243129 So what do you folks think will be contained in the final NTSB report as to the cause(s) of this disaster?
So what do you folks think will be contained in the final NTSB report as to the cause(s) of this disaster?
I do not expect them to place any blame on the institution of Amtrak such as inadequate training. I also do not expect them to blame the engineer. They will say that he was doing the best he could under the unfortunate circumstances.
I would really like to hear their explanation of the engineer's decisions regarding his method of braking as he realized he was approaching the curve way too fast. The NTSB has apparently contributed to confusion over those details by first reporting that the engineer made an application of the independent brake. Assuming that was not the case, I would like them to explain their conclusion that it was. The key point I would like to know is the derailment speed for that train entering the curve, and whether maximum braking starting upon the engineer's relization of the circumstances, would have prevented the derailment.
I would like to know whether the brake application was mostly ineffective, as the engineer has stated, and if so, why?
The engineer spoke of passenger disruption such as spilled food and drinks from excessive speed on the curve. He also said he thought that would be the extent of the problem. At the final moment, the engineer said, "Aw, we're dead." Prior to that point, did the engineer realize the high probability of derailing? I would like to hear the NTSB's insight into that point.
I doubt that any of these details will be in the report. So that leaves only the intense focus on the need for PTC. I also expect the NTSB to place most of the blame on the curve for being too sharp.
zugmann 243129 I am going to take a page from YOUR playbook . The specificity you claim I have not shown is contained within this thread. I am not going to do your work for you. GO LOOK FOR IT YOURSELF! Sound familiar? Might as well look for bigfoot.
243129 I am going to take a page from YOUR playbook . The specificity you claim I have not shown is contained within this thread. I am not going to do your work for you. GO LOOK FOR IT YOURSELF! Sound familiar?
Might as well look for bigfoot.
Big Footlong with a railroad motif
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
243129I am going to take a page from YOUR playbook . The specificity you claim I have not shown is contained within this thread. I am not going to do your work for you. GO LOOK FOR IT YOURSELF! Sound familiar?
The opinions expressed here represent my own and not those of my employer, any other railroad, company, or person.
M.B.A. (master of baseless allegations)
I am going to take a page from YOUR playbook . The specificity you claim I have not shown is contained within this thread. I am not going to do your work for you. GO LOOK FOR IT YOURSELF! Sound familiar?
Euclid charlie hebdo I am not the guy who has been posting and reposting his complaint/warning letters on here multiple times. You have never given us your specifics except a return to having firemen trained by veteran engineers, as you said you did in the past. I have said several majot points, on this and the Frankford threads: 1. Hiring/screening should be improved to look for job-related character issues. 2. Better training on routes, including more hands-on experience is needed. 3. Cognitive impairment issues should be part of the initial screening, but also with ongoing monitoring, similar to screens for controlled substances and alcohol. Generally the problem seems well defined, but if the objective is fixing the problem, you have to convice Amtrak to take action. But they are not going to take action unless they are ordered by the government or they are threatened with a loss of public support. Otherwise, if you go to Amtrak and tell them they need to improve their hiring/screening for character issues; they will say, "Oh yes, we agree that that is very important, and so we are proactive, and constantly reviewing our process to make sure we are doing the very best we can in screening new job applicants." I think the most effective approach would be something like what Joe has done with his direct letters. Those communications have the feel of someone who has gone way beyond the simplistic and pointless plattitudes. The direct detailed analysis of the problem will get peoples' attention, but it has to be very convincing and objective. It would require lots of research and development of the points that could be made, and then tons of writing and draft development to get to fully polished reports that will just knock people over when they read them. Maybe before the job is done, Amtrak will have a couple more high profile accidents that will help drive the point home.
charlie hebdo I am not the guy who has been posting and reposting his complaint/warning letters on here multiple times. You have never given us your specifics except a return to having firemen trained by veteran engineers, as you said you did in the past. I have said several majot points, on this and the Frankford threads: 1. Hiring/screening should be improved to look for job-related character issues. 2. Better training on routes, including more hands-on experience is needed. 3. Cognitive impairment issues should be part of the initial screening, but also with ongoing monitoring, similar to screens for controlled substances and alcohol.
