These are all valid concerns. My goal was to highlight an opportunity for improvement that does not require capital equipment purchases. As you note, analysis may not reveal any opportunity for improving the regenerative controls. Given their inability to address the problem today, I expected they’d rather investigate a low-odds opportunity than disregard it. I was incorrect; I will raise my minimum-likelihood thresholds at HN in the future. ‘Simple’ was meant only in relation only to all other identified options, that each require non-zero capital expenditure and thus invoke the complexities of capital expenditure. It was not my intent to diminish the intricacies or difficulties of rail electrical engineering with my imprecise use of that adjective and I apologize for the disrespect inflicted.