Washington subway crash

[Shawnee123]

Certainly it's an intricate dealing. You think there'd be a flowchart or something.

[classicman]

...or a graph! We like graphs

[Clodfobble]

...Right up until a negligent train driver causes a wreck, and they suddenly decide that what we really need for safety is computer automation...

[ZenGum]

What a way to run a railroad!

In our hippy-fascist social utopia Down Under, senior management can be held criminally liable for workplace deaths. The charge isn't "murder" but can still result in prison. Do you have that in the Great Satan?

[glatt]

The NTSB is holding hearings this week. The first day of hearings provided no new information. Yesterday did provide some very interesting information that I hadn't heard before.

Alstom, the maker of the sensor that mysteriously failed to sense a train, causing the Metro train crash last June, is blaming Metro for using 3rd party hardware in the circuit. They mixed brand new 3rd party hardware with a 40 year old circuit and didn't give the technicians installing the new hardware instructions on how to do it correctly.

The Metro engineer, Johann Glansdorp, "was told Alstom would not consent with the mixing of equipment," said Illenberg, the lead Alstom representative for the investigation. During the overnight shift June 16, Metro replaced the component as part of an upgrade of its aging track system.

Illenberg said the specific risk associated with using non-Alstom equipment is that it would require boosting the power level of the device. That, in turn, could increase the potential for a signal malfunction that could prevent the system from detecting a train on the tracks, causing a crash, according to industry sources.

tw is right, it is Metro management's fault.

In interviews with federal investigators, Metro technicians who worked on the portion of track involved in the accident before the crash said the installation of equipment by Union Switch & Signal caused speed and power problems because it did not properly match the existing equipment, much of which they noted was 40 years old. "That's obviously mismatched," said Thomas Barcheski, a 21-year veteran of Metro at the time of the crash, according to a transcript of his interview.

Barcheski said he had asked superiors for new procedures for testing and handling the equipment but was told that there were none and that no training on it was provided by Metro. "We're not given anything," Barcheski, an automatic train control mechanic, said in his interview.

Metro officials testified Tuesday that information about new testing requirements was in the 2006 bulletin. But Alan Nabb, a senior Metro official, testified Wednesday that distribution of the bulletin to Metro's 190 technicians was "probably uneven."

Barcheski told investigators that he was not aware of those testing requirements. Moreover, employees said they were frustrated at their inability to fix problems linked to the new gear and were discouraged about trying to get the construction crews that installed the devices to return to adjust them.

"It fell on deaf ears most of the time," said Bruce Weibel, an automatic-train-control mechanic.

This information is finally coming out. So they know it's a problem with electronic hardware compatibility, but they still haven't fixed it. I know because the trains are still being driven by humans. The derailment less than two weeks ago was caused by driver error, as pointed out by tw above. The human drivers are now causing accidents. It's time they fix the circuits and get the trains back to computer control again.

[Clodfobble]

The cynic in me says they deliberately won't be fixing the circuits until the whole investigation and final rulings are done, because to do so would be admitting that that was the problem in the first place.

[tw]

Originally Posted by Clodfobble

The cynic in me says they deliberately won't be fixing the circuits until the whole investigation and final rulings are done, ...

I also integrated late 1950 electronic technology into 1980s equipment. It's not hard or difficult. It does not create reliability failures. Electricity never changed. But it requires an engineer (or other patriotic American) to have proper information (ie all tech specs) AND for management to understand significance of technical facts so that management can provide the necessary "attitude and knowledge". What did change?

Alstom warned against mixing components across all train control systems.

That says near zero - by itself is literally insulting to all readers. But then something cryptic follows about power mismatches. Ok. Reporter is not doing her job. Posting hearsay rather than numbers. Good reporters, at a minimum demand and then quote numbers even if she does not understand them.

However the reporter did include what any 15 year old would understand:

Moreover, employees said they were frustrated at their inability to fix problems linked to the new gear and were discouraged about trying to get the construction crews that installed the devices to return to adjust them.

"It fell on deaf ears most of the time," said Bruce Weibel, an automatic-train-control mechanic.

