Michael Cash <mikecash@buggerallspammers.com> wrote:
> Here's food for thought:
>
> Imagine if the vehicle in question had been an automobile instead of a
> train.
>
> At 11 months total driving experience, the driver would still be over
> two years away from even being eligible to upgrade to a license to
> drive a bus.
>
> So in the case of automotive licensing, the system would consider him
> far short of being capable of hauling 30 or 40 people around. Yet in
> the case of choo-choo licensing they give him a limited express with
> 580 people onboard.

Hi Mike,

i don't think we can meaningfully compare the two systems: train drivers
receive rigourous training and supervision, and they operate under much
more restrictive conditions (the most important one the fact that they
don't actually steer the train) and follow a very tight script of
actions during their trip. They are being supported by a generally
well-thought out and well-developed safety system (from dead-man
switches to signal blocks with automatic overrun braking, etc.), and all
this means that they don't often face situations where they would have
to make too many decisions at once or simply lose control of the train
due to environmenmtal conditions - this is what usually kills
inexperienced car drivers: misassessment of the interaction between car
and environment.

In this case it is very likely that the accident was caused by an
unfortunate combination of one of the oldest safety systems in the
railway network plus a speeding driver (Ken can explain in detail why
drivers "have to speed" at times).

And i think that both contributing factors have to be considered
carefully in view of the privatization issue - show me any country in
the world where train safety has improved as the consequenece of
privatization...

Regards: Al

--