jlf1961
Posts: 14840
Joined: 6/10/2008 From: Somewhere Texas Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: LadyDemura Good thing this passenger train wasn't carrying nuclear materials as a side load... What really is the excuse for not implementing the passive system that would probably have prevented this? The cost involved, actually. What was initially supposed to be a couple of billion in cost has, after looking at what needs to be done with sensors on the tracks, beside the tracks and the modification of the locomotives, New Jersey alone will cost 6 billion, and when you consider the cost for the system nationwide, there is not a state in the country that could actually afford it. And since the federal government mandated it (the typical, do this or else) and then barely funded the program, its on the states. And it is not "driverless" trains, but a system that can override the engineer if it reads the train is travelling too fast. The engineer gets a warning beep, and if he does not act, a computer applies braking. After installation, the cost of maintaining the system, and the time involved gets problematic as well. Washington DC has the system on its mass transit train system, and it has failed on a number of occasions with fatal results.
_____________________________
Boy, it sure would be nice if we had some grenades, don't you think? You cannot control who comes into your life, but you can control which airlock you throw them out of. Paranoid Paramilitary Gun Loving Conspiracy Theorist AND EQUAL OPPORTUNI
|