Re: Does NR know about this?

[mauried@tpg.com.au (Maurie Daly)]

In article <364E303C.F9F@ERIE.NET> James Robinson <NOSPAM@ERIE.NET> writes:
>From: James Robinson <NOSPAM@ERIE.NET>
>Subject: Re: Does NR know about this?
>Date: Sat, 14 Nov 1998 20:37:00 -0500

>David Proctor wrote:

>> (btw, I happen to prefer 2-man crews - I think it is safer for both the
>> public and the community 

>Yup, used to be that trains had five people to handle them, and crews
>operated shorter distances, too.  Luddites used the same argument as the
>numbers of on-train personnel were reduced one at a time, and as the
>distances crews travelled lengthened.  

>New technologies and practices have made railroads safer than they have
>ever been, and there is no reason to assume that, with proper care,
>crews cannot be reduced even more.  Probably inevitable, if not
>required, to keep the industry healthy and competitive.


Could you please enlighten us as to what you are talking about here.
What technologies and practices .
In Australia today , a prang will occur for exactly the same reason that it 
would have occurred 100 years ago, ie driver error or physical infrastructure 
fault , like broken rails or broken wheels.
If drivers are expected to drive for longer hours , and there are to be less 
of them , and there is no form of electronic train protection to override 
drivers when they may mistakes (no ATP in use in Australia yet.), then the 
prang rate will increase.
Hines Hill, Mt Christie and Beresfield wernt statistical anomalies.

MD