|
|
| Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash (1338083) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
Page 2 of 14 |
||
|
| (1338186) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Thu Feb 5 20:06:30 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by Spider-Pig on Thu Feb 5 15:52:43 2015. Look up "joint and several liability." |
|
|
| (1338187) | |
Re: How 3rd Rail Running Cummuter Rail Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Thu Feb 5 20:08:42 2015, in response to Re: How 3rd Rail Running Cummuter Rail Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by j trainloco on Thu Feb 5 17:03:44 2015. Which is what happened here. :( |
|
|
| (1338188) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Thu Feb 5 20:15:46 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by Fisk Ave Jim on Thu Feb 5 19:20:41 2015. The vehicle acted as a wedge at impact. Steel is steel, it's going to bend in the direction it's levered at just like when it rolls out of the furnace. The chances of this happening are insanely small, but it did. |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (1338189) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by Stephen Bauman on Thu Feb 5 20:28:20 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by LuchAAA on Thu Feb 5 17:54:42 2015. A few years ago, DOT installed a traffic light on 88th Street just yards south of a grade crossing.The traffic light at 88th St & 77th Ave is within 200 feet of the RR crossing. It is subject to the FWHA's guideline regarding traffic control devices not causing spillback onto the tracks. The traffic light was installed by NYCDOT. They would be the agency to inquire whether it is preempted by the RR crossing signal. It would be a good idea to alert your friend about what the VTL states: § 1176. Obstructing highway-railroad grade crossings. No person shall drive a vehicle onto the railroad tracks at a highway-railroad grade crossing unless there is sufficient undercarriage clearance to traverse the crossing and adequate space on the opposite side of the crossing to accommodate the vehicle he and/or she is driving, notwithstanding the indication of any traffic control device which would permit him and/or her to proceed. |
|
|
| (1338190) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by pragmatist on Thu Feb 5 20:58:35 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by Stephen Bauman on Thu Feb 5 20:28:20 2015. The very same VTL which says that drivers should not enter an intersection unless the opposite side is sufficiently clear. Inconsiderate or oblivious drivers frequently ignore that one also, just that the consequences are usually less tragic. Too many drivers advance when they think the other side of a crossing or intersection will clear, not waiting until it actually does. |
|
|
| (1338191) | |
Re: How 3rd Rail Running Cummuter Rail Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by BMRR on Thu Feb 5 21:01:17 2015, in response to Re: How 3rd Rail Running Cummuter Rail Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by j trainloco on Thu Feb 5 17:03:44 2015. I thought about a concrete ramp of sort for the 3rd rail ends at crossings this morning while watching the news. Forgot about theunder running shoes of MNRR. This is just a very sad story. |
|
|
| (1338192) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by Merrick1 on Thu Feb 5 21:08:11 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by Dutchrailnut on Thu Feb 5 13:28:16 2015. We could have built a lot of infrastructure with the money we pissed away in Iraq and Afghanistan. |
|
|
| (1338194) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by Dutchrailnut on Thu Feb 5 21:19:03 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by Merrick1 on Thu Feb 5 21:08:11 2015. shit we could have had a nation wide TGV style network, and fixed all safety deficient road infrastructure and still have spare $$$$ |
|
|
| (1338197) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by Andrew Saucci on Thu Feb 5 21:30:11 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by Dutchrailnut on Thu Feb 5 13:25:21 2015. Good point here-- the driver of the car died. There's no stiffer punishment than that. The rest of this discussion is idle chatter. Apart from that, no one knows why the car was there, and we probably never will; the only person who might be able to explain that is dead. |
|
|
| (1338198) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by ElectricTraction on Thu Feb 5 21:36:00 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by pragmatist on Thu Feb 5 20:58:35 2015. There are times when blocking an intersection is fine, like where crosswalks are involved, and you have to in order to grab your spot in the rotation. NYC is mental about not blocking intersections, but in parts of suburbia, it's acceptable in some circumstances. There is NEVER a situation where blocking a RR crossing is ok. |
|
|
| (1338199) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by Andrew Saucci on Thu Feb 5 21:41:54 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by ElectricTraction on Thu Feb 5 21:36:00 2015. "There are times when blocking an intersection is fine."No. Blocking intersections and driveways is always prohibited, even if no signs or pavement markings are present. If you are near a camera of some sort, you could get a ticket in the mail for that. Red light cameras are not limited to red light violations. In some cases, the situation should simply be avoided if driving through it without blocking an intersection is not possible, but blocking intersections and driveways is never "fine." It is often dangerous and does cause gridlock. If an emergency vehicle needs to get through the intersection and can't, lives could be lost. |
