negligence). A good example of a 'right' metaphor for an ATC system was the Miller system, which was being promoted just before the American entry into WW1; this provided 'assurance' feedback to the engineer instead of castigating him after the fact.[/quote] I haven't found much information online. From what I found the Miller train stop was a mechanical system that let a train brake when a stop signal was run. After the shoe was off the ramp the engineer regained full control of the brakes. Is that right so far? On typical inductive system the engineer gets alerted. If he doesn't react on the alarm in a given timeframe there is a penalty brake application. With the Miller system the engineer is alerted by the brake application on othe ATS systems he is alerted by the signal tone. I don't see why the Miller system should be better. They are safety systems and shall prevent accidents caused by ignoring a signal aspect. With the Miller system the engineer could go on still ignoring a red signal. The systems are not for crew comfort, but back-ups for human failures. But perhaps I understood something wrong with my limited information on the Miller system. Regards, Volker
Tags (Optional)
Tags are keywords that get attached to your post. They are used to categorize your submission and make it easier to search for. To add tags to your post type a tag into the box below and click the "Add Tag" button.
Add Tag