|
|
| Amtrak #11 hit by big rig in Aromas CA (1222657) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
| (1222657) | |
Amtrak #11 hit by big rig in Aromas CA |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Thu May 16 21:23:16 2013 KION, CBS 46, Salinas
|
|
|
| (1222660) | |
Re: Amtrak #11 hit by big rig in Aromas CA |
|
|
Posted by seabeachexpress on Thu May 16 21:32:54 2013, in response to Amtrak #11 hit by big rig in Aromas CA, posted by Olog-hai on Thu May 16 21:23:16 2013. Tiny town north of Salinas. Amtrak status says it arrived 1 hr, 40 min late at San Jose. |
|
|
| (1222665) | |
Re: Amtrak #11 hit by big rig in Aromas CA |
|
|
Posted by mike cruz on Thu May 16 21:59:23 2013, in response to Amtrak #11 hit by big rig in Aromas CA, posted by Olog-hai on Thu May 16 21:23:16 2013. Good lord even CA people don't know who runs a friggin train! And the trailers destroyed?...................not the cab considerin he ran INTO the train? LOL |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (1222666) | |
Re: Amtrak #11 hit by big rig in Aromas CA |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Thu May 16 22:03:00 2013, in response to Re: Amtrak #11 hit by big rig in Aromas CA, posted by mike cruz on Thu May 16 21:59:23 2013. What are you talking about? |
|
|
| (1222697) | |
Re: Amtrak #11 hit by big rig in Aromas CA |
|
|
Posted by chud1 on Fri May 17 05:12:39 2013, in response to Amtrak #11 hit by big rig in Aromas CA, posted by Olog-hai on Thu May 16 21:23:16 2013. its engineer who controls da train's motion, not da conductor you idiot media.chud1 |
|
|
| (1222820) | |
Re: Amtrak #11 hit by big rig in Aromas CA |
|
|
Posted by WillD on Fri May 17 17:49:37 2013, in response to Re: Amtrak #11 hit by big rig in Aromas CA, posted by mike cruz on Thu May 16 21:59:23 2013. Good lord even CA people don't know who runs a friggin train!It might have been the conductor who told the reporter the details of the accident as related to him or her by the engineer. And the trailers destroyed?...................not the cab considerin he ran INTO the train? The truck was stationary. In common parlance it was the train that ran into the truck. Olog swapped them because the train was exactly where it belonged, while the truck most decidedly was not. |
|
|
| (1222823) | |
Re: Amtrak #11 hit by big rig in Aromas CA |
|
|
Posted by CJ on Fri May 17 17:58:59 2013, in response to Re: Amtrak #11 hit by big rig in Aromas CA, posted by chud1 on Fri May 17 05:12:39 2013. But isn't the Conductor in charge of the entire train, despite not being in the cab and operating the controls? |
|
|
| (1222829) | |
Re: Amtrak #11 hit by big rig in Aromas CA |
|
|
Posted by R36 #9346 on Fri May 17 18:40:15 2013, in response to Re: Amtrak #11 hit by big rig in Aromas CA, posted by WillD on Fri May 17 17:49:37 2013. It wasn't Olog. The wording on the news site also implies the truck hit the train, not the other way around. TrainOrders also says it was the truck that hit the train. |
|
|
| (1222839) | |
Re: Amtrak #11 hit by big rig in Aromas CA |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Fri May 17 18:56:28 2013, in response to Re: Amtrak #11 hit by big rig in Aromas CA, posted by R36 #9346 on Fri May 17 18:40:15 2013. The truck did hit the train. It was where it was not supposed to be; the train was. |
|
|
| (1222840) | |
Re: Amtrak #11 hit by big rig in Aromas CA |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Fri May 17 18:57:05 2013, in response to Re: Amtrak #11 hit by big rig in Aromas CA, posted by CJ on Fri May 17 17:58:59 2013. Yes he is. |
|
|
| (1222841) | |
Re: Amtrak #11 hit by big rig in Aromas CA |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Fri May 17 18:57:26 2013, in response to Re: Amtrak #11 hit by big rig in Aromas CA, posted by chud1 on Fri May 17 05:12:39 2013. What? There's nothing in there that implied that the conductor was operating the train. |
|
|
| (1222853) | |
Re: Amtrak #11 hit by big rig in Aromas CA |
|
|
Posted by Dan Lawrence on Fri May 17 19:25:07 2013, in response to Re: Amtrak #11 hit by big rig in Aromas CA, posted by CJ on Fri May 17 17:58:59 2013. Now days the conductor is in the cab with the engineer. No more cabooses. |
|
|
| (1222854) | |
Re: Amtrak #11 hit by big rig in Aromas CA |
