From: nilknocgeo@earthlink.net   
      
   "Jishnu Mukerji"  wrote in message   
   news:LLSdnY5A5KvcMuXOnZ2dnUVZ_oednZ2d@giganews.com...   
   > On 5/18/2014 1:39 AM, Glen Labah wrote:   
   >> In article ,   
   >>  "conklin"  wrote:   
   >>   
   >>> You are irrational once again.  If Metro-North needs to follow X, Y and   
   >>> Z   
   >>> for safe transport of passengers, then freight RRs which carry oil need   
   >>> to   
   >>> have track as good as Metro-North.  Or, are you saying that Metro-North   
   >>> needs no new program because you say so?   
   >>   
   >>   
   >> The mainline railroads already are doing these types of track   
   >> inspections - or rather the Federal Railroad Administration does the   
   >> inspections with its own cars:   
   >>   
   >> http://www.fra.dot.gov/Page/P0120   
   >>   
   >   
   > ...snip snip for brevity ....   
   >   
   >> The problem here is that a commuter railroad has cars that pass over the   
   >> track a number of times a day, so Metro-North or any other commuter   
   >> railroad that inspects their track by having inspection equipment on   
   >> their cars is inspecting their track far more often than is required.   
   >> It isn't necessarily that they are more safety conscious but simply an   
   >> effect of doing this inspection with the cheapest method available to   
   >> them (that is, using their own passenger equipment).   
   >>   
   >> For freight railroads, the cheapest thing is going to continue to be   
   >> doing the inspections only at the required interval.   
   >   
   > The reason that this is an issue at Metro north is because they had some   
   > serious track inspection failures in the last couple of years and their   
   > whole track inspection methodology was called into question by the FRA   
   > as a result.   
   >   
   > One of what turned out to be a case of serious omission of adequate   
   > track inspection upon investigation, led to the derailment of one train   
   > and an opposing train crashing into it just outside of Bridgeport CT.   
   >   
   > There were other incidents with less spectacular results. When FRA ran   
   > its own inspection they found numerous deficiencies that were apparently   
   > not detected by MNRR's track inspection program. That is why this extra   
   > attention to track inspection at Metro north of late.   
   >   
   > It was most likely a cultural and training issue, but throwing in a bit   
   > of technology always seems to go hand in hand with such. Hopefully they   
   > are actually fixing the root causes while they are at it. It is likely   
   > that the root cause was not entirely the lack of equipment.   
   >   
      
   So let us wonder what would be the results would have been of Federal   
   inspection of the track in Lynchburg, VA?   
      
   --- SoupGate/W32 v1.03   
    * Origin: LiveWire BBS -=*=- UseNet FTN Gateway (1:2320/1)