As more and more comes out on the Red Line accident, it becomes more and more apparant that Metro Board members knew of problems with the 1000 series carriages and problems with the Automiatic Train Control and did nothing, putting at risk the safety of Metro's riders and staff.
I am sure we will hear that the board was kept in the dark by the staff and didn't know the severity of the problems, but that is the the kind of lack of curiosity rivaled only by President Geroge W. Bush.
To date we have heard Metro blame the federal government for not giving Metro more money to replace the 1000 series cars, whose flimsy crash protection was partially responsible for other passenger and staff deaths and was noted by the NTSB. I find this poor excuse not only insulting but disgusting and Metro should be ashamed for even floating it as excuse for theri unwillingness to protect the riding public. It is absolutely the worst form of malfeasance especially for long time Metro board meebers and past chairs like Chris Zimmerman and Jim Graham it not only unconcionable it is probably criminal. The blood is definitely on their hands and the public needs to demand that both (and others too) resign from Metro.
My thoughts on who is ultimately responsible are a little different. It is my opinion that the Board is mostly clueless about the inner workings at the agency. Accountability mostly doesn't exist at WMATA because decisions within management are made by committees within committees within committees within committees. No one person has the final say.
I tend to agree with John although Antozilla has made some excellent points. Based on this morning's Post report, it appears that Metro is practicing deferred maintenance on the fleet.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/24/AR2009062400815.html?hpid%3Dtopnews (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/24/AR2009062400815.html?hpid%3Dtopnews)
We also need to wait for some additional preliminary NTSB reports before passing judgment.
Chuck
Quote from: smithavechuck on June 24, 2009, 11:52:52 AM
I tend to agree with John although Antozilla has made some excellent points. Based on this morning's Post report, it appears that Metro is practicing deferred maintenance on the fleet.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/24/AR2009062400815.html?hpid%3Dtopnews (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/24/AR2009062400815.html?hpid%3Dtopnews)
We also need to wait for some additional preliminary NTSB reports before passing judgment.
Chuck
Deferred maintenance? OK, so the train's brakes may have needed replacement, it will be interesting to see if that is true and how that didn't get fixed. But the issues with crash worthiness and black boxes? Should Metro have diverted money from other things to get black boxes for trains that are about to be retired and unlikely to have a major crash before that point?
Quote from: Antozilla on June 24, 2009, 08:23:15 AM
As more and more comes out on the Red Line accident, it becomes more and more apparant that Metro Board members knew of problems with the 1000 series carriages and problems with the Automiatic Train Control and did nothing, putting at risk the safety of Metro's riders and staff.
I am sure we will hear that the board was kept in the dark by the staff and didn't know the severity of the problems, but that is the the kind of lack of curiosity rivaled only by President Geroge W. Bush.
To date we have heard Metro blame the federal government for not giving Metro more money to replace the 1000 series cars, whose flimsy crash protection was partially responsible for other passenger and staff deaths and was noted by the NTSB. I find this poor excuse not only insulting but disgusting and Metro should be ashamed for even floating it as excuse for theri unwillingness to protect the riding public. It is absolutely the worst form of malfeasance especially for long time Metro board meebers and past chairs like Chris Zimmerman and Jim Graham it not only unconcionable it is probably criminal. The blood is definitely on their hands and the public needs to demand that both (and others too) resign from Metro.
The Metro Board that you want to fire, as John pointed out, knows next to nothing about transit operations. That said, they have been advocating for a dedicated funding source for Metro, especially for capital funds, and they have yet to receive it. This campaign has been going on since the middle of the Richard White days. The various regional governments, including the Federal Government, should look in the mirror about their transportation funding priorities more than anything else at this point. And the rest of us need to wait for the NTSB to do its work before we decide who to point fingers at.
The Metro Board decides what gets doen and what does not get done and as the responsible actors they need to go.
As to what you do with the Rohr cars, either they needed to be retrofitted for better crash worthiness or disposed of and replaced. That didn't happen, management was aware of it and did nothign that is negligence.
Well I'd like to hear what complaints people would have if we just willy nilly discarded 1/3rd of the rail fleet.