I am not the guy who has been posting and reposting his complaint/warning letters on here multiple times. You have never given us your specifics except a return to having firemen trained by veteran engineers, as you said you did in the past.
I have said several majot points, on this and the Frankford threads:
1. Hiring/screening should be improved to look for job-related character issues.
2. Better training on routes, including more hands-on experience is needed.
3. Cognitive impairment issues should be part of the initial screening, but also with ongoing monitoring, similar to screens for controlled substances and alcohol.
Generally the problem seems well defined, but if the objective is fixing the problem, you have to convice Amtrak to take action. But they are not going to take action unless they are ordered by the government or they are threatened with a loss of public support. Otherwise, if you go to Amtrak and tell them they need to improve their hiring/screening for character issues; they will say, "Oh yes, we agree that that is very important, and so we are proactive, and constantly reviewing our process to make sure we are doing the very best we can in screening new job applicants."
I think the most effective approach would be something like what Joe has done with his direct letters. Those communications have the feel of someone who has gone way beyond the simplistic and pointless plattitudes. The direct detailed analysis of the problem will get peoples' attention, but it has to be very convincing and objective. It would require lots of research and development of the points that could be made, and then tons of writing and draft development to get to fully polished reports that will just knock people over when they read them.
Maybe before the job is done, Amtrak will have a couple more high profile accidents that will help drive the point home.
I forgot to include:
#4. Ongoing review of fatigue and work-related practices that contribute to it.
Of course, if I were trying to present a program to Amtrak, it would be much more detailed. But even in laying out these points there is much more meat for Amtrak to consider than just:
"Screen, train, supervise. Disasters loom. I have a plan."
I have always felt you should not put much stock in someone who says he has a plan, but gives no specificity. We should have learned that from Nixon in 1968, who claimed he had a plan to get us out of Vietnam quickly, but it took four more years.
EuclidI think the most effective approach would be something like what Joe has done with his direct letters. Those communications have the feel of someone who has gone way beyond the simplistic and pointless plattitudes.
No they don't. They have the feel of a someone who regretted retiring and now wants to be back in the game. They are long-winded and rambling, and offer very few specific points. Just "there were wrecks" and "I can make amtrak great again - ask me how!".
Even if he does have good ideas, he needs to learn how to present them in a concise and professional manner. Some on here have tried to assist him, but he's made it clear he will not accept any aid or criticism. Which, IMO, doesn't make him sound like a good candidate for any type of training program - but that's just my opinion. Worth as much as the paper it isn't written on.
"I study too, you know. How could I teach anyone if I didn't grow and learn day by day?"
"The difference between the novice and the master is that the master has failed more times than the novice has tried."
-- Korosensei
charlie hebdo 243129 BaltACD zugmann 243129 I would wager a guess that of lack of situational awareness, poor training,poor supervision, poor vetting and high speed contributed to this disaster. Shotgun approach. Throw enough against the wall - something is bound to stick. Current Law Enforcement procedure - catch someone for killing somebody - Charge them with all degrees of Murder as well as all degrees of Manslaughter and throw in Income Tax evasion as well as Jaywalking - something might stick. ALL of my observations have contributed to the 501 disaster. Which of them do you disagree with? ALL are generalities. Never any specifics revealed in your endless repetitions of this mantra. As was once said by Walter Mondale in a presidential primary debate and by Clara Peller in the Wendy's ad, "Where's the beef?"
243129 BaltACD zugmann 243129 I would wager a guess that of lack of situational awareness, poor training,poor supervision, poor vetting and high speed contributed to this disaster. Shotgun approach. Throw enough against the wall - something is bound to stick. Current Law Enforcement procedure - catch someone for killing somebody - Charge them with all degrees of Murder as well as all degrees of Manslaughter and throw in Income Tax evasion as well as Jaywalking - something might stick. ALL of my observations have contributed to the 501 disaster. Which of them do you disagree with?
