LIRR Derailment - Atlantic Terminal track 6

Discussion of the past and present operations of the Long Island Rail Road.

Moderator: Liquidcamphor

Re: LIRR Derailment - Atlantic Terminal track 6

Postby jonnhrr » Mon Jan 09, 2017 9:24 am

freightguy wrote:If you want to see at great automation is just look at the Washington DC metro over the last 12 years. Though not fully automated they've had some serious incidents over that time frame. LIRR is pretty remarkable being they haven't had a passenger related crash death since the early 1950's. Metro North has had 10 in the past 3 years though nottte total fault of Railroad or their personnel.


Washington Metro is an outlier, plenty of ATO systems have run for decades without major issues - Philadelphia/Camden PATCO line, London's Victoria and Central Lines, to name a couple that come to mind.

Jon
Avatar Photo - P&W local from Gardner to Worcester at Morgan Rd., Hubbardston
User avatar
jonnhrr
 
Posts: 1016
Joined: Sun May 30, 2004 5:58 pm
Location: Lewiston ME USA

Re: LIRR Derailment - Atlantic Terminal track 6

Postby puckhead » Mon Jan 09, 2017 10:30 am

re: sleep apnea . last year i was tested for it. i'm by nature a restless sleeper and often fatigued. i'm 5'10, 170 lbs, never smoked, no health problems. my ENT doctor told me it was very unlikely i had apnea, but i thought what the heck and went for a test.

i went for the test, wired up like a marionette. it not an easy environment to sleep and i tossed and turned. i usually sleep on my back, and tried my side when i wasnt falling asleep. every time i went on my side, a voice over the speaker told me to sleep on my back. two days later i get a call telling me to come in to be fitted and tested for the mask/machine . boom, just like that. i asked what the diagnosis was ,and i was was told moderate apnea. i asked high side of moderate, low side of moderate? they just said moderate. i told them no thanks, i want to see the report. i didnt get it until i told them i was withholding the insurance check. 15 min later it was in my inbox. i read the time line and when i was on my back, the apnea was above above the baseline. on my side, it was non existent. i believe then wanted me on my back to bump up the numbers to justify the machine. the big money is in the machine. it requires another sleep test, and all sorts of calibration, maintenance, and also the cost of the machine. i'm quite sure i and the ins co was being scammed.
puckhead
 
Posts: 75
Joined: Mon May 14, 2007 6:49 pm

Re: LIRR Derailment - Atlantic Terminal track 6

Postby MCL1981 » Mon Jan 09, 2017 12:07 pm

One engineer. Two engineers. Three engineers. A conductor or two. Beepers, alerters, cab signals, PTC. All are subject to failure. Sometimes you just have to accept that accidents and malfunctions happen. Rarely. But they do and will happen no matter what feel good BS you throw in front of it. The aviation industry has multiple people and multiple layers of automation. Guess what. None make air travel immune to accidents or malfunctions.
MCL1981
 
Posts: 550
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2012 9:23 am

Re: LIRR Derailment - Atlantic Terminal track 6

Postby SemperFidelis » Mon Jan 09, 2017 12:53 pm

Ice formed in the pitot tube...not the "pilot's tube". Common autocorrect error.
SemperFidelis
 
Posts: 1292
Joined: Thu Jun 01, 2006 3:49 pm
Location: Stupid Voterland

Re: LIRR Derailment - Atlantic Terminal track 6

Postby flexliner » Mon Jan 09, 2017 4:02 pm

Mirrodie, and others please see my thoughts on OSA over in the MN forum.

viewtopic.php?f=67&t=153599&start=885#p1411325

Puckhead you are 100% spot on. They were trying to sell you the CPAP. that is where the $$ is. Luckily from what you say your side RDI (respiratory disturbance index) is low so you can manage with sleeping on the side (sew a closed pocket on the back of your phone shirt with a tennis ball in it. Every time you turn on your back that ball will condition you to turn on your side........
flexliner
 
Posts: 92
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2004 3:01 am

Re: LIRR Derailment - Atlantic Terminal track 6

Postby Morisot » Mon Jan 09, 2017 4:22 pm

LOL, flexliner --- for a minute I thought you said "they were trying to sell you the CRAP" ---
Morisot
 
Posts: 214
Joined: Sun Nov 21, 2010 1:18 am

Re: LIRR Derailment - Atlantic Terminal track 6

Postby Head-end View » Mon Jan 09, 2017 8:50 pm

Very good posts by mark777 and puckhead. In terms of realistic operating procedure, I think Mark's suggestion re: crew deployment and tasking is the most likely to happen and be successful. Mostly because it seems practical and it won't cost the railroad any $$$. No way you're going to see a second qualified engineer in the cab as the cost would be over-the-top and no way the railroad would pay for that.

