Re: British Accident 1sr Report Out - Thames Driver Not Being Blamed At This Point

["Derick Wuen" <cullend@webone.com.au>]

Eddie Oliver wrote in message <3810425A.76EB9041@efs.mq.edu.au>...
>David Johnson wrote:
>>
>> Eddie Oliver wrote:
>>
>> > After all,  how else would you abbreviate "signal passed at danger"?
>>


<snip>
 If a SPAD - even a
>minor one - is automatically recorded, it naturally lifts the apparent
>frequency above what it would be on the basis of people reporting them.
>
>Eddie

I still think its chilling that fundamental safety gets abbreviated,
summarised and now according to Eddie, categorized ...... A minor SPAD, a
semi-minor SPAD, a serious SPAD, a Ladbroke Grove SPAD....

The use of the acronym desensitizes the meaning such that the psychology is
all wrong for safety culture.

If a signal is passed at danger and it "does not matter", then remove that
signal... its obviously superfluous.

I suggest that a target for rail operations should be zero tolerance to
passing a signal at danger, and not substitute categorization, statistics
and acronyms for safety management.

For London automatic train stop is the main solution. It will only cost
money.