I think a solution to this problem, for now, is to sandwich Rohrs. Put them only in the middle of 6- and 8-car trainsets so that frontal contact accidents won't result in telescoping. This would be a pain for dispatchers but wouldn't impact service ... and it might even make the operators happier because they'll have new cabs :-)
I think the Rohrs can only transit with themselves
They can be mixed with any other type of train that Metro has. Take a look at the videos linked below:
http://www.orenstransitpage.com/otpdcpics3/rohrbredatakeoffavi.htm
http://www.orenstransitpage.com/otpdcpics3/cafrohrtakeoffavi.htm
http://www.orenstransitpage.com/otpdcpics3/cafbredarohrtakeoffavi.htm
The Rohr cars are compatible with the other ones in the fleet. I've seen mixed consists with them many times. Regarding the board, they really are clueless when it comes to transit operations. They rely in the management of the transit agency to give them the information they are looking for. Being on the WMATA board is only a small part of their responsibilities as they are involved in their own jurisdictions. The main thing is finding out who from WMATA decided that not doing this was the best course to go.
I think they should have made the retrofits as the NTSB suggested since those cars were supposed to be around until 2014. Why not make that investment....It's cheaper than having to replace rail cars that are damaged in accidents.
I stand correcteed re the Rohrs.
That said the WMATA Board may be clueless, but that does not absolve them of responsibility for being in charge of the transit system. Ultimately the decisoons made are theirs.
So the Iraq War is Congress's fault, not Bush? Yes they could have done more to prevent it, but they were trusting the people whose job it is to provide them information. If you want heads to roll, go find Richard White and talk to him about it.
I'm pretty sure NTSB's findings were presented to the Board after Woodley Park, and WMATA management (which has been shaken up since then) addressed each recommendation. Structural repair to the Rohrs would be too expensive and too complex, so they accelerated the process to replace them...which takes years and dollars, lots of dollars. To the tune of $900 million to replace 300 Rohrs. No one has $900 million dollars. They probably won't be able to do any more of those lease agreements either, since AIG failed I don't know who would back them.
Congress and the President is nothing like the GM and the Metro Board
Catoe is an employee of the Metro Board who can be hired and fired by them at any time. The Metro Board decides what will and will not be done. They approve all and are all powerful and all responsible and they fell down. Thye knew the Rohr cars were weak and instead of shoring em up, they left em as is. Even if they did not let them lead that would have been something, didn't happen and 9 people are dead. As for ATC, we knew about that problem for sometime and thought the repair had solved the problem, guess not. BUT I tell you this Catoe et al knew ATC was at the center of the investigation that night when they took al trains to manual and increased distances and slowed speeds.
Unfortunately I don't know of any transit board that operates like that. The ones I've been involved with directly just approve or not approve suggestions that the transit system brings to them after they thoroughly review what should and shouldn't be done. Most transit board members know nothing of transit and they typically react to what a constituent wants or what they think a consituent wants rather than getting involved in day to day operations.
Ultimately, it's the WMATA management that will have to answer to this and the board will then take the necessary actions. As you said, Catoe is hired by the board and they have to entrust the good faith judgement of what he decides to do, not micro manage. They need to get to the root of why they had the NTSB report that recommended this and why management told them it wasn't being done.
John,
Can you please tell us what capital project should have not occurred so the 1000 Series cars could have been strengthened? It isn't like they didn't spend that money at all, they chose to spend it on something else that was deemed to be more important at the time.
New bus purchase, Orange Line Extension, Pick one I woukld rather have bad service than deadly service
Quote from: Tristan on June 24, 2009, 01:32:19 PM
Well I'd like to hear what complaints people would have if we just willy nilly discarded 1/3rd of the rail fleet.
I think a solution to this problem, for now, is to sandwich Rohrs. Put them only in the middle of 6- and 8-car trainsets so that frontal contact accidents won't result in telescoping. This would be a pain for dispatchers but wouldn't impact service ... and it might even make the operators happier because they'll have new cabs :-)
I'd have to agree with that. Having Rohrs sandwiched in between Bredas, CAFs, and Alstoms would be nice, but you still have those all Rohr trains that are the bread and breath of the Red line. The new 7000s will eventually replace the Rohrs. As for speaking on the age of the railcars, we can compare to BART who still operates their original A and B cars from the 1970s (built by Rohr as well) everyday on all five of their lines carrying commuters across the Bay Area. Also, weren't the 1000s rehabbed sometime in the 90s or so. I can't remember.