|
|
| (1338200) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Thu Feb 5 21:49:11 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by Fisk Ave Jim on Thu Feb 5 19:20:41 2015. Third rail is not welded. It does not need to be, and that would have made the accident worse.Remember that MN uses the Sprague type third rail. It is an under-running third rail, which means that the ends of a section bend upward so that an approaching shoe is pushed down under the rail. On NYCT and LIRR, the third rail is over-running, the end pieces bend down wards and will lift the shoes up onto the rail. In the vent of an accident the offending object would be lifted up over the rail. On MN an offending object would be pushed down under the rail, and lift the rail up off of its seats. Because the under running rail has an insulated cover over the top of it, this would tend to hold the rail together as it is lifted, albeit that it should be more difficult to lift a Sprague rail up since the brackets want to hold it down. On NYCT and LIRR, the third rail simply sits on the insinuator seats courtesy of gravity. It is more easily dislodged in an accident, with the result that it is pushed aside and out of the way. Leastwise, that is how the LION sees it, your mileage may vary. ROAR |
|
|
| (1338201) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Thu Feb 5 21:51:45 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by Merrick1 on Thu Feb 5 21:08:11 2015. Yeah, but you could only enjoy it if you spoke Arabic. |
|
|
| (1338202) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by pragmatist on Thu Feb 5 21:53:27 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by ElectricTraction on Thu Feb 5 21:36:00 2015. Thinking it is ok, or the acceptance of it in some areas does not make it any more legal. On a clear and dry day there are certain highways where I drive over the speed limit, as do many others. I know it is accepted practice, but if I get a ticket that is not usually a valid defense. |
|
|
| (1338204) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by ElectricTraction on Thu Feb 5 21:56:26 2015, in response to How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by SLRT on Thu Feb 5 09:14:04 2015. One other aspect that will be investigated is whether the under-running third rail contributed to this more than over-running third rail would have. I've also seen a lot of discussion about third rail and grade crossings. It's more than just that. Any line that has the traffic levels to have electrified dual track shouldn't have crossings on it in the first place. When you're talking about 60-100+ trains a day, there just shouldn't be crossings, especially in a populated area, especially with MU trains, especially with third rail.1. This is the correct solution. Lines like this shouldn't have grade crossings. Some could be closed, some could be bridged, and others would need alternate access provided in one way or another. This one would also get grade separated from the Taconic Parkway, which would probably save more lives than the rail separation. It would be a much tougher situation on LIRR, where there are a gazillion crossings. 2. Not going to happen. There are all sorts of clearance issues, not to mention hundreds of million of dollars of equipment that would have to be replaced after you spend tens or hundreds of millions on the wire. And the NIMBYs with the visual impact. 3, 4, and 5. Totally impractical. MN is already having schedule and speed issues and speed restrictions. This type of thing would cause massive slowdowns in service. 6. Interesting idea, but it would be hard to make foolproof, and I can imagine various failure modes for it no matter what you do. I think the NTSB may take action, banning the lead car from being occupied while a train operates above restricted speed over a grade crossing with third rail. Railroads would have a few options of how to comply with this: 1. Grade separate crossings. Not going to happen tomorrow, or next year. It would take several years even if the funding were all available today. Some may just able to be closed completely. 2. Go through crossings at restricted speed. Not going to work, as there are crossings that aren't near stations. 3. Put extra cars on the train. May or may not be practical, may run out of siding space, available power, etc. Also, they may not have that many extra cars, and it would cost a lot over time. 4. For MN on the Harlem, make everyone on the lead car get off at WP/NWP outbound before continuing into grade crossing territory, and don't load it until WP/NWP inbound. LIRR would be screwed if something like this applied to them, as they already have worse capacity issues, and way more grade crossings. |
|
|
| (1338205) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by ElectricTraction on Thu Feb 5 22:02:19 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by Andrew Saucci on Thu Feb 5 21:41:54 2015. Oh, come on. People move for an ambulance or whatever, irregardless of whether they're in an intersection or not.I know of several 4-way stop intersections with heavy pedestrian traffic (on a college campus) where you have to block the intersection to get queued in line while waiting for someone to cross, otherwise you will never get anywhere. In the right intersection, there's no issue with this. I've seen other cases where it's incredibly rude and annoying to block an intersection, but it's not dangerous. |
