|
|
| Re: Canarsie CBTC (99516) | |||
 |
|||
| Home > SubChat | |||
|
[ Read Responses | Post a New Response | Return to the Index ] |
|
||
|
Re: Canarsie CBTC |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Thu Jun 16 09:10:27 2005, in response to Re: Canarsie CBTC, posted by Jeff H. on Wed Jun 15 23:50:00 2005. "I think I've already gone over this several times"No. You've gone over your prejudices and misconceptions without demonstrating that you know very much about CBTC in general and zero about Siemens. You're capable of a marvelous discourse about conventional signalling, and even though I can't follow all of it, I have found myself looking up things just to understand you better. You should take that as a compliment, because it is. That's why I also express fristration with your insistence on degenerating to your discussion to ignorant nonsense when it comes to CBTC - all because you're too intellectually lazy to look up anything (or you're afraid to learn something new??). "CBTC is the "only alternative". Other potential technologies are not being evaluated." After you fill in your own understanding of CBTC (hhey, and ours too, OK?) then you can intelligently discuss the alternatives. Not before. And you have not done that yet. "CBTC is a tremendous 'culture shock' to the way NYCT understands signaling. Strategies to bypass that culture shock by bringing in "untainted" outsiders with a "fresh view" on signaling have not been as successful as hoped," You're OK so far. Change has that affect on people. Good management knows how to deal with that. If you want to read a classic business case on culture shock check out the Harvard Business Review from a few years ago - they have a great article on what happened at Volkswagen's plant in Mexico City. "because in the end, its still all about signaling and safely controlling train movements, which is a craft distinct from ATM machines, web browsers and (yes SB) industrial controls." False statement, and incredibly ignorant on your part. Pure bullshit with nothing -ZERO - to support it except your prejudice towards recent technologies. It's really about the willingness of rank and file to learn how to deal withnew technology - period. There is TWU and its leadership with their heads up their rear-ends, there's the TA with its sometimes overbearing and authoritarian management style (so its a vicious circle) and then there's Siemens stepping into the middle of it all. "Although there are some very qualified people involved with trying to make CBTC work, on the whole, the team just doesn't have the "voodoo". If you are referring to conflict between Siemens and NYCT personnel, you may have a point. But that is a mansagement problem, not a technology problem. How is Siemens' rlationship with RATP in France? How does the degree of culture shock vary there? It might be interesting to compare the two. "Unless you've actually worked in a technical field and experienced good system installs and bad installs, I doubt you can truly understand what I mean by that." I know exactly what you mean, because I've seen that in IT (both commercial and medical IT). I also was lead consultant recently on an NYC project involving introduction of new technology for healthcare and one of the biggest challenges was getting different organizations to work together and buy into thenew concepts. The nuclear power industry is a place where new technologies (such as computers in the control rooms) were resisted because of concerns in mission-critical systems. Ditto for commercial jetliners - remember when flight engineers were replaced by Fuel Management Systems. An Airbus A300crashed early on because of bugs in the software; most recently an A340 nearly crashed. But overall the technology works well (and Boeing has not had a problem with it). |
|
|
|