minority,
Ha ha ha!
Want to mislead again???
Go read the Straits Times article again:
That meant a train travelling at 60kmh on an automatic mode was not diverted to an alternate platform or told to stop. The driver applied emergency brakes when he saw staff on the track, but it was too late.
minority,
use your PIG BRAIN to think think think, If there was REALLY a DRIVER driving the train, why:
a) "a train
travelling at 60kmh on an automatic mode"?
b) "
was not ... told to stop"?
c) The so-called "driver", if he was really DRIVING the drain,
why he need to be "told to stop" the train? He so stupid cannot stop the train?
d) If there was a DRIVER really driving the train, and
the train was travelling at 60kmh, why he can't stop in time when apply emergency brakes?
Come on, when we are driving at 90kmh on the road (much faster than that 60kmh), we keep safety distance and we still can stop the train in time!
If the driver was really driving the train, so he must have been very RECKLESS then?
Why was the driver NOT CHARGED or PROSECUTED for driving RECKLESSLY without watching out for their ENGINEERs on the train TRACK?
e) If there was a driver really driving the train,
why there is NO COMPREHENSIVE DRIVER's statement as to:
(i) Why he didn't keep a careful lookout for their staff on the platform since they are in straight line of sight (and he should be able to see clearly and from far distance)?
(ii) Why was he driving at 60kmh when near the MRT station? (shouldn't he be driving slowly near train station platform?)
(iii) Why was the train in "automatic mode"? Is the driver really in control?
(iv) Why he cannot brake in time when the people are in straight line of sight? What was he doing at the time when the train was moving? Was he skiving and not looking out because the train was driving in "automatic mode"??? [or the truth is, as SMRT said, "the train was in automatic mode", so the driver was NOT DRIVING the train! So the so-called "driver" is NOT a in control of the train at that time! Then what is the so-called "driver" doing in the train when he was actually not driving the train? Did SMRT released misleading and not forth-coming statement???]
So from the above, we can have 2 conclusions:
Either:
(1) There was NO DRIVER in control of the train, as SMRT released the misleading statement that "the train travelling at 60kmh on an automatic mode" and the train "was not ... told to stop" and yet suddenly it said the driver cannot stop in time???
OR: (2)
There was A DRIVER in control of the train, and he was driving RECKLESSLY, yet the so called SMRT comprehensive investigation report was totally incomprehensive because it doesn't address why the driver driving the train did not see the staff on the train platform despite straight line of sight, was driving at fast speed of 60kmh so near the train station, was unable to stop in time despite applying emergency brakes! And the report said nothing of the RECKLESSNESS of the driver and finding him guilty for causing the death???
So, minority,
which is true? (1) or (2)???