|
|
| (1338208) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by heypaul on Thu Feb 5 22:30:17 2015, in response to How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by SLRT on Thu Feb 5 09:14:04 2015. "Full stop, then proceed at every grade crossing"I believe this is a near perfect solution. I would only add crossing gates across the tracks also, to ensure that all trains come to a complete stop. While this may increase trip times significantly, I believe most customers would welcome a longer, but safer ride. |
|
|
| (1338211) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Thu Feb 5 23:02:07 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by heypaul on Thu Feb 5 22:30:17 2015. I would only add crossing gates across the tracks also |
|
|
| (1338216) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Fri Feb 6 00:56:35 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by Broadway Lion on Thu Feb 5 21:49:11 2015. Actually, the way the structure for the third rail is designed, if something caught underneath it, with the C-shape hangers if anything, the third rail should have been peeled off to the side in the direction of the hangers. In this situation the vehicle actually grabbed the rail and guided it upward instead of sideways. |
|
|
| (1338277) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by Fisk Ave Jim on Fri Feb 6 11:24:37 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by Broadway Lion on Thu Feb 5 21:49:11 2015. Pure speculation here...the point I'm trying to make is if the 3d rail was welded instead of bolted, it would not have one of the joints fail permitting the rail to seperate & morph into a bayonet since the joint would'nt be there in the first place. Being continous, it might have just bowed or wrapped around the wreckage like running rail does in accidents, in stead of penetrating it. |
|
|
| (1338281) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Fri Feb 6 11:42:33 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by Fisk Ave Jim on Fri Feb 6 11:24:37 2015. Can't see that. If it did not break off it would have stayed together, and it would have gone through several more cars.ROAR |
|
|
| (1338287) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by pragmatist on Fri Feb 6 12:10:31 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by Broadway Lion on Fri Feb 6 11:42:33 2015. Many of us have theorized about the potential differences between under and over running styles of third rail, and whether or not welded continuous rail would have made a difference in this accident. It is also very possible that gasoline would have ignited from a metal to metal spark, or from any other available electrical arc caused in the crash. The discussion points may be worthwhile, but are perhaps premature, since we do not have confirmation that the source of ignition was arcing from the rail. Gasoline is not hard to ignite, it wouldn't take much of a spark. Of course, while we all suspect it, it is not official that it was a gasoline fire. |
|
|
| (1338296) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Fri Feb 6 12:24:27 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by Karl M, Ex New Yorker on Thu Feb 5 11:19:35 2015. The best solution is if all drivers followed the law and did not drive around the gates and did not cross the tracks until they were sure there was space on the other side for their car. |
|
|
| (1338299) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by pragmatist on Fri Feb 6 12:34:27 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by BrooklynBus on Fri Feb 6 12:24:27 2015. You are 100% correct. Around 5 people a week died last year in rail crossing accidents across the country, the number of accidents where no one died because they "got out of dodge" and left the vehicle is staggering. Almost all were preventable. |
|
|
| (1338302) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by SLRT on Fri Feb 6 12:38:01 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by Andrew Saucci on Thu Feb 5 21:30:11 2015. Since this was observed, we know why the car was there; it's not like it was abandoned.We seem to know: What I don't know is (has any of this been reported yet?): |
|
|
| (1338304) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by SLRT on Fri Feb 6 12:43:32 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by pragmatist on Fri Feb 6 12:10:31 2015. It can't be continuous. It has to end for the crossing and begin on the other side. |
|
|
| (1338305) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by pragmatist on Fri Feb 6 12:45:09 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by SLRT on Fri Feb 6 12:43:32 2015. I agree, I was pointing out the discussions, not there validity. |
|
|
| (1338307) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by Elkeeper on Fri Feb 6 12:50:41 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by MainR3664 on Thu Feb 5 13:16:48 2015. It appears that a lot of the damage was caused by the curved up underunning third rail. It went through the car and the train like a spear. Any thoughts about this? |
|
|