BaltACD zugmann 243129 I would wager a guess that of lack of situational awareness, poor training,poor supervision, poor vetting and high speed contributed to this disaster. Shotgun approach. Throw enough against the wall - something is bound to stick. Current Law Enforcement procedure - catch someone for killing somebody - Charge them with all degrees of Murder as well as all degrees of Manslaughter and throw in Income Tax evasion as well as Jaywalking - something might stick.
zugmann 243129 I would wager a guess that of lack of situational awareness, poor training,poor supervision, poor vetting and high speed contributed to this disaster. Shotgun approach.
243129 I would wager a guess that of lack of situational awareness, poor training,poor supervision, poor vetting and high speed contributed to this disaster.
Shotgun approach.
Throw enough against the wall - something is bound to stick.
Current Law Enforcement procedure - catch someone for killing somebody - Charge them with all degrees of Murder as well as all degrees of Manslaughter and throw in Income Tax evasion as well as Jaywalking - something might stick.
ALL of my observations have contributed to the 501 disaster. Which of them do you disagree with?
ALL are generalities. Never any specifics revealed in your endless repetitions of this mantra. As was once said by Walter Mondale in a presidential primary debate and by Clara Peller in the Wendy's ad,
"Where's the beef?"
Those are specifics but I would not expect you to recognize them as such. So tell me what do you think are the causes of the 501 disaster?
I believe the engineer took the run knowing he was inadequately prepared. He made himself a victim of that fact and blamed it on Amtrak. He was fully aware of the curve, but not prepared to realize where it was ahead of him as he approached it. He made a rough plan to slow down in time for reaching the curve, but his plan was inadequate if certain key details should happen to fail. He believed that if the plan failed, it would be Amtrak’s fault.
With this uncertainty, he could have “errored on the side of caution” by slowing down early. But instead, he chose to run at full speed right up to the last second, as if he were fully qualified to know where he was and had zero uncertainty. He chose to run as Amtrak expected with a fully qualified engineer, and yet he knew he was not fully qualified. He took a deadly chance that luck would protect him. He failed to face up to his mistake even after he was aware of it, and there was still time to mitigate the effects.
rdamonI am still waiting for Balt to give us his urination credentials for the photo he posted 4 pages ago :)
7719th on the Left Return of my beer rental.
I am still waiting for Balt to give us his urination credentials for the photo he posted 4 pages ago :)
Gee, I thought the reference was to this thread.
243129I would wager a guess that of lack of situational awareness, poor training,poor supervision, poor vetting and high speed contributed to this disaster.
I would wager a guess that of lack of situational awareness, poor training,poor supervision, poor vetting and high speed contributed to this disaster.
Paul of Covington Electroliner 1935 Paul of Covington Heck, I've been enjoying this thread Are you a masochist? To many of us (in my opinion. NOT speaking for theothers.) the repititious postings by the former engineer gets painful. So if you like this which I consider painful and a masochist enjoys pain, I wondered whether you were one. Somewhat as a joke. I have NO desire to start a fued .I mean no disrespect or insult. As the expressiin goes, "Have a nice day!" Note, the above should have been posted below the following. Typing this on a tablet which I sound do again. Maybe we should start another feud. Why are you suggesting that I might be a masochist? I am not being hurt by this thread. Are you a qualified psychiatrist or psychologist? What are your qualifications? ..
Electroliner 1935 Paul of Covington Heck, I've been enjoying this thread Are you a masochist?
Paul of Covington Heck, I've been enjoying this thread
Are you a masochist?
To many of us (in my opinion. NOT speaking for theothers.) the repititious postings by the former engineer gets painful. So if you like this which I consider painful and a masochist enjoys pain, I wondered whether you were one. Somewhat as a joke. I have NO desire to start a fued .I mean no disrespect or insult. As the expressiin goes, "Have a nice day!"
Note, the above should have been posted below the following. Typing this on a tablet which I sound do again.
Maybe we should start another feud.
Why are you suggesting that I might be a masochist? I am not being hurt by this thread. Are you a qualified psychiatrist or psychologist? What are your qualifications?
..
zugmann Euclid And besides, the personal attack never works as intended. I just ask if someone insults me that they be original and creative.
