by JoeG
I believe that trains should be required to have 2 people in the locomotive cab. Maybe an exception could be made for routes with cab signals and train control like the NEC, where engineers not acknowledging a restrictive signal will get penalty brake applications. The FRA has all kinds of onerous, sometimes silly, "saftety" rules designed to counter far-fetched possibilities. However, the rail industry is notorious for running trains in such a way that crews are frequently exhausted and sleep-deprived. Why won't the FRA make a rule to deal with this widespread problem? If planes need copilots, so do trains--the safety of more people is imperiled in a train crash. The second person in the cab doesn't have to be a fully qualified engineer. He could be a trainee, a brakeman, etc.
In the fifties and sixties, the AAR ran a nasty campaign charging "featherbedding", etc. to aid its campaign to get rid of firemen. Now, it may be that a rule requiring another person in the cab would be held up to ridicule because of memories of this campaign. But now, freight trains usually have 2 crew members (compared to at least 5 in the old days) but, since there are no caboooses, both men ride in the cab. So only passenger trains have only 1 person in the cab. This doesn't make any sense--the most at-risk trains have no "co-pilot".
In the fifties and sixties, the AAR ran a nasty campaign charging "featherbedding", etc. to aid its campaign to get rid of firemen. Now, it may be that a rule requiring another person in the cab would be held up to ridicule because of memories of this campaign. But now, freight trains usually have 2 crew members (compared to at least 5 in the old days) but, since there are no caboooses, both men ride in the cab. So only passenger trains have only 1 person in the cab. This doesn't make any sense--the most at-risk trains have no "co-pilot".