Re: "lost" trains

["Dave Proctor" <thadocta@spambait.dingoblue.net.au>]

RNS wrote in message ...
>
>
>The reason he should have exercised caution in this case was that he
>was aware that the steam train was having difficulties ahead and a
>little bit of caution for the next two signals would not have caused
>the system to grind to a hault. Also there had been ongoing problems
>on Cowan bank with trains stalling and, indeed, signal failures.

Again, how do you know he was aware? If all he had seen was a green signal
(and had not seen the signal showing green and red intermittently) he would
have had no reason to suspect that something was wrong.

Dave

>
>
>On Fri, 31 Dec 1999 18:54:57 +1100, "Dave Proctor"
><thadocta@spambait.dingoblue.net.au> wrote:
>
>>RNS wrote in message <2sko6sghnn6hsi1jldmplv0kv3fvo8j1t2@4ax.com>...
>>>
>>>This means that the same thing was happening that day as the day of
>>>the Cowan bank accident, except on the down instead of the up!
>>>Whilst the signal failures being experienced on Cowan Bank may not
>>>have been the only reason for the accident, it was certainly a major
>>>contributing factor.
>>>Once again, if caution by the following interurban driver had been
>>>excercised the accident either would not have happened, or it would
>>>have been considerablly less serious.
>>
>>But why should he have been exercising caution? My understanding is that
he
>>received green signals. The signalling was definitely the cause (notice I
>>did not say "at fault") but if every driver constantly exercised caution
>>when receiving green signals, the system would grind to a halt.
>>
>>Dave
>>
>