| (1338313) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Fri Feb 6 13:30:34 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by Elkeeper on Fri Feb 6 12:50:41 2015. The curve of the rail may or may not be a factor. You can get things under standard rail too that would lift it up. Over-running rail is easier to dislodge from its insulator seats, more likely to be pushed out of the way. The under-running rails appear to be more firmly attached to its hangers, and may be more likely to lift up like a spear.ROAR |
|
|
| (1338314) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Fri Feb 6 13:33:04 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by Andrew Saucci on Thu Feb 5 21:30:11 2015. Disagree 100%. |
|
|
| (1338319) | |
WAIT for the test results...WAS How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by b/p rupture on Fri Feb 6 13:47:23 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by SLRT on Fri Feb 6 12:38:01 2015. Was she on a cell phone? Was she having a medical emergency? We may or may not know more when the TOXICOLOGY reports come in, which should be a part of the investigation, which in turn should be completed before all the speculation and blame goes around. Having posted this, I am not saying it played, or didn't play a part in this, hence the highlighted may not above, to clarify for the idiots on this board. A witness statement earlier indicated no cell phone, and actions on the driver's part that don't indicate a medical emergency. She took the thoughts in her head at the time, with her to the grave. |
|
|
| (1338345) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by Jace on Fri Feb 6 14:45:30 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by SLRT on Fri Feb 6 12:38:01 2015. "Why she would get BACK into the car"It's dark, cold and icy outside. You're scared, on a crossing with the gates down and a train heading towards you. You go to what you feel is the safest place - your warm car with all kinds of air bags and other safety features. Unfortunately, the safest action is not always the most logical (re: Kaprun). And don't forget that the train was running wrong main. She may have initially thought that she was in the clear. As to the consequences, there will be many. Design is predicated to a very large extent on experience. The collision posts that kept the carshell together in this wreck are a direct result of one of the last, bad commuter rail crossing accidents when a South Shore train nailed a coil steel flatbed back in 1998. The fire retardant materials and standards used for the interior stem from the smoky BART Transbay fire in 1979. Other fire safety features are a result of the MARC/Amtrak collision and fire in 1996. But this was one of those out of the blue types of accidents: I'm sure I'm not alone when I say that have never heard of such a fiery wreck caused by a car or a wreck where live third rail may have triggered a fire inside a car. Sure there have been incidents of gas trucks getting hit with terrible resulting fires (Amtrak seemed to be good at these back in the 1970's), but not from an automobile/SUV. Thinking out loud, if the third rail didn't cause the interior fire, just the gas as the NTSB seems to have already said, then I wonder if the HVAC system helped spread the fire. In common with many cars, the M7 recirculating (interior) air intakes are below the units at the ends of the cars. The units could have quickly drawn the fire up into the ceiling ducts and spread most of the length of the car. As long as the car had power, the blowers should have stayed on. That could be why the fire was so strong so fast. Maybe, maybe not. My set of predicted changes: - The third rail configuration around crossings will be re-engineered so that the third rail fails in a safe way if there is a grade crossing collision. This could involve better securement to the track, additional gaps away from the crossing, breakaway features, etc. No matter what, you never want third rail to enter a car again. - Reinforcements on the front end of the cars to prevent punctures. - Possible changes in HVAC design if that did contribute to this disaster. - Higher priority on grade crossing elimination plans (I agree that this particular crossing will be closed within a year). - Grade crossing sensors to detect vehicles on the tracks (which of course will likely result in longer times for the gates to be down so that the train crew has sufficient time to react and distance to stop the train). Maybe the best thing to do is bring back crossing watchmen. |
|
|
| (1338355) | |
Re: How 3rd Rail Running Cummuter Rail Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by Outside the Box on Fri Feb 6 15:12:49 2015, in response to Re: How 3rd Rail Running Cummuter Rail Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by BMRR on Thu Feb 5 21:01:17 2015. The under running 3rd rail apparently made the incident far worse. The 3rd rail shoe ramp for the under running 3rd rail is pointed slightly up. An electrician claimed that this caught the SUV and lifted it up through the SUV and into the first 3 cars.http://7online.com/news/exclusive-new-details-on-third-rail-involved-in-metro-north-crash/506244/ Some details might be off, but the gist of it seems right. |
|
|
| (1338358) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by Outside the Box on Fri Feb 6 15:18:33 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by Jace on Fri Feb 6 14:45:30 2015. watchmen,Considering virtual doorman technology is mature, how about virtual grade crossing monitor. Use personnel who are on disability, or are on gap shift. |
