3 ms·

> When you have a situation like this you run a worst case scenario and put in effect immediately. Almost all of the time it's not a worst case scenario though

> When you have a situation like this you run a worst case scenario and put in effect immediately. Almost all of the time it's not a worst case scenario though. Most of the time it's just that someone has dropped their phone on the track and trains have been asked to stop so that it can be retrieved. Worst case scenario management is expensive and dangerous (e.g. walking on tracks) because the net risk or net cost is beneficial in the face of a bad situation. It is a good thing that we don't jump straight to these sorts of solutions as it would be in general more dangerous and our services would cost even more. Now, is 3 hours too long? Yeah probably. But these sorts of issues happen maybe once a year per line, it's hard to know when you're in one.

pdonis 3y ago
> Almost all of the time it's not a worst case scenario though. While this is true, this would seem to be one of those cases where the people in charge should have known it was a worst case scenario fairly early on. In which case they should have activated the worst case scenario fallback plan much earlier. In other words, it's not a matter of treating every scenario as worst case, but of quickly spotting the ones that are so fallback plans can be activated much sooner to avoid stranding people for hours. > It's hard to know when you're in one. The passengers and the driver of that train obviously didn't know--but somebody knew fairly early on that this wasn't going to be a quick fix, and that somebody should be responsible for communicating that knowledge to all the affected trains and telling their drivers to evacuate because this isn't going to be fixed any time soon. The big question I would be asking is why that wasn't done and why it isn't standard operating procedure in cases like this.
addicted 3y ago
I’d imagine when you’re minutes away from losing auxiliary power without any idea when main power will return that’s an easy trigger for worst case actions. Here it seems people were waiting 45 mins to an hour after that happened.

pdonis 3y ago

> Almost all of the time it's not a worst case scenario though. While this is true, this would seem to be one of those cases where the people in charge should have known it was a worst case scenario fairly early on. In which case they should have activated the worst case scenario fallback plan much earlier. In other words, it's not a matter of treating every scenario as worst case, but of quickly spotting the ones that are so fallback plans can be activated much sooner to avoid stranding people for hours. > It's hard to know when you're in one. The passengers and the driver of that train obviously didn't know--but somebody knew fairly early on that this wasn't going to be a quick fix, and that somebody should be responsible for communicating that knowledge to all the affected trains and telling their drivers to evacuate because this isn't going to be fixed any time soon. The big question I would be asking is why that wasn't done and why it isn't standard operating procedure in cases like this.

addicted 3y ago

I’d imagine when you’re minutes away from losing auxiliary power without any idea when main power will return that’s an easy trigger for worst case actions. Here it seems people were waiting 45 mins to an hour after that happened.