The drivers have apparently been complaining that something like this might happen. Hopefully now they'll do something, although it's sad that this is what it takes.
I've heard about Metro budget, management, and maintenance problems for years
June 23 2009, 12:05 AM
And they already pretty much persuaded me to NEVER take Metro if ANY other alternative, including walking, biking, driving, taxiing, bussing, flying, transportering, teleconferencing, etc., was available. This latest tragedy has simply reconfirmed the logic of my choice.
Amazing to me that the London Underground has been running since 1863 and the New York City Subway since 1904. In all those years (over 100 in New York's case, over 145 in London's), I don't think either of those systems had as many problems as the D.C. Metro which opened in 1976. Shoddy workmanship and low-ball budgeting on the one hand, and safety-critical systems on the other do NOT go together!
I visit DC a couple of times a year and have always enjoyed riding the Metro, especially as compared to the NY subway system. At least they clean inside the Metro occasionally and I've never had a train just stop mid trip for 5-10 minutes which happens in nyc at least a couple of times a week.
The accident sounds horrible. But I'm not convinced it couldn't happen anywhere else if a system failed. If you've ever seen some of the system they use to control MTA (you can view it from the south end of the West 4th platform) it looks like it hasn't been upgraded since the 1950s.
Houndentenor
"Get the trash off the street and back on the stage where it belongs." -- Bette Midler
That old MTA control system is probably based on electro-mechanical switching. Vs. newfangled computerised switching used for Metro.
Anyone who has any knowledge of the software industry will definitely opt for electro-mechanical simplicity over software-controlled complexity all other things being equal.
With an infinitesimal number of exceptions, ALL software is excessively complex, riddled with errors and faults, and the industry that produces it is cavalier to the point of criminal liability - EXCEPT unlike virtually every other industry that makes security-critical or safety-critical products in this country, software manufacturers are not held legally liable in any way for their mediocrity and negligence. Worse, they have been so successful in brainwashing the public that they have us all believing that not working the way it's supposed to a large percentage of the time, doing things it's not supposed to far more often than is acceptable, and failing frequently are simply unavoidable characteristics of the product that we all have to live with. And guess what? We do. Because we're stupid sheep.
Because he rides that line I wanted to make sure he was okay.
Yes, there was an automated system that should have worked and didn't. But there's also a manual brake and one has to wonder why the train operator didn't pull it. (There may well be a good explanation but no one seems to know.)
I was also told all the trains are being operated manually today until they can figure out what the problem is.
Houndentenor
"Get the trash off the street and back on the stage where it belongs." -- Bette Midler
I go into DC on Tuesdays and Thursdays, and live on the west end of the line. This accident was on the east end. I lived in the DC area and took the train a lot from 1990-1996 and then came back in 2005 and saw that the maintenance of the system had gone downhill since the 90s. When you see water gushing into underground stations and parts of the tunnel ceiling falling down, and hear all the employee complaints about lack of maintenance, it makes you wonder about safety. In this case one train rear-ended another. Supposedly they have computer systems that would make this impossible. I don't think more is known at this time about what went wrong.
*************************************************** ''It is easy to say that such and such a singer has sold his soul, when really we are only annoyed that Satan has never offered us as high a price.''
I read the CNN article, but it didn't ever say how one train managed to get itself on top of another one. Were they both running on the same tracks? Did one derail and hit the other? I don't understand... did a track fall apart somewhere? Was someone at fault? Not that I need to blame someone, but I'm just curious if one driver missed a track switch or something.
Both trains were going in the same direction on the same track. One was stopped and the second approached at a high speed. The operator of the first lived but the operator of the striking train died and the striking train was also an older one that does not have the data recorders that the other one had, so learning the exact cause may be tricky. The trains have an automatic mode to keep them from colliding during rush hour when there are many on the same track. This was during rush hour. The train's auto mode can be overridden, but I haven't heard yet whether that was the case.
*************************************************** ''It is easy to say that such and such a singer has sold his soul, when really we are only annoyed that Satan has never offered us as high a price.''
As annoying as it is sometimes to wait, MTA cars are not supposed to leave the station until the train has cleared the next station. Sometimes that doesn't happen but it usually does and when that is working it prevents something like this from happening.
Houndentenor
"Get the trash off the street and back on the stage where it belongs." -- Bette Midler
The trains auto-pilot had malfunctioned that day and was non-operational, AND
June 24 2009, 1:07 AM
The train was too old and had not been retrofitted for auto-piloting despite their national review suggesting these trains be eliminated or retro-fitted every year.
![[linked image]](http://roflrazzi.files.wordpress.com/2009/03/celebrity-pictures-snoopy-charlie-brown-bffs-before.jpg)
