[PRCo] Re: METRORAIL Ridership

[Phillip Clark Campbell]

Greetings;

This email is to dispel confusion, if it exists;  there  'seemed'  to
be a little confusion about an email on  'victims'  as well.

I received a most cordial private email that corrected comments I never
made about a comparison between rail and rubber-tired vehicles.  I never
made any such comparison;  I never in inferred such a comparison;  I never
even thought about such a comparison.

Someone wrote that Wmata carries a million people daily.  I thought this
high but was pleasantly surprised to learn the figure is over 800,000  (the
million figure wasn't intended to be accurate  --  it was a general comment  --
no quibble there.)   I then asked for ridership stats on other eastern cities;
again, I was quite pleasantly surprised to find that Wmata carried considerably
more passengers than Boston and Philadelphia, both long established rail
transit cities.  Please note that comparisons are rail to rail, not rail against
rubber-tired vehicles  (not metro area to metro area  --  there are sound
reasons for differences in ridership among cities;  still,  I am quite
pleasantly surprised and pleased with Wmata rail ridership.)

Someone else  'inferred'  that I made a rail to rubber-tire comparison and
it seems that comment took on a life of its own.  My apologies for any confusion
on this topic.



Along with that I have always been miffed why anyone compares any accidents
to auto travel;  for all my life, mention an airline accident and someone quips that
'it'  is much safer than auto travel.  The same happened with the Metrorail disaster;
several mention that rail transit is safer than auto travel.  Please note that I did not
originate this topic;  I did not ask for this comparison and I did not in any way contribute
to this comparison.

Whenever this happened in the last 7+ decades my first thought was:  "Why are you so
defensive?"   And if defensive, "what else is there to hide?"  The public transit accident
was mentioned;  nothing was said about autos.  Saying autos are not as safe is worse than
an apples - oranges comparison;  such tends to  'justify'  rail accidents as  'normal;'  then
people shrug their shoulders and move on rather than learn from and improve  'transit'
safety.

'Safety'  is reportedly the #1 concern of all transit companies;  any and all accidents
on transit must be investigated and what is learned must be applied toward improving
safety if at all possible.  In this context, comparison to auto accidents is meaningless.

This topic has worn out its welcome here.



 Phil
Without  a   'coast'   but  not  a   'cause.'
--  --
"If thou wouldst rule well, thou must rule for God,
and to do that, thou must be ruled by Him ...
Those who will not be governed by God...
........will be ruled by Tyrants."
William  Penn,  founder  of  Pennsylvania