I believe the Rohrs underwent a rehab, but I think not to the level that the Bredas are being done now. Sidelining the Rohrs would be a bad decision. Orange line trains are packed as it is and try getting a seat after an Orange line train leaves Landover, it ain't happening and don't get me started on the Red line. Having Rohr trains sandwiched in between the newer cars is a good idea.
The one thing that sometimes prevents WMATA from getting the newer cars sooner............MONEY. Trains aren't cheap and on top of that it takes around 5 years from the order to delivery. Could WMATA have replaced those trains earlier, yes, but if the money isn't there, then it can't happen.
If this crash didn't tell the local governments that there needs to be dedicated funding, then I don't know what will.
Just heard on the news that WMATA is recieving $3 Billion from Maryland to upgrade some of their trains.
Quote from: 79MetroExtraMD on June 24, 2009, 07:25:47 PM
Quote from: Tristan on June 24, 2009, 01:32:19 PM
Well I'd like to hear what complaints people would have if we just willy nilly discarded 1/3rd of the rail fleet.
I think a solution to this problem, for now, is to sandwich Rohrs. Put them only in the middle of 6- and 8-car trainsets so that frontal contact accidents won't result in telescoping. This would be a pain for dispatchers but wouldn't impact service ... and it might even make the operators happier because they'll have new cabs :-)
I'd have to agree with that. Having Rohrs sandwiched in between Bredas, CAFs, and Alstoms would be nice, but you still have those all Rohr trains that are the bread and breath of the Red line. The new 7000s will eventually replace the Rohrs. As for speaking on the age of the railcars, we can compare to BART who still operates their original A and B cars from the 1970s (built by Rohr as well) everyday on all five of their lines carrying commuters across the Bay Area. Also, weren't the 1000s rehabbed sometime in the 90s or so. I can't remember.
The cars can be shifted around if they needed to sandwich the Rohrs in the middle of the trains. I still think that measure is overkill though.
The Rohrs were not rehabbed, but overhauled. Not nearly as extensive as a rehab.
Quote from: landoverdivision on June 25, 2009, 12:45:09 AM
Just heard on the news that WMATA is recieving $3 Billion from Maryland to upgrade some of their trains.
Steny Hoyer is simply proposing legislation that would give WMATA this money. WMATA doesn't have the money yet, but it is likely that Hoyer will deliver on this considering he is Majority Leader.
Quote from: Antozilla on June 24, 2009, 04:19:44 PM
New bus purchase, Orange Line Extension, Pick one I woukld rather have bad service than deadly service
Hindsight is 20-20, but I wonder if you would have said that if this accident didn't happen...
Being on the outside of things, it's easy for you to say "fire the entire board" or whatever, but realize that even if they immediately set in motion efforts to address all the recommendations from the 2004 crash....well a new car order would probably just be starting to arrive, or the alternative -- sending Rohrs out 2 by 2 for rehab, would probably only have been going on for about a year.............there's nothing "fast" they could have done short of sidelining the cars altogether that would address the 2004 issues that might have contributed to the severity of this accident.
A new twist - track circuitry - is also being examined by the NTSB. There are many factors that led to this crash. (see link below from Yahoo.com).
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090625/ap_on_re_us/us_dc_metro_train_derailment
Chuck
Well, I have to agree with Tristan. There is enough blame to go around but the real problem is that MD, VA and DC cannot agree on a stable source of funding for METRO that would allow for the repairs and running transit service. The METRO Board acted to run a transit service and make repairs and enhancements when the three jurisdictions would fund them. This is the same choice AMTRAK made. MD, VA and DC need to provide dedicated sales tax revenue or income tax revenue for transportation and use that money only for that purpose. Recently they all "borrowed" from the transportation funds to pay for other items and we all know that money will never be repaid. Changing the METRO board membership won't make any difference when the jurisdictions that appointed the members don't provide dedicated funding to run the system.
Well I heard on another board so take this for what it is worth that:
1. the PTC on the red line was so rickety and unreliabel that sections of it were TURNED OFF to prevent trains being stopped in error.
Meaning you were running trains at 60 MPH in 'dark territory".
