Crew Size VS Safety

Well, if two person crews in locomotives do not increase safety, why do airlines have 2 person crews in the cockpits? The NTSB gives examples, and the article was quick to point out, where accidents occurred on a 2 person crewed locomotive. What isn't mentioned is the accidents that were avoided because of the presence of the second crew member. Also they do not mention the Canadian disaster, the train was a one crew job.

John
 
I would go for less instead of more.

Example:
The Dubai metro operates without problems (not counting 1 person who committed suicide) without a driver in the train.
 
JohnnyC's article is careful not to point out both sides of the argument even though the NTSB points out examples where having additional crew members on the train is a good thing, and this comes from an industry publication. The problem is railroads don't want to spend the money on the extra crew members even in cases where having a second crew member is needed. With the automated systems, such as a closed metro system, no crew or a single crew member is all that is needed, but in cases where things can be a bit complicated, having a second set of eyes should be mandatory.

John
 
oknotsen said:
I would go for less instead of more.

Example:
The Dubai metro operates without problems (not counting 1 person who committed suicide) without a driver in the train.
Click to expand...

Until it takes 4 hours to get one person on the ground to reconnect airhoses in a break-in-2, that sounds like a good idea. Until some poor bum tries to race a train at a grade crossing, 0-man crews sound like a good idea.

And JohnnyC1, excellent point on the missing incidents.
 
Always keep in mind that the source of the article always follows rr management trends not labor viewpoints.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top