Euclid And besides, the personal attack never works as intended.
I just ask if someone insults me that they be original and creative.
Was Don Rickles a railfan?
Electroliner 1935 Paul of Covington Heck, I've been enjoying this thread. Are you a masochist?
Paul of Covington Heck, I've been enjoying this thread.
_____________
"A stranger's just a friend you ain't met yet." --- Dave Gardner
As I have stated ad nauseam poor training , poorer supervision ,Amtrak's inadequate vetting and hiring procedures have contributed to this past and future disasters.
One man's opinion. Worth the paper is isn't written on.
The opinions expressed here represent my own and not those of my employer or any other railroad, company, or person.
zugmann One man's opinion. Worth the paper is isn't written on.
Maybe. Maybe not.
EuclidAnd besides, the personal attack never works as intended.
zugmann Euclid Bear in mind that strongly defending your point of view on the topic, even if it becomes strongly argumentative, can be done without it being a personal attack. The personal attack is a weak shortcut attempting to advance your point of view by injuring the person who is debating with you. Ok. And...?
Euclid Bear in mind that strongly defending your point of view on the topic, even if it becomes strongly argumentative, can be done without it being a personal attack. The personal attack is a weak shortcut attempting to advance your point of view by injuring the person who is debating with you.
Ok. And...?
And therefore, defend your point of view if it is challeneged, but do so without resorting to a personal attack. A personal attack as a subsitute for argument means that you have lost confidence in your point of view.
And besides, the personal attack never works as intended.
EuclidBear in mind that strongly defending your point of view on the topic, even if it becomes strongly argumentative, can be done without it being a personal attack. The personal attack is a weak shortcut attempting to advance your point of view by injuring the person who is debating with you.
Sounds like an after-school special.
charlie hebdo 243129 charlie hebdo 243129 I also have the "privilege of using Kalmbachs forums". I hope not much longer. Insulting Johnny Deggesty is simply not done. He has no more privileges than anyone else on this forum even though he acts as he does . It is not about any special privileges. It is simply common courtesy and etiquette, something "big boys" should have learned to do by age 12. You seem to think this forum has a clique. False. Your observation has more to do with you than any conspiracy aligned against you. Your posts on this thread were either ignored or appropriately responded to until page 23, when you were warned by the moderator not to engage in personal attacks.
243129 charlie hebdo 243129 I also have the "privilege of using Kalmbachs forums". I hope not much longer. Insulting Johnny Deggesty is simply not done. He has no more privileges than anyone else on this forum even though he acts as he does .
charlie hebdo 243129 I also have the "privilege of using Kalmbachs forums". I hope not much longer. Insulting Johnny Deggesty is simply not done.
243129 I also have the "privilege of using Kalmbachs forums".
I hope not much longer. Insulting Johnny Deggesty is simply not done.
He has no more privileges than anyone else on this forum even though he acts as he does .
It is not about any special privileges. It is simply common courtesy and etiquette, something "big boys" should have learned to do by age 12. You seem to think this forum has a clique. False. Your observation has more to do with you than any conspiracy aligned against you.
Your posts on this thread were either ignored or appropriately responded to until page 23, when you were warned by the moderator not to engage in personal attacks.
MODERATOR COMMENT FROM PAGE 23:
243129 zugmann 243129 Stop being childish and man up to what you post. Are you referring to my post or not? Me? childish? I can live with that. Given the content of your posts it looks like you shall have to. Perhaps the PBS for Kids website would suit you better.
zugmann 243129 Stop being childish and man up to what you post. Are you referring to my post or not? Me? childish? I can live with that.
243129 Stop being childish and man up to what you post. Are you referring to my post or not?
Me? childish? I can live with that.
Given the content of your posts it looks like you shall have to. Perhaps the PBS for Kids website would suit you better.
Angela Pusztai-Pasternak, Production Editor, Trains Magazine
*************************************************
I take that warning to be directed at all of the several people who were exchanging personal attacks at that time, and not specifically at one person. This highlights the problem of personal attacks. They always begin with one person attacking another. The second person naturally feels compelled to respond in kind in order to get even.