2. There will be many retirements in the upper level of Metro
If this is true, not only does the Metro Board need to be replaced, somer people on the Board and in management need to go to jail and wwe will start with manslaughter chargers.
The LAST thing Metro needs is dedicated funding. Metro has not shown itself to be a bastion of fiscal restraint or responsibility and to give them an dedicated trough to sup from instead of making them justify their expenses is asking to waste the taxpayers money.
Tristan, I ahve been against dedicated funding and some of Metro's capital projects for sometime so the answer is yes if the accident had not happened I would bne opposed. The issue is priorities and obviously for Mwtro expansion is more important than safety.
As for the Rohr cars there are things that could have been done to eithe rimporve them or minimize their faults and some of that you seen on this board and they cost no money at all but as is often the case with Metro except when they have their hands out, nothing was done.
I believe your new general manager was working to improve safety conditions on the Metrorail. Unfortunately, this type of stuff takes time, and unfortunately, he started too late to prevent these this accident from happening.
But with the circuitry problem in that section of track and potential brake failure, how long has this problem existed? How much maintenance has WMATA deferred? These are the questions that are in people's heads, especially since we all know that WMATA is straining as it is.
And they want to bring a new rail line into the mix...into one of the busiest sections of the Metrorail system...
WMATAGMOAGH
John,
Can you please tell us what capital project should have not occurred so the 1000 Series cars could have been strengthened? It isn't like they didn't spend that money at all, they chose to spend it on something else that was deemed to be more important at the time.
Oren,
There is no logical reason to increase the crash worthiness of the 1k cars. Strengthening worn out transit car that have stress cracks in the bodies make no sense from a spending stand point. These cars are slated to be sent to the aluminum recycler within a few short years. The only logical thing to do is replace them.
John,
If replacement is the option, can you identify a list of capital projects started since 2004 (effectively 2005, when we got NTSB's recommendations) that total $900 million dollars, so we are justified in lynching the current Board of Directors, many of whom have not even been around since 2004?
Thanks
-Tristan
Quote from: Antozilla on June 25, 2009, 07:33:46 AM
Tristan, I ahve been against dedicated funding and some of Metro's capital projects for sometime so the answer is yes if the accident had not happened I would bne opposed. The issue is priorities and obviously for Mwtro expansion is more important than safety.
As for the Rohr cars there are things that could have been done to eithe rimporve them or minimize their faults and some of that you seen on this board and they cost no money at all but as is often the case with Metro except when they have their hands out, nothing was done.
What could be done that would not cost money?
Also, the Board of Directors -- for the last time -- did not turn the PTC off, the Board of Directors is responsible for OVERSIGHT, not for day-to-day duties. I don't think anyone here is holding WMATA blameless for the accident, especially in the light of things that could apparently have been done, what we're saying is that your issue with the WMATA BOARD is misdirected. The Board only reacts to the information it is given. Maybe it's a structural issue in how the responsibilities of the Board are defined, maybe it's something else, but even after Woodley Park, the General Manager's staff presented all the data about how repairs to the Rohrs are not justified, the Board listens and agrees or disagrees. They act on what is reported to them.
Quote from: Sand Box John on June 25, 2009, 11:22:27 AM
WMATAGMOAGH
John,
Can you please tell us what capital project should have not occurred so the 1000 Series cars could have been strengthened? It isn't like they didn't spend that money at all, they chose to spend it on something else that was deemed to be more important at the time.
Oren,
There is no logical reason to increase the crash worthiness of the 1k cars. Strengthening worn out transit car that have stress cracks in the bodies make no sense from a spending stand point. These cars are slated to be sent to the aluminum recycler within a few short years. The only logical thing to do is replace them.
I agree with you, the question was directed to the other John.
and I answered it.
That siad I find it very odd that in the end of the budget battle Metro can always make its budget by trimming the fat internally. Always, must be a lot of fat because its not bus operators and train operators that get cut. its management and contractors.
What they could have done with the ROhr cars is what thye are suddenly doing which is put them in the middle or at least put them on the end. That could have and should have been done ages ago but no and sadly no one is being held accountable.
