Re: "lost" trains

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

Tony Gatt wrote in message <386F2C4C.60D66F65@tig.com.au>...

>> You are carrying this a bit far here Tony. Sure, he has the
responsibility
>> for the safety of the passengers, but if he did not know there was
anything
>> wrong with the signals, then it would be unreasonable to expect the
driver
>> to proceed at extreme caution, ready to stop clear of any obstruction. If
>> this was the case, no train would ever get up over the 20km/h mark.
>>
>
>Thats crap and you know it David. How could you even contemplate that last
>comment?? If the signal is full clear then surely there is no problem with
>travelling at track speed.

Which is what I said. I said "if he did not know there was anything wrong
with the signals, then it would be unreasonable to expect the driver to
proceed at extreme caution", in response to your statement "if caution by
the following interurban driver had been excercised the accident either
would not have happened, or it would have been considerably less serious".

It was not actually established that the driver knew there was a train in
front of him, nor which signals were faulty and which were fluctuating. If
he saw one signal fluctuating, was he supposed to proceed at extreme caution
all the way to Central, or just until he found a signal that was not
fluctuating? If the latter, we do not know what he saw when he came around
that bend. If all he saw was the signal displaying a constant green, then he
could be quite rightly excused for assuming it was only the one signal that
he saw fluctuating which was at fault.

>And was it not true that the driver from Cowan Bank had reported signals
>fluctuating at Hawkesbury River..

There are a few signals (two, I believe, although it is a while since I did
a cab ride up ther) between Hawkesbury River and the accident site.

>That to me is a fault, and therefore could be:
>
>1) Signal Control relay forcing signal to show red when of course it should
>have been green ..
>2) Signal control relay failing due to intermittent track circuit showing
Green
>when it should be showing Red.
>
>Which one would you prefer the driver to think if you were a passenger on
the
>train David???

The latter of course. But if he had only seen one faulty signal, and had
then come across one, perhaps two, signals that appeared to be showing
normal indications, then what would you expect him to think? Or would you
expect him to assume that all signals were faulty merely because he had seen
one that was fluctuating, operate at 20km/h all the way to Central taking 3
hours to do it?

>I am as sure as hell hoping every driver of a train I travel on assumes the
>"worst" and proceeds cautiously..
>Better to get there 1 or 2 minutes late than never get there at all..

Or 3 hours late, depending on how far caution goes.

>Please don't post something just for the sake of an argumentative thread..

I am not. I genuinely believed (and still do) that your argument that the
driver should have been exercising caution was without basis. Nobody knows
exactly what the driver saw and what he was told, except the driver himself,
and he did not survive the accident to be able to tell us. You saying he
should have been exercising caution, without knowledge of what he saw or
what he was told (as opposed to what others have said they told him) is
merely supposition. I am engaging in supposition as well, but it is to
counter yours. Given the circumstances, none of us have the right to do
this, since none of us know exactly what he saw and heard.

Dave