But once you respond to an attack, then you have committed an attack; and you will be deemed to be as guilty as the person who began with the first attack. So when several people get involved with attacking each other, nobody can see how it all started, so all are blamed collectively.
To address this problem, I was once advised by a moderator to not respond in kind to any personal attack. He told me to just let those people play in the traffic, and they will be weeded out over time; kind of like the Darwin Award.
Bear in mind that strongly defending your point of view on the topic, even if it becomes strongly argumentative, can be done without it being a personal attack. The personal attack is a weak shortcut attempting to advance your point of view by injuring the person who is debating with you.
Deggesty 243129 Deggesty 243129 charlie hebdo 243129: Your attacks on the training of engineers with Amtrak by logical extension would include the training of many engineers on the freight lines. True and also deficient? That's a pretty broad brush of condemning most engineers, certainly those with less than 40 years' experience. If not, how does the training on the freight lines differ? I speak only of that which I know and that is Amtrak. I have the impression that everyone who has been following this thread is well aware of the scope of your knowledge and your ability to present it to other people. I do not see how iterating and reiterating your position will being about any change in the situation. You have expressed annoyance twice before. Why do you continue to read this thread if it annoys you so much? I am hoping that sometime soon you will realize the futility in contiuing to harp on the fact that Amtrak will not listen to you and then cease complaining to the people who have the privilege of using Kalmbach's forums.
243129 Deggesty 243129 charlie hebdo 243129: Your attacks on the training of engineers with Amtrak by logical extension would include the training of many engineers on the freight lines. True and also deficient? That's a pretty broad brush of condemning most engineers, certainly those with less than 40 years' experience. If not, how does the training on the freight lines differ? I speak only of that which I know and that is Amtrak. I have the impression that everyone who has been following this thread is well aware of the scope of your knowledge and your ability to present it to other people. I do not see how iterating and reiterating your position will being about any change in the situation. You have expressed annoyance twice before. Why do you continue to read this thread if it annoys you so much?
Deggesty 243129 charlie hebdo 243129: Your attacks on the training of engineers with Amtrak by logical extension would include the training of many engineers on the freight lines. True and also deficient? That's a pretty broad brush of condemning most engineers, certainly those with less than 40 years' experience. If not, how does the training on the freight lines differ? I speak only of that which I know and that is Amtrak. I have the impression that everyone who has been following this thread is well aware of the scope of your knowledge and your ability to present it to other people. I do not see how iterating and reiterating your position will being about any change in the situation.
243129 charlie hebdo 243129: Your attacks on the training of engineers with Amtrak by logical extension would include the training of many engineers on the freight lines. True and also deficient? That's a pretty broad brush of condemning most engineers, certainly those with less than 40 years' experience. If not, how does the training on the freight lines differ? I speak only of that which I know and that is Amtrak.
charlie hebdo 243129: Your attacks on the training of engineers with Amtrak by logical extension would include the training of many engineers on the freight lines. True and also deficient? That's a pretty broad brush of condemning most engineers, certainly those with less than 40 years' experience. If not, how does the training on the freight lines differ?
243129:
Your attacks on the training of engineers with Amtrak by logical extension would include the training of many engineers on the freight lines. True and also deficient? That's a pretty broad brush of condemning most engineers, certainly those with less than 40 years' experience. If not, how does the training on the freight lines differ?
I speak only of that which I know and that is Amtrak.
I have the impression that everyone who has been following this thread is well aware of the scope of your knowledge and your ability to present it to other people.
I do not see how iterating and reiterating your position will being about any change in the situation.
You have expressed annoyance twice before. Why do you continue to read this thread if it annoys you so much?
I am hoping that sometime soon you will realize the futility in contiuing to harp on the fact that Amtrak will not listen to you and then cease complaining to the people who have the privilege of using Kalmbach's forums.
Tell me you are not acting 'privileged'.
"I did not know that anybody had privileges; tell me, please, what privileges are available and how one gains such privileges."
I guess you gave them to yourself.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.