The Metro Board is responsible for everything that goes on over there. AS for oversight, you think soemone would know that the PTC had been turned off and heck I knew nothing has happened wth the Rohr cars so if I knew thye knew. So much for effective oversight. Bottom line, the buck stops with the Metro Board, its their job and their responsibility and they did not carry it out properly.
So any guesses on how long Catoe is around before they throw him under the bus?
Uh, the car at the back of the train becomes the front at the other end of the line...
You seem to be basing most of your arguments on hindslght. That is wonderful now, but I highly doubt you would have said these things Monday at 4:30 PM.
I actually haven't yet seen any change in train consists and ... haven't heard anyone really suggest putting Rohrs mid-train, except for in here.
You obviously don't know anything about how Boards of Directors work, but Metro's in many ways is not different than corporate boards. They represent the legislative branch, not the executive branch. Responsibility for these things is with the GENERAL MANAGER who GENERALLY MANAGES things. There is a difference between DIRECTING and MANAGING. Go do some research and come back with your findings...until then, you're only belligerently refusing to accept the fact that you could be WRONG.
Quote from: Antozilla on June 25, 2009, 12:00:02 PM
What they could have done with the ROhr cars is what thye are suddenly doing which is put them in the middle or at least put them on the end. That could have and should have been done ages ago but no and sadly no one is being held accountable.
The Metro Board is responsible for everything that goes on over there. AS for oversight, you think soemone would know that the PTC had been turned off and heck I knew nothing has happened wth the Rohr cars so if I knew thye knew. So much for effective oversight. Bottom line, the buck stops with the Metro Board, its their job and their responsibility and they did not carry it out properly.
So any guesses on how long Catoe is around before they throw him under the bus?
Disclaimer: Acknowleding what Tristan said as I was typing this, I may duplicate some things...but I don't feel like going through this post to find the small things I may be repeating.
With all due respect, with the recent media outlash about the Metrolink Disaster, MBTA Trolley Crash, and any driver/operator/engineer operating a vehicle with a cell phone, not to mention the mandate by the FTA that EVERY rail system must have some sort of PTC in place by 2015, how do you think the nation's capital's mass transit system (affectionately known as the metro) would get away with deliberately turning the system OFF in the middle of RUSH HOUR?!
I believe the trains were in automatic mode. I believe that deferred maintenance was taking place because of the funding woes (that's a way transit systems cut costs), and because of that a critical train detection circuit failed, and the emergency brake function failed on some of the cars of that train. Put that in with limited visibility due to the curve and underpass, and you have the perfect storm.
As was stated earlier, the board only knows what the organization wants them to know. They aren't paid my metro, nor are they WMATA staff. They just make sure that WMATA isn't some sort of dictatorship...a check/balance type of thing, with votes and stuff. So, they may have been completely in the dark about some of the specific details that you have outlined in your posts. I'd redirect your attack from the board of directors and focus it on the middle management in charge of making sure inspections were held to WMATA standards...as stated in a policy somewhere. Also, whoever "turned off PTC" should be investigated as well.
Even the big bosses of companies don't always know everything...they just get all of the blame or all of the credit.
SO the buck stops no where and this is why Mero does not desrve a dedicated funding stream and why there is no accountability at Metro.
I guess the board should just recommend paving over the entire subway and creating one hell of a Quickway/Busway!!
Washington Post article on Metro's request for additional funds and the problems contained therein.
Chuck
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/24/AR2009062403429.html
Wow, a lot of heated discussion here, but lemme chime in though....
Would there be a possible issue with mixing the cars in a pattern format, like a Breda as the cab, then a Rohr, then Breda, then Rohr (and so on)?
I'm only curious as into how that would work, if it could possibly work as well as a "sandwiching" (seeing that I'm not all keen on the workings of the trains and the couplings and the black boxes and the jello with the pudding and the POP blaaaoooo).
QuoteWould there be a possible issue with mixing the cars in a pattern format, like a Breda as the cab, then a Rohr, then Breda, then Rohr (and so on)?
The cars are in married pairs.
John A: You've made so many assumptions in your post, it isn't worth responding to.
I don't think you can do an A as one type and B as something else. I know they typically keep cars as married pairs for probably a lot of different reasons.
Quote from: WMATAGMOAGH on June 25, 2009, 12:45:13 PM
QuoteWould there be a possible issue with mixing the cars in a pattern format, like a Breda as the cab, then a Rohr, then Breda, then Rohr (and so on)?