|
|
| (1338370) | |
Re: How 3rd Rail Running Cummuter Rail Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by steamdriven on Fri Feb 6 16:02:41 2015, in response to Re: How 3rd Rail Running Cummuter Rail Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by Outside the Box on Fri Feb 6 15:12:49 2015. This event is so rare that I don't believe it justifies losing the advantanges of under-running 3rd rail. For one, with MNR under-running rail it is possible to insulate the top and sides to reduce the number of burned and killed pedestrians, such as the bicylist who was pushed onto the LiRR 3rd rail by a car one rainy day (he lived, afaik).MNR 3rd rail doesn't act like a collection plate for liquid and frozen water. The remote chance of this sort of spearing could be mostly cancelled out by a ski jump, offset a bit to the outside so it does not catch the pickup shoe. If a car being dragged along the tracks misses the ski jump, it is only barely striking the 3rd rail and would probably just result in tearing off the bumper. |
|
|
| (1338379) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by WillD on Fri Feb 6 16:59:01 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by Elkeeper on Fri Feb 6 12:50:41 2015. If the dual position shoes proposed for the M8s worked it may be time to look into adopting them fleetwide and beginning a conversion of the underrunning third rail to overrunning third rail. The LIRR has had its share of grade crossing accidents without the catastrophic outcome seen here.That, or else reelectrify with high voltage AC OHLE and order M8 style dual voltage EMUs. |
|
|
| (1338380) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by WillD on Fri Feb 6 17:05:13 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by steamdriven on Thu Feb 5 13:25:30 2015. Except that red light cameras do enhance safety. I know, it's awful, the damn gubmint expecting you to be in control of the multiton behemoth barrelling down the roads they built for you. |
|
|
| (1338381) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by Bill West on Fri Feb 6 17:33:19 2015, in response to How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by SLRT on Thu Feb 5 09:14:04 2015. Okay, let's get some reality back in here.-MNR/LIRR, Uh where does one think that LIRR rail goes after it slopes down? Certainly not to the ground. The fact is there is plenty of opportunity to catch under it too. Thus there is no useable difference in car impact resistance between the two systems because both can be snagged. -Neither is the rail mounting an issue, it's fragile insulators and it's going to be ripped up and tossed in any incident. The lag screws under the MNR C supports can be pulled straight up by a car as readily as they can be pushed over, it will depend more on the tearing object than the mount. -A barrier around the end of the third rail not only has to clear the shoe it has to clear the coach overhang. This is very tight, there is barely space for the protection board let alone a barrier of a useful strength. You wouldn't want a barrier to wedge the car either, it would increase the risk of derailing the train. -What is the relevance of all the detector/watchman ideas? The engineer did "detect" the problem and reacted as quickly as the train could respond. Now if someone has a method of predicting from a minute and a mile back that a car will enter the tracks AND not get off by the time the train gets there and it can be done for thousands of crossings at a taxpayer affordable price then maybe there's something worth posting about. -Any one location can be singled out after an accident but unless one can predict the future we'd need to fix thousands of crossings to meaningfully reduce the risk. Arguing for financially unattainable overpasses is not recognizing the scale of the problem. -Politically this crossing may get closed but it will not be because it is a meaningful cure to the ongoing problem. -The third rail puncture and fire consequence was a once in a century fluke, I've never heard of such an extreme case before. It is just unfortunate and not anything that has high enough probability to warrant trying to change the long shot future odds of a repeat. Bill |
|
|
| (1338386) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by WillD on Fri Feb 6 18:07:38 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by Bill West on Fri Feb 6 17:33:19 2015. -MNR/LIRR, Uh where does one think that LIRR rail goes after it slopes down? Certainly not to the ground. The fact is there is plenty of opportunity to catch under it too.-A barrier around the end of the third rail not only has to clear the shoe it has to clear the coach overhang. This is very tight, there is barely space for the protection board let alone a barrier of a useful strength. But the LIRR's third rail is far more compatible with a short slope sided, U shaped concrete barrier that'd protect the third rail approach and force a foreign object up onto and over the third rail. The barrier would always be below the height of the shoes and thus would also be outside the dynamic envelope of the train. IMHO this trial by error approach to system safety you espouse is the absolute worst way to go about learning from this accident. We do not know if this is a once in a century fluke. It may not have happened before this, but one example is bad statistics. It could happen again tomorrow, or next week, or next year. But it seems apparent that this sort of conflagration resulting from an accident is preventable. At the very least USDOT needs to study the impact of both types of third rail on grade crossing accidents. |