|
|
Posted by Dan Lawrence on Fri May 17 19:27:12 2013, in response to Re: Amtrak #11 hit by big rig in Aromas CA, posted by Olog-hai on Fri May 17 18:57:26 2013. Not operating, but there are no more cabooses, so the conductor is in the cab with the engineer. |
|
|
| (1222862) | |
Re: Amtrak #11 hit by big rig in Aromas CA |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Fri May 17 19:38:27 2013, in response to Re: Amtrak #11 hit by big rig in Aromas CA, posted by Dan Lawrence on Fri May 17 19:27:12 2013. Somebody has to sit in front of the big red button. Can't trust engineers to do that. :(
|
|
|
| (1223107) | |
Re: Amtrak #11 hit by big rig in Aromas CA |
|
|
Posted by WillD on Sat May 18 11:09:10 2013, in response to Re: Amtrak #11 hit by big rig in Aromas CA, posted by R36 #9346 on Fri May 17 18:40:15 2013. Ah, so it did. Sorry, I got this thread confused with the one Peter Rosa posted a little bit later about the stuck on a crossing being struck by an NS train.Odd that this is the second time an Amtrak train out west has been struck by a semi truck. And yet the NTSB would rather force the train to become even heavier, rather than changing regs on truckers who manage to blunder into the side of a damn passenger train. Funny how they have nothing to say about passenger cars who also end up in the path of these wayward truckers. |
|
|
| (1223119) | |
Re: Amtrak #11 hit by big rig in Aromas CA |
|
|
Posted by merrick1 on Sat May 18 13:02:15 2013, in response to Re: Amtrak #11 hit by big rig in Aromas CA, posted by WillD on Sat May 18 11:09:10 2013. The NTSB does not "force" anything. It is an investigatory agency with no enforcement power. The quotation from the report reads "Among other things, the panel also RECOMMENDED the development of side-impact worthiness standards." (emphasis added) |
|
|
| (1223252) | |
Re: Amtrak #11 hit by big rig in Aromas CA |
|
|
Posted by WillD on Sat May 18 23:42:52 2013, in response to Re: Amtrak #11 hit by big rig in Aromas CA, posted by merrick1 on Sat May 18 13:02:15 2013. Of course. But while the FAA and NHTSA get to pay lip service to the NTSB's recommendations, the FRA somehow always seems to adopt them, no matter how ruinously inefficient it makes passenger rail transport. |
|
|
| (1223259) | |
Re: Amtrak #11 hit by big rig in Aromas CA |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Sat May 18 23:58:18 2013, in response to Re: Amtrak #11 hit by big rig in Aromas CA, posted by WillD on Sat May 18 23:42:52 2013. And the reason for that is attorneys. Failure to follow "recommendations" results in liability and judgement in plaintiff's favor. |
|
|
| (1223270) | |
Re: Amtrak #11 hit by big rig in Aromas CA |
|
|
Posted by WillD on Sun May 19 02:01:56 2013, in response to Re: Amtrak #11 hit by big rig in Aromas CA, posted by SelkirkTMO on Sat May 18 23:58:18 2013. If that were true then the FAA would have rolled out NextGen ATC 20 some odd years ago, every aircraft would have a ballistic recovery parachute, and buses would weigh 80 or more tons while using two drivers, all in the name of safety. Somehow those two modes are able to avoid enacting NTSB recommendations, while rail, especially passenger rail, will always end up being subject to those NTSB recs.Hell, that's why I can't say I'm overly upset about the freight railroads' agitation over the PTC mandate. Their regulatory capture of the FRA has kept them from having to enact even cursory improvements which would greatly improve passenger rail safety, and now they're being made to pay for their lax approach to safety. |
|
|
| (1223273) | |
Re: Amtrak #11 hit by big rig in Aromas CA |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Sun May 19 02:24:17 2013, in response to Re: Amtrak #11 hit by big rig in Aromas CA, posted by WillD on Sun May 19 02:01:56 2013. If we're going to live in a society where Darwin is required to live in a bubble too, along with everybody, else then this is the price. Rest assured that when it comes down to the lawsuits over an air crash, a car crash, or a train crash, the attorneys and those they sue have already places a cash value on human life. If it's cheaper to just pay out, they'll do that instead of tightening up their issues. All comes down to which is the cheaper path for them. |
|
|