The cars are in married pairs.
John A: You've made so many assumptions in your post, it isn't worth responding to.
Oren and Perry, thanks for your answer. So it seems like a "sandwich" is the best way to handle it. But again, I just had to be curious.
John, please, just stop it. The Metro Board isn't (and shouldn't IMO) gonna get held at the stake.
TriTransit Area hit the nail on the head; who/whatever turned off that PTC is where all eyes, fingers, and lawsuits should be fixated.
Quote from: Perry on June 25, 2009, 12:47:32 PM
I don't think you can do an A as one type and B as something else. I know they typically keep cars as married pairs for probably a lot of different reasons.
It might theoretically be possible, perhaps with some modifications. That said, separating out the As and Bs and remating them would be very time consuming and expensive.
Tristan
John,
If replacement is the option, can you identify a list of capital projects started since 2004 (effectively 2005, when we got NTSB's recommendations) that total $900 million dollars, so we are justified in lynching the current Board of Directors, many of whom have not even been around since 2004?
No.
WMATA has spent something in the neighborhood $250 million increasing maintenance facility capacity in the last 4 years (New shop building Shady Grove, New shop building New Carrollton, expanded shop building Brentwood, and New back shop Greenbelt), something under a $100 million on various other smaller enhancements (Navy Yard entrance and entrance escalator canopies).
Procuring more cars has been an argument that I have been making for more then 20 years. WMATA has had a rolling stock shortage sense service on the C Route was extended to Huntington back on 12 17 1983. WMATA built and extend lines but gave no more then just lip service to budgeting the procurement of rolling stock to run on those extensions. The only extension that considered rolling stock an issue over the last 15 years was the G Route Blue extension to Largo. Most of 5K cars were procured to increase the overall fleet size some were for the Largo extension. The 6K cars were procured to increase the overall fleet size. WMATA to this day sill doesn't, in my opinion, have an adequate number of cars in their fleet. A number of the 7k cars (128) are for the full N Route Silver line.
It my opinion that WMATA should expedite the procurement of the 7K cars so they can be put in to service before the N route Silver line comes on line.
I amazed that few of you choose to put the balme for thsis accident on the Metro Board and in stead are content to blame some little guy in the signals department.
Is there no accountability in Metro? Does not the signals guy report to a boss who ultimately reports to Catoe and to the Board?
Maybe this is the problem, the inmates are running the asylum.
Does the Board not have the responsibility to ask hard questions and get answers?
In every board I have served on and that has been many, we were not only legally responsible but morally respoinsible fro everything that goes on under our chanrge to include things we did not know about?
Now do I expect them to know who changes the TP rolls at CET, no, but if it is not getting done it is there responsiblity and they need to fix it, and if they were told in the past it is not getting done, they damn well better be sure it is being done and maybe even do it themselves.
I don't think John Catoe is a little guy in the signals department, but I'll double check that and get back to you.
The reason we aren't blaming the Board of Directors is because we actually know how transit works and how WMATA is structured, and we know that the Boardroom isn't the place where these things are discussed. On corporate and other boards, sometimes they are composed of industry experts and such who would be expected to know what's happening; the Metro board on the other hand is composed of politicians. Chris Zimmerman (I'm not endorsing him so don't attack me) is probably the most knowledgeable member of the board when it comes to public transportation, and even he isn't all that. I just refuse to accept that firing some politicians from a basically volunteer board with revolving appointments is going to prevent accidents; you need to dig in and find where the problems are so that you correct them -- if you get rid of the Board, that's only placating people (like you) politically, not fixing the problems that lead to the accident.
http://wmata.com/about_metro/board_of_directors/meetings.cfm
Why don't you go here and listen to these board meetings to see what goes on and how it works -- the executive branch reports to the legislative branch, the legislative branch makes actions based on the information presented by the executive branch. The decision to do something like shut a single detection circuit off is a decision made in the executive branch, and if it isn't reported, the board won't know about it. It is the Chief Executive's responsibility to know what's happening, and that person is John Catoe......and even at this point, I'm reluctant to call for his hanging, because we don't even know the facts of the accident yet.
