Railroad Forums 

  • National Railroading Safety (Amtrak & Host Railroads)

  • Discussion related to Amtrak also known as the National Railroad Passenger Corp.
Discussion related to Amtrak also known as the National Railroad Passenger Corp.

Moderators: GirlOnTheTrain, mtuandrew, Tadman

 #1461130  by justalurker66
 
I'll agree with ThirdRail's sentiments on this issue as far as the railroader vs railroader argument.

The safety culture is a valid question ... it was been raised by media in the NTSB press conference for the Cayce collision. The public, not just railroads, have an interest in whether Amtrak is operating safely. Which is why it is good to have a rational, non-emotional discussion of the issues.

It is emotional to ask "Amtrak has had three fatal incidents within the past few weeks - what is wrong at Amtrak?" Which is why I am glad the topic has been expanded here to host railroads. "What is wrong with railroads?" would be a better question. Are their efforts to operate safely enough? If they are not enough what are the railroads doing to be better?

ThirdRail' posed the question "what are railroaders doing about the problem?" Are they leaving it for others to solve while they spend time complaining on the Internet?

I am outside of the industry so the best I can do is talk to my Congressman. Then they can talk to the FRA and hold hearings. Is that what railroaders want?
 #1461142  by Greg Moore
 
I'm sort of working on a longer reply in my head, which may or may not make it here.

Let me add though, that The Checklist Manifesto is a great read and I recommend it to anyone reading this thread.

Another area to look at is the US Navy's SUBSAFE program, put into place after the Navy lost the USS Thresher. Prior to that they had lost 16 submarines to non-combat causes. Since then, 1, and that was the non-SUBSAFE certified USS Scorpion.

Some people say that Admiral Rickover was an absolute hard-ass to work with. And by all accounts, he was: but mostly because he expected absolutely accountability. Culture has to come from the top down. If management is giving both the message, "cut costs" and "be safe" something has to give. But it also, as Thirdrail7 brings up, has to come from the bottom up. People have to take pride in their work. This is a very much a feedback loop. If management expects and rewards safety, people will work towards it. If people work towards it, they'll hold other accountable, including management.

There's no single solution to increasing safety. Technology as I said before is just one small part of it and can often lead to disasters on its own.
As I mentioned before, I highly recommend reading "Normal Accidents" by Charles Perrow.
(edited to correct mistake in regards to Nimitz v. Rickover).
Last edited by Greg Moore on Sun Feb 11, 2018 8:23 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 #1461161  by mtuandrew
 
Question for the railroaders: what role does (and should) the FRA play here? It’s been hobbled like most other executive agencies, most recently by the acting director leaving (amid conflict of interest) with no permanent director in place (from Congressional pushback - Batory seem like a great choice otherwise.)
 #1461175  by David Benton
 
Criminal investigators are good when there is a possibility that someone may lie or mislead to cover their butts. Or there is a possibility of outside influence .
A friend of mine was an ex cop , who went to work for the govt investigating workplace accidents.
All was fine , until he got sent to a accident site where several civilians lost their life . He was horrified there was no attempt to seal the scene, and that key people were allowed to leave the site. People trained in safety are not equipped to adequately conduct a investigation into what is basically a potential manslaughter/ homicide, their focus is rightly safety , and preventing the recurrence of the accident. To have them setup as criminal investigators as well would be a needless duplication in most cases.
 #1461184  by Greg Moore
 
N91566 wrote:
Greg Moore wrote: Some people say that Admiral Nimitz was an absolute hard-ass to work with....
Think you mean Admiral Rickover.
You are absolutely correct. My mistake.
 #1461328  by Backshophoss
 
Figure on some lawsuits directed at CSX after the NTSB findings are public from the Derailments near Cumberland WVa. and the wreck in Cayce Nc.
The "cost cutting" that EHH pushed along with the wholesale changes to the Railroad will come back to bite the corporation!
 #1461380  by Safetee
 
Unfortunately most railroads today do their vetting via the dot drug and alcohol prescribed procedures. For DOT alcohol testing, somebody who was drunk as as a skunk 8 hours before testing should pass with flying colors. And ironically somebody who partook of cannabis 28 days before testing will usually be drummed out of service. The MBTA operator in question probably never flunked an alcohol test.
 #1461382  by justalurker66
 
Safetee wrote:The MBTA operator in question probably never flunked an alcohol test.
He did get one drunk driving conviction in an jurisdiction where his father wasn't a judge. Otherwise his failures were covered up in the legal system in Boston. Reduced charges, no charges and none of the required self reporting by said engineer. Perhaps if he was not related to a judge he would not have slipped through so easily.

As far as workplace administered tests I assume (as you do) that he passed (if any were administered).
 #1461512  by Jeff Smith
 
Note: this is not airlines.net, but I do post this as people often bring up the airlines as a point of comparison (which is valid).

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2018/02/13/un ... video.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

When something goes wrong on an airplane and it crashes, EVERYONE dies. Thankfully in this case, that didn't happen. Same thing with casino buses, etc., which usually have much more severe casualties (I recall the crash of a privately operated casino bus on the Bronx/Westchester border a few years back).

I note this because someone posted in the SC thread (since deleted, since we have this topic) "thank God for airlines"...