Sounds like Puckhead and the other posters are calling it re: sleep-apnea being the current trendy buzzword/white elephant/moneymaking scam, etc. The commercial interests including those in the medical profession will latch onto anything like this that offers the chance to capitalize, that is make big money. The emperor had no clothes. :wink:

Some years back, wasn't there a similar "fad" regarding children being over-diagnosed with attention-deficit disorder?
Head-end View
 
Posts: 2292
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 10:00 pm
Location: The second row on a SEPTA Silverliner V

Re: LIRR Derailment - Atlantic Terminal track 6

Postby mark777 » Tue Jan 10, 2017 3:10 am

yes, sorry about the Pilot's tube, but it was around 3am. Unfortunately, yes, there can be an "over diagnosis" of sleep apnea, and if you add in the word "politics" to the mix, you see where this is going. I for one do suffer from some type of sleep disorder, where I can't fall asleep, yet one day, boom, it happened, and I got into an accident. I personally don't know the difference between Insomnia, Sleep apnea, and all other conditions. I was tested and came up moderate. Then came the CPAP, or in my opinion CRAP, because for me it did nothing but make matters worse. I got bloody noses, severe headaches, and simply put, I felt more anxious when the air would literally drown me. I paid nothing for it under my insurance, but needless to say, It went back. went for a dental implant. guess what, my insurance wont cover it because I have a moderate case of sleep apnea. I needed higher numbers for it to be covered. so what do I do now? I take prescription sleep medication until we find a solution. I sleep, but it isn't the fix. My guess now is that with all of these highly publicized accidents taking place due to sleep apnea, that I would hope that insurances will be forced to cover more options. so train crews, you have been warned. This is what to expect in your future. I hope you go through less issues than I did. Trucking industry will go in par with the rail industry, so if you have a CDL, get ready.
mark777
 
Posts: 440
Joined: Thu May 27, 2004 1:43 am
Location: somewhere near Jamaica

Re: LIRR Derailment - Atlantic Terminal track 6

Postby kenorian » Tue Jan 10, 2017 9:02 am

Sleep apnea and insomnia are quite different.

Sleep apnea happens WHILE you are sleeping. It's a pause of anywhere from a few seconds to a half a minute while you are sleeping. It's often prevalent in a person who snores.

When the brain determines that the blood oxygen level has dropped a small amount of adrenaline is triggered to start breathing again. The result is that deep REM sleep isn't achieved. So, even though a person may have had many hours of sleep, it is not productive restful sleep.
kenorian
 
Posts: 1
Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2016 9:32 am

Re: LIRR Derailment - Atlantic Terminal track 6

Postby mirrodie » Tue Jan 10, 2017 2:55 pm

EM2000 wrote:Having two Locomotive Engineer's on a crew as opposed to a Conductor, primarily a customer service representative, only makes sense.


Actually I'm not advocating that as sensible. But if the idea being mentioned here is to have 2 people in the cab at all times, it must meet the scales of economic efficiency.

mark777 wrote:Lastly, there is no reason why the conductor or any crew member can not be up front in the cab to assist the engineer in calling signals while entering critical areas of the RR such as terminals or sharp curves....Announcements could also be done by the brakeman. The conductor could very well be in the cab with the engineer while the train enters the station. While maybe a distraction to some, having that additional person with an extra set of eyes can offer another level of protection while their hand is on the dump cord. You don't need an additional person in the cab full time. A simple redirecting of duties onboard would be suffice.


in a perfect world, sure. But even in your own example, its tough. At first you state that 2nd person being present only upon entiing terminals. But then mention sharp curves. How about going over RR crossings too, then? Too many variables. It would have to be a full time position. But again, not perfect.