Is that hearsay - subjective statements - more informative? No numbers means the reporter's information is almost insulting. But at least she provided something minimal.

The Alstom bi-phase data port can only output 10 milliamps. The Union Signal receiver requires 12 milliamps minimum. We don't know anything until we have those numbers. Then a significant minority learn from the 1% how simplistic this really is AND how much contempt management had by not knowing something that students in college physics labs measure. If responsible management was told this, then a responsible management would have shut down that entire region - replaced all signaling with emergency flagmen.

If those numbers were provided, then reporter’s other hearsay (subjective) quote has credibility. Any manager in Metro - even personal director - who could not understand significance in those numbers should be fired for not being sufficiently educated in basic management principles. Answers must always include the perspective of numbers. Without numbers, then perspective is easily replaced by emotion and wild speculation.

Demonstrated is the same problem in this discussion: Toyota stop sale.

Apparently we do not only have a serious Metro management problem. We also have an investigation committee or newspaper reporter with the same problem. Answers given without numbers should result in sharp condemnation. People died. Subjective citations simply insult even the victims. No numbers why the problem would not be fixed; requiring, if necessary, widespread and public condemnation.

There is sufficient evidence to indict management. The investigation committee’s job is to obtain facts – especially numbers – to convert an indictment into a scathing accusation. Doing any less would even insult victims of that crash. And should concern every Metro user.

How to have a solution. It starts with the reporters always including numbers. If a power mismatch exists, the reporter must include the appropriate numbers or a URL. Numbers must always exist to provide the necessary perspective. No numbers is how the "politically correct" get problems ignored.

[glatt]

Yeah. Well, the Post is a shell of its former self. I'm just glad they had a reporter at the hearing.

[tw]

Originally Posted by glatt

Yeah. Well, the Post is a shell of its former self.

Is it the Post that is degrading? Or is it a new breed of reporter taught to be a communication major and therefore does not understand how to ferret out the irrefutable fact?

I was amazed back at Watergate and again during "Mission Accomplished" how Bob Woodward routinely corralled facts. I was always amazed how David Habersham even identified an American defeat in Vietnam by viewing facts ... in 1963. And I routinely have contempt for the local 'Action News' or NBC Dateline who spend so much time with gossip or hype for ratings. I truly miss Ted Koppel.

Is it the Post that does not have talent? Or are so many communication majors do not learn what is necessary to have a fact? There are fundamental reasons why all military academies graduate everyone with engineering training. The military needs people who can analyze and extract the irrefutable fact.

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

Sounds like the same thing Toyota is trying to do with their electronics.

Demonstrated is the same problem in this discussion: Toyota stop sale .

Does Metro have severe problems? 40% of the deaths in America are all one that one transit system. Numbers are damning. By not providing numbers, someone is either hiding something. Or someones are simply not able to grasp fundamental and damning facts. Or a third possibility. The entire Metro management is being manipulated for a massive beheading. I doubt it. But that is also a possibility.

[xoxoxoBruce]

C'mon, tw. The reporter isn't cross examining these people, just reporting what is said in the hearings. It's up to the people holding the hearings to ask for details.

[TheMercenary]

Sounds like the same thing Toyota is trying to do with their electronics.

[Clodfobble]

Cool.

[ZenGum]

Investigative journalism is very nearly dead.
Most readers want easily digestible answers so they know who to blame; doesn't matter if they're correct. Managers want profit - more stories from fewer staff - so journalists have become churnalists - recycling press releases and web stories. And that is before we even get into sinister conflict of interest/mass-manipulation/distraction issues.

Oooh look look! Brangelina may be breaking up!

Frankly, for this issue at least, I'd trust the cellar investigative team more than I'd trust even the WaPo.

[ZenGum]

That is a damn good question. I wonder if the investigation will even address it.

[glatt]

My understanding from what little I've read about the bakes is that when the train is in automatic mode, driven by the computer, you apply the brakes by hitting the panic button. The brakes then go on with full force and don't come off. It's an all or nothing emergency brake.

Gradual braking can only be done if the train is in manual mode and the driver is actually driving.

During the crash, this train was in automatic mode.

There's something strange going on if the skid marks stop and then continue again.