LRT Report Infers Trains Have Safety Woes (1)

 

The conclusion of the Light-Rail Disruption – Root Cause Review to be considered at transit commission on Thursday leaves one with an uneasy feeling.

As in that it appears to infer that the Confederation Line is not safe. At least that was my reading of the conclusion of the report:

The issues with the axle bearings have had a significant effect on the reliability of rail service. Fixing this issue permanently will allow for the removal of temporary mitigations currently in place, as well as further increasing the safety of the light rail system. While the timelines to design and implement the new axle bearing system are long, solid plans are in place to monitor and manage the current axle configuration until the solution can be implemented. This work should result in Ottawa being one major step closer to having the reliable and dependable rail system that it deserves.

“Increasing the safety of the light-rail system” tells me that the line is not as safe as it could be. That it’s not safe now.

Gov’t PR: Alice In Watsonland: THE VOTER


So The Bulldog ran the conclusion above through an artificial intelligence language program which confirmed my suspicions and went further than I thought.

Here’s what AI said:

Yes, the statement you provided suggests that the current system, particularly concerning the axle bearings in the context of the rail service, may not be as safe or reliable as desired or required. Here are the key points from the statement:

  1. “The issues with the axle bearings have had a significant effect on the reliability of rail service”: This indicates that there have been problems or issues related to axle bearings that have negatively impacted the reliability of the rail service. These issues suggest that the current system is not operating as safely or efficiently as it should.
  2. “Fixing this issue permanently will allow for the removal of temporary mitigations currently in place”: The mention of “temporary mitigations” implies that there have been measures put in place to address the safety and reliability concerns, but these are not a long-term solution. The goal is to find a permanent solution to address these issues, indicating that the current system may not be as safe as it could be.
  3. “Further increasing the safety of the light rail system”: This phrase explicitly states that improving the axle bearing issue will enhance the safety of the light rail system, suggesting that the current safety level may not be sufficient.
  4. “Timelines to design and implement the new axle bearing system are long”: The fact that it will take a long time to design and implement the new system indicates that there is recognition that the current system’s safety and reliability issues are not quickly or easily resolved.

Overall, the statement acknowledges that there are safety and reliability concerns with the current rail system, and there is a commitment to addressing these issues to make the system safer and more dependable for users.

Where Is The Audit Of The Trillium Line Procurement?

Now whether this conclusion of the report is poor language usage by OC Transpo or very accurate in its description, my conclusion and that of an AI language program are the same.

Ken Gray

 —

 

 

Don’t miss our regular features
Everything Ottawa      Full Local     Bulldog Canadian
Opinion    Comments    Breaking News    Auto
Ontario   World    Get Cheap Gas   Big Money
Pop Gossip   Your Home    Relax …   Tech
Bulldog Weather    Full Local Sports
TV/Movies   Travel
Page 2   Page 3   Page 4   Page 5   Page 6

 

Other features:    Full Bulldog Index    Return to Bulldog Home

4 Responses

  1. Bruce says:

    So a further conclusion from the report and analysis of it might be…Do Not Ride The rail? or ride at your own risk!

  2. The Voter says:

    The last sentence says this is “one major step closer to having the reliable and dependable rail system that it deserves.” That sentence should end “the reliable and dependable rail system that it deserved four years ago and has paid for.”

    If it’s one step closer, how many more steps are there to having a reliable, dependable system? The answer we are all looking for is, of course, zero. That sentence certainly suggests that achieving this step will NOT give us such a system.

    So is it three or three hundred more steps? Are the other steps major or minor ones? What’s the timeline for those steps? What is the cost of those steps and who’s paying for them? And finally, how do the other unachieved steps affect the safety of the system and its passengers both now and going forward?

  3. Ron Benn says:

    Further to The Voter’s insights, of the undefined other steps that are needed ” … to having a reliable and dependable rail system …”, how many can be taken in advance of the four-ish years from now more reliable axle/hub/wheel assemblies? How many are dependent on other steps being taken SUCCESSFULLY? So many questions, so few answers. So few answers, so little confidence.

  4. Ken Gray says:

    Ron:

    How not Mr. Rogers of you.

    I always thought of you as the quiet unassuming progressive conservative on this gabfest. All caps … that means you’re shouting … SHOUTING.

    But as ever, I must agree. Very little confidence. You’d think after four years we might have an answer. How long would it have taken people to get to the moon if OC Transpo were NASA. We will go to the moon this millennium, not because it is easy, but because it’s hard.

    Now these characters, city types, want to spend two-thirds of a billion dollars on Lansdowne. Why? Lansdowne hasn’t worked, won’t work and they want to take on another mega-project. Didn’t they notice how LRT turned out. Another mega-project? City types, give your head a shake.

    Memo to Mark Sutcliffe … we already have enough shopping malls. And if that’s not enough, when the city does something big, it screws it up. Lansdowne is already screwed up and you want to pour more hundreds of millions into it. For a CFL team. The Argos were worth $5 million 10 years ago. You know what they’re worth now? Guess what, $5 million … if you can find someone who will buy the Argos. You’re building a castle for the court jester.

    Real shopping malls can’t find anchor tenants. Lansdowne can’t find tenants. Surely you’ve heard of Amazon.

    Mike Andlauer spends $5 million on cab fare.

    Want to get a laugh in Hogtown? Walk down the street and tell someone you own the Toronto Argos. “Well I’m impressed Mr. Argo … I’ve got a 20-year-old Ford Taurus.”

    Oh well. Hope the bird and pumpkin pie were tasty, Ron.

    cheers

    kgray

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

 

Paid Content

Home   Full Bulldog Index