|
|
| (1338390) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by Fisk Ave Jim on Fri Feb 6 18:19:37 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by Jace on Fri Feb 6 14:45:30 2015. "Maybe the best thing to do is bring back crossing watchmen."Y'know, you might be on to something here. Bringing back the watchmen (watchpersons nowadays) would be a hell of a lot cheaper than eliminating all the grade crossings. Also eliminated would be the litigation that goes along with such accidents. With all those folks on the books,Think of all the extra $$$ going to the tax man!! Why didn't I think of that:( |
|
|
| (1338395) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by TUNNELRAT on Fri Feb 6 18:47:08 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by Fisk Ave Jim on Fri Feb 6 18:19:37 2015. uh,because you weren`t born in the 19th. century. |
|
|
| (1338398) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by milantram on Fri Feb 6 19:32:53 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by Dutchrailnut on Thu Feb 5 21:19:03 2015. Agreed. |
|
|
| (1338400) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by merrick1 on Fri Feb 6 20:03:02 2015, in response to How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by SLRT on Thu Feb 5 09:14:04 2015. Would this accident be getting anywhere near as much attention if the driver had run a traffic light and had been hit by a car carrying five people and everyone had died? |
|
|
| (1338401) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by Fisk Ave Jim on Fri Feb 6 20:03:15 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by SLRT on Fri Feb 6 12:43:32 2015. Continuous in side sections, as in 100 yds on the left & then 100 yds on the right for example. Naturally, employing common sense here, gapping at grade crossings. |
|
|
| (1338402) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Fri Feb 6 20:08:21 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by merrick1 on Fri Feb 6 20:03:02 2015. No. And it's been like that for centuries.I'm sure the death rate traveling by 19th century horse and buggy was a lot higher than the rate on the early explosive railways and steamers too. |
|
|
| (1338404) | |
Re: WAIT for the test results...WAS How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Fri Feb 6 20:17:38 2015, in response to WAIT for the test results...WAS How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by b/p rupture on Fri Feb 6 13:47:23 2015. With the severe burns to the point of needing dental records, is toxicology even possible ? |
|
|
| (1338408) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Fri Feb 6 20:34:37 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by BrooklynBus on Fri Feb 6 12:24:27 2015. Do you think people can even judge that ?Ever watch people parallel park or back park into a slot ? It is a lost art. They have no spacial senses at all. |
|
|
| (1338411) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Fri Feb 6 20:41:19 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by WillD on Fri Feb 6 16:59:01 2015. Well, there was this over a year ago on the LIRR:http://gothamist.com/2013/01/22/lirr_train_hits_vehicle_at_brentwoo.php That was the end of that M-3, and it was a virtually empty deadhead train. Packed 12 car rush hour train might have been a quite different story |
|
|
| (1338413) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Fri Feb 6 20:45:59 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by Joe V on Fri Feb 6 20:34:37 2015. Do you think people can even judge that ?Yes. If you're not sure there's enough space, don't proceed. I have never in my entire life even come close to stopping on a railroad track. Sure even if everyone were totally careful, some day someone would get stuck exactly on the tracks and not have time to escape. But 999 out of 1,000 fatalities can be avoided by just a bit of prudence. It's not like blocking a car intersection. I've done that from time to time out of selfishness. But I'd never stop on tracks to try to make a light or something. |
|
|
| (1338414) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by steamdriven on Fri Feb 6 20:46:28 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by WillD on Fri Feb 6 18:07:38 2015. It's simpler than that.Install a ski-jump ramp with a brass cover (slides better) at the critical locations, offset to the outside just a few inches and perhaps forwards to it doesn't catch the pickup shoe. That will be enough to raise cars and drop them on top of the 3rd rail rather than spearing it; if just an edge of the car catches the 3rd rail it does not lead to this type of event (the car bit tears off). Engineers who deal with barriers may come up with something more clever. But this particular accident sequence appears to be so rare that it might not be worth the trouble. I'm in favor of mitigating risks, but if such an event is not likely to happen again for the lifetime of the technology (let's say 50 years), it's just pandering to the emotion of "do something!!!" I suggest MTA keep the MNR under-running 3rd rail, and if the bureaucrats that be don't eliminate ground level 3rd rail (which is unlikely), convert the LIRR to MNR style under-running. It is more reliable and slightly safer, as the top and sides could be (sorta) insulated. |
|
|
|
Page 2 of 14 |
||
