Re: Rail + Safety Records

[dave pierson <pierson@mail.dec.com>]

Dave Malcolm wrote:
 
> In article <3847705a@vk4lw.caboolture.net.au> "Thomas Fothergill"
><s370507@student.uq.edu.au> writes:
> >From: "Thomas Fothergill" <s370507@student.uq.edu.au>
> >Subject: Re: Rail + Safety Records
> >Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1999 17:28:10 +1000

> >ahh but how many of those were due to shoddy infrastructure and
> >maintainance, and how many were due to driver error????
> >hmm?

	My observation, US data mostly, nonprofessional examination (of
	released reports):

		'person failure' leads.

	Mechanical failure (failed wheel, axle, boiler explosion,
	signalling breakdown, design error (probabable for Ladbrooke
	Grove  (OKOK, thats non US)) is way less prominent.  It would
	need a disinterested look thru the Australian reporst to come
	up with an anaswer & then it would be subject to debate &
	uncertainity in some cases.  (somewhere between 5 to 1 and
	3 to 1, withe the difference in how 'cause' is assigned.
	If anyone has _professional_ data, disregard...)

	As to the inherent unsafeness of rail, welllllll, most of
	those points can bve 'flipped' to indicate inherent safety,
	i think.  The approximate parity (US data...) between
	rail, air & bus, with autos 10x more lethal, might indicate
	that professional, trained staff are worth a lot.  (I'm
	Assuming the same ration holds, roughly, in Australia...)

	[If it needs saying:
		My sympathies to the crews, passengers & families
		involved, including the rescue crews...]

-- 
thanks
dave pierson			|the facts, as accurately as i can manage,
Smart Modular Technology  	|the opinions, my own.
334 South St			|
Shrewsbury, Mass   		|pierson@mail.dec.com
"He has read everything, and, to his credit, written nothing."  A J
Raffles
"Internet: net of a million lies..." 	after Vernor Vinge