And here is a comprehensive Washington Post report on the ATC issue. Well written from a technical perspective.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/25/AR2009062501073.html
Chuck
smithavechuck
And here is a comprehensive Washington Post report on the ATC issue. Well written from a technical perspective.
Actually I thought it was over simplified. I also though it used far to much generalized language and not enough precise language, The language in the graphic in the article is somewhat deceiving.
I have a WMATA signal maintainers manual sitting on a box next to me. It does a far better and more comprehensive job of explaining the workings of the signaling and train control system.
But I will give the Washington Post the benefit of a doubt, because they are writing to an audience with 7th reading comprehension.
It could have been a worse article. It says Lindsay Layton contributed to the writing, and if Lena Sun had written that explanation on her own, it would have read very differently.
I said it before nad I will say it again heads need to roll and accountability starts at the top.
Sources Claim Metro Was Warned of Circuit Problem posted 10:49 am Thu July 02, 2009 - WASHINGTON from ABC 7 News - http://www.wjla.com/news/stories/0709/636836.html (http://www.wjla.com/news/stories/0709/636836.html) Sources tell ABC 7 News there are significant new findings on what led to the breakdown on Metro last Monday.
Two sources who must remain anonymous because they are close to the investigation allege that Metro technicians knew about a serious circuit problem on the track five days before the deadly accident and that they allegedly reported the problem to supervisors days before nine people lost their lives.
On June 17, the sources say several technicians discovered a circuit component near the accident scene, known as a Wee-Z bond, was not working properly. Metro explains that particular circuit communicates train speed and distance between the tracks, trains, and the operations control center.
The sources explain there was bobbing in the circuit, meaning it was intermittently dropping out and could possibly be unable to detect a train on the track.
Five days later, a train was stopped on that track waiting for another to clear the station ahead. The sources say the system failed to alert an oncoming train, #112, that there was a train stopped in front of it.
According to the sources, #112 did not go into automatic protection mode and it collided into the back of the stopped train. The investigation has since revealed the operator herself tried to engage the emergency brakes 450 feet before the point of impact to no avail. The operator and eight passengers were killed.
Sources say the technicians all claimed they notified supervisors and Metro's maintenance operations center about the circuit problem five days before that collision and that the information was entered into Metro's maintenance computer database.
NTSB investigators ran a test after the accident and reported finding a circuit that failed to detect a test train at the same location as the train that was struck on June 22.
Earlier Wednesday, Metro said the circuit had been replaced on June 17 during routine maintenance and that a computer review of circuit data done after the accident did reveal the circuit problem.
When asked if Metro was aware of any problems on the track prior to the accident beyond what was looked at on the computer, Metro's Lisa Farbstein said, "I am not aware -- no one has shared with me. I wouldn't have access to those types of memos if there were -- I am not saying there were -- I just honestly don't know."
But when asked about this new information Wednesday night, a spokesman refused to comment citing the ongoing investigation. © 2009 WJLA-TV All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. |
We don't disagree that accountability is at the top, but I think we're seeing a different view of the top. The GM is accountable to the Board but he is the chief executive of the agency and HE is the "top" that would need to fall. The entire Congress wouldn't be impeached if we found out that Iraq was a big lie, the onus would be on the president. As the article you yourself posted, Metro TECHNICIANS, not Board Members, were aware of the problem. They report to their supervisor, who reports it up the chain to the General Manager, who then...if he needs Board approval or money, will report it to the board. We've been through this about 20 times and you're making a nuisance of it now.
"Antozilla"
Source: Metro circuits were malfunctioning for five days (http://www.fredericknewspost.com/sections/news/display.htm?storyID=91910)
Originally published June 26, 2009
By Marge Neal
News-Post Staff
Status log of track circuit the stopped train was occupying (B2-304) (http://www.fredericknewspost.com/media/pdfs/Reading_B2-304011.pdf) (1.25 MB PDF file)
Status log of track circuit behind the track circuit that the stopped train was occupying (B2-312) (http://www.fredericknewspost.com/media/pdfs/Reading_B2-312010.pdf) (208 KB PDF file)
NTSB is saying they discovered an 'anomalie' in the tracks circuits in question. As it stands now I don't think either WMATA or the NTSB yet know what caused the anomalie.