Originally Posted By vbdad55 there is nothing I would put past that bunch in Washington ( especially the Chicago bunch that moved in) - but I trust basically no one there right now- regardless of what side of the aisle they sit on.
Originally Posted By Socrates The government may own GM; who is managing GM? Socrates "The unexamined life is not worth living."
Originally Posted By MPierce >> there is nothing I would put past that bunch in Washington ( especially the Chicago bunch that moved in) - but I trust basically no one there right now- regardless of what side of the aisle they sit on. << That is a sound philosophy.
Originally Posted By MPierce >> The government may own GM; who is managing GM? << Does it really matter with the Government pulling the strings?
Originally Posted By SuperDry In reading the article, one thing that stood out to me was that there was not even a mention of the driver having a responsibility to know that they are on the correct track. That seems to me to be a fundamental part of safely operating a rail system, yet the only mention of the driver's part in it was that his rear-view windows were fogged. That may have prevented him from seeing the train behind him, but not from determining what track he was on. The report was preliminary, and then just a summary of that was published in the newspaper, so we'll just have to see what the actual, final report says when it comes out.
Originally Posted By trekkeruss Look at this photo of the driver's seat and how it is position relative to the side windows, the mirrors, and the front windshield: <a href="http://tinyurl.com/y9hbvty" target="_blank">http://tinyurl.com/y9hbvty</a> If his side windows were sufficiently fogged, the only way for him to know if he was on the correct track would be to look out the front windshield after clearing the switch. If he was moving onto the MK loop as was supposed to occur, he would have seen the Epcot track veer off to his right. This would be more evident if his peripheral vision was better, but imagine putting blinders on, and thinking about driving in reverse by only looking out the front windshield of you car. Would you be driving trying to see what was behind you so you wouldn't crash into something, or would you drive looking out the front windshield to see where you had been? I have no doubt the driver has some responsibility, but given the circumstances, I don't how much, especially since it's hard to say just how well he could see.
Originally Posted By SuperDry <<< only way for him to know if he was on the correct track would be to look out the front windshield after clearing the switch. >>> Precisely. <<< Would you be driving trying to see what was behind you so you wouldn't crash into something, or would you drive looking out the front windshield to see where you had been? >>> My point wasn't that it could have or should have occurred to the driver to look straight forward to verify he was on the correct rail after clearing the switch, but that it should be part of Standard Operating Procedure and therefore part of their training and written procedures that he do so. Unlike the person in the control booth with an indicator light or the maintenance guy in the shop that operates the switch, the driver is the only one that can physically see the actual position of the switch. In this case, since they're backing up, they can't see until after they back up over it, but even at that point he has at least 4 train lengths of track before he reaches the station, which is plenty of time to observe which track he's on and stop if necessary.
Originally Posted By trekkeruss <<My point wasn't that it could have or should have occurred to the driver to look straight forward to verify he was on the correct rail after clearing the switch, but that it should be part of Standard Operating Procedure and therefore part of their training and written procedures that he do so.>> I think the SOP indicates having a spotter, and therefore there is no SOP for that type of driver awareness.
Originally Posted By SuperDry <<< I think the SOP indicates having a spotter, >>> There is now, but I don't think there was at the time of the accident.
Originally Posted By Socrates MPierce -- When you say "the Government", who do you mean? For example, I've heard the Attorney General of New York is threatening to sue Toyota. Is that what you're talking about? Socrates "The unexamined life is not worth living."
Originally Posted By MPierce >> MPierce -- When you say "the Government", who do you mean? << You know, the bureaucrat stacked Federal Government. You know, the one that seems to want to dictate every aspect of our lives right now. You know the ones that keeps bailing out failed businesses, and banks, and people who are to dependent to takes care of themselves. You know the one that keeps hiring, and growing bigger daily, just so they can set up more review panels that spend a lot of time discussing our problems while spending no time solving them. You know the one that manages to bankrupt every single social program they get involved in. That Government.
Originally Posted By Mr X ***I have no doubt the driver has some responsibility*** I don't think so. I have no idea how rear-view mirrors are supposed to work on a six car train, but requiring a driver to back the thing up is irresponsible right from the start. I would not place the blame on the guy in the cockpit in this case, not even a little bit, any more than I would blame an airline pilot for crashing into something going backwards (yes I know that's not possible, but you get my drift). The procedures that the corporation had in place were wholly inadequate, to say the least.
Originally Posted By Mr X ***I think the SOP indicates having a spotter, and therefore there is no SOP for that type of driver awareness.*** ***There is now, but I don't think there was at the time of the accident.*** I'm no train safety inspection expert, but it would seem to me that a spotter would be better served as a failsafe rather than rely on that for your whole process. That would still be no reason for the driver not to know on which track he was operating at all times. Even in reverse (which is absurd). Recently (actually since this thread went down, in fact), I've been riding in the front cars of Tokyo subway trains just out of curiosity regarding super-safe procedures and all that. I observed an AMAZING amount of cross-check double-check activity, along with an attention to detail that I think WDW monorail executives should really consider IF they don't want any more dead people.
Originally Posted By MPierce >> What's your solution to the problem, MPierce? << Would you care for my 2600 page manifesto on salvaging a capitalist system run amuck or the short version? Short version allow failing systems to fail. That's why we have bankruptcy courts. That's where you go to restructure your contractual obligations and restructure your debt. Federally insured banks should all have independent review boards to control loan, and investment stratigies, with an oversite committee from the Government who's only autority would be to question high risk loans. The Federal Government should not be expected to be a wet nurse to privately held failing businesses. They should only become involved in business if National Security or massive fraud are involved. Those are just a few of the things that could have been implemented rather than Government opening up their pocket book one more time, and leading this Nation further into debt. Now that everybody is completely bored do you have an alternative solution SuperDry or are you completely happy with the way events have been unfolding?
Originally Posted By MPierce >> The procedures that the corporation had in place were wholly inadequate, to say the least. << That's the reason there was an accident to begin with. Had the original safety system designed for this type of operation been in place there would have been no accident. Short cuts to save time were implemented while the original safety procedures had been ignored for a very long time.
Originally Posted By Socrates "You know, the bureaucrat stacked Federal Government. You know, the one that seems to want to dictate every aspect of our lives right now. You know the ones that keeps bailing out failed businesses, and banks, and people who are to dependent to takes care of themselves. You know the one that keeps hiring, and growing bigger daily, just so they can set up more review panels that spend a lot of time discussing our problems while spending no time solving them. You know the one that manages to bankrupt every single social program they get involved in. That Government." I must confess I'm a bit confused. It sounds like you're unhappy with the Executive Branch, which executes the laws and is headed by the President. So are you saying you're upset with the President? Or perhaps the Legislative Branch, which passes those laws. Is that where the trouble is? Socrates "The unexamined life is not worth living."
Originally Posted By Spirit of 74 There was a time when I hated government corruption (and that covers 80% of ours on a good day) more than Big Business/Wall Street and the morons who run TWDC ... now, I'm so disgusted with all of them and everyone, I think I'm just gonna decide to hate George Clooney, Tom Hanks and Jennifer Aniston instead. Don't eat eggs before bed!
Originally Posted By Socrates Everyone should hate government corruption. But in a democracy, who is the government? Socrates "The only good is knowledge and the only evil is ignorance."