Now, do you need 2 people in the cab to run a loco? No. But if the suggestion of 2 people in the cab is to be made, it would need to be economically feasible. You'd have to create a role for the 2nd person in the cab, a role that is hands on int of operation, in order for it to make sense.


So many people here keep harping that there is no way to have a 2nd qualified engineer in the cab at all times. Why not? Cost? YES

And since that the case, having that 2nd engineer, brakeman, or conductor up front will pose the SAME exact reason why it cant' work: COST

Honestly, from an potential engineers point of view, if I were told I'd need a conductor to keep an eye on me to make sure I'm awake, with it and paying attention, that would be demoralizing. And if I were the boss, having to pay a 2nd employee just to make sure the 1st one gets it right makes zero financial sense.

But going back to my initial concept, unless you have a pair one engineers INTERGRATED and sharing in the running the train in the same way an airliner does, (THERE BOTH HAVE HANDS ON ROLES), it doenst make logistic nor financial sense.
All you need is faith
To hear the diesels humming
mirrodie
 
Posts: 448
Joined: Mon Mar 15, 2010 9:23 am

Re: LIRR Derailment - Atlantic Terminal track 6

Postby mirrodie » Tue Jan 10, 2017 2:57 pm

Head-end View wrote:Very good posts by mark777 and puckhead. In terms of realistic operating procedure, I think Mark's suggestion re: crew deployment and tasking is the most likely to happen and be successful. Mostly because it seems practical and it won't cost the railroad any $$$.



Oh, and I meant ot ask, how is it NOT costing any $$$? Its an allocation of resources with costs tied to it.
All you need is faith
To hear the diesels humming
mirrodie
 
Posts: 448
Joined: Mon Mar 15, 2010 9:23 am

Re: LIRR Derailment - Atlantic Terminal track 6

Postby ExCon90 » Tue Jan 10, 2017 3:39 pm

Don't airplanes have dual controls, with duplicate controls on both sides of the cockpit? Lots of retrofitting to do that on a locomotive.
ExCon90
 
Posts: 3376
Joined: Thu Sep 18, 2008 1:22 pm

Re: LIRR Derailment - Atlantic Terminal track 6

Postby rr503 » Tue Jan 10, 2017 5:16 pm

Comparing flying an airplane and driving a train isn't valid. The workload that pilots have to deal with is orders of magnitude larger than that of an engineer. Automation actually has reduced the number of people needed in the cockpit from three to two, and has (generally) prevented many dumb pilot error crashes.

The AF 447 crash was so much more than just automation caused ineptitude. It was TERRIBLE CRM, a lack of communication on all parts, a total loss of situational awareness, bad cockpit design on the part of Airbus, and AF's failure to replace bad pitot tubes.

As far as automation goes, while I agree that it working well is a long way down the road, it'd be a whole lot easier than making some contemporary autopilots, just by the merit of a railroad being a 1 dimensional proposition. Once a way is found to detect trespassers, rail faults, cars on tracks, build reliable computers, etc, we can automate.

More OT though, I think that having 2 ppl in the cab while entering terminals is a no brainer.
rr503
 
Posts: 490
Joined: Sat May 02, 2015 4:13 pm
Location: North by Northwest

Re: LIRR Derailment - Atlantic Terminal track 6

Postby Datenail » Tue Jan 10, 2017 7:20 pm

But going back to my initial concept, unless you have a pair one engineers INTERGRATED and sharing in the running the train in the same way an airliner does, (THERE BOTH HAVE HANDS ON ROLES), it doenst make logistic nor financial sense.


The engineers are the problem. AS was the first with a solution and we are proceeding with his recommendation.
Datenail
 
Posts: 257
Joined: Tue Dec 15, 2009 5:29 pm

Re: LIRR Derailment - Atlantic Terminal track 6

Postby Liquidcamphor » Tue Jan 10, 2017 7:24 pm

Morisot I dont know why you wrote that post so it was redacted by me. Gentlemen, please keep with the topic.
Liquidcamphor
 
Posts: 305
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2004 1:44 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Long Island Rail Road (LIRR)

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests