|
|
| Re: WAIT for the test results...WAS How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash (1338083) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
Page 3 of 14 |
||
|
| (1338416) | |
Re: WAIT for the test results...WAS How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Fri Feb 6 20:48:07 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. She was supposedly driving from Chappaqua to Scarsdale, yet at the time of her death she was headed back toward Chappaqua. That suggests being severely flustered, though of course alcohol could be the cause of that too. |
|
|
| (1338417) | |
Re: WAIT for the test results...WAS How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Fri Feb 6 20:50:25 2015, in response to Re: WAIT for the test results...WAS How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by AlM on Fri Feb 6 20:48:07 2015. Got lost on a detour ? |
|
|
| (1338420) | |
Re: WAIT for the test results...WAS How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Fri Feb 6 20:57:40 2015, in response to Re: WAIT for the test results...WAS How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by Joe V on Fri Feb 6 20:50:25 2015. Probably. And probably realized she was lost, and late for her appointment, and so concerned with all of that that she didn't really notice the railroad tracks. |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (1338423) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Fri Feb 6 21:02:19 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. "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."It has only been 30 years that the Upper Harlem has been electric. I suppose at some time, the Hudson and Lower Harlem did too, but I don't know. I am sure the Putnam had them. |
|
|
| (1338425) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Fri Feb 6 21:03:57 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by Joe V on Fri Feb 6 21:02:19 2015. I meant they had grade-crossings. |
|
|
| (1338432) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by jabrams on Fri Feb 6 21:36:20 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by Dutchrailnut on Thu Feb 5 13:25:21 2015. Install cameras just like red light cameras. Two or three seconds after the lights start flashing (bell is ringing) take pictures. If the bell shuts off when the gates are down and starts up again when the gates are rising, take pictures until the light stops flashing. Ticket the same way as red light cameras. |
|
|
| (1338433) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by jabrams on Fri Feb 6 21:40:44 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by SLRT on Fri Feb 6 12:38:01 2015. And if you remained where she was, she would have cleared the tracks by 6 feet. She probably panicked, forgot to put the car in reverse and just gave it gas. For the gate to hit her car, she definitely went through the flashing lights (probably at a slow speed, or she could not have stopped with the gates still on her car). What is interesting, is that the gates went down 39 seconds before the train arrived, with the national minimum at 20-25 seconds. |
|
|
| (1338437) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by Dutchrailnut on Fri Feb 6 22:03:07 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by jabrams on Fri Feb 6 21:36:20 2015. unenforceable, no way to see who driver is , courts would trow 75% of those out . |
|
|
| (1338438) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by j trainloco on Fri Feb 6 22:03:56 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by WillD on Fri Feb 6 16:59:01 2015. The LIRR has had its share of grade crossing accidents without the catastrophic outcome seen here.And MNRR hasn't? In fact, apparently, there was an accident at this intersection 30 years ago. It didn't result in the kind of catastrophe that happened this week. Safety statistics indicate that MNRR has a small number of incidents every year. In sure some of them happened in third rail territory. reelectrify with high voltage AC OHLE and order M8 style dual voltage EMUs. That's knee jerk. It would probably be cheaper to eliminate grade crossings. But I'm sure there are measures even cheaper that would be just as effective as changing to overhead wire. |
|
|
| (1338439) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by Dutchrailnut on Fri Feb 6 22:34:07 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by j trainloco on Fri Feb 6 22:03:56 2015. re electrifying 700 track miles and buying 450 new M-8's at 3 million per car would cast more than building 58 viaducts for all crossings on MN |
|
|
| (1338443) | |
Re: How 3rd Rail Running Cummuter Rail Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by j trainloco on Fri Feb 6 23:23:55 2015, in response to Re: How 3rd Rail Running Cummuter Rail Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by steamdriven on Fri Feb 6 16:02:41 2015. I thought about this some more, and it probably could also be fixed by having a third rail that is directed away from the running rails (to avoid the under running shoe) and then have an end that is anchored into the ground. The SUV had to not just get under the rail, but also catch the end of it to direct the force up into the railcar |
|
|
| (1338444) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by Jace on Fri Feb 6 23:26:18 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. "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."I think you already know that there is no such thing as a fluke when passengers/innocent bystanders are killed. This is especially the case when the accident is such that one can easily visualize the horror of being there when it happened; you feel the same vulnerabilities that those on board surely felt. That's why a coil rolling down the aisle of a NICTD car led to lots of structural revisions, hell, that's why 9/11 led to all kinds of changes...This accident exposed clear but unforeseen vulnerabilities. There will be changes; third rail can never be allowed inside a car again. The thought of this is too scary to chance a repeat. Lots can be done, but no matter what is implemented, there is only one measure of success: no such accident ever occurs again. If the odds of repeating the accident sequence are already low then pretty much anything you do will be a success. That's great news for the governor or who ever is spending the money. Think of Sandy in this context. As for some of the ideas, if third rail can't be tied down better then maybe break it into short segments with gaps between right after crossings. That way you won't have a car or two lanced by a rail. On the car side, look for ways to improve the emergency braking rate much less survivability in a fire. And car end reinforcing of some sort will happen, no doubt. |
|
|
| (1338445) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by WillD on Fri Feb 6 23:43:15 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by Dutchrailnut on Fri Feb 6 22:03:07 2015. Why wouldn't you use the same legal framework used effectively for speed and red light cameras? No need to see who the driver is, just ticket the car and send it to the registered owner. |
|
|
| (1338450) | |
Re: How 3rd Rail Running Commuter Rail Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Sat Feb 7 02:00:56 2015, in response to Re: How 3rd Rail Running Cummuter Rail Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by steamdriven on Fri Feb 6 16:02:41 2015. Advantages over what? |
|
|
| (1338459) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Sat Feb 7 07:21:19 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by jabrams on Fri Feb 6 21:36:20 2015. So in this case, we would have ticketed her estate. The fine would never get paid because all the other parties of the death and injured will clean out her insurance policy, then her estate. Her 3 kids may never see college. |
|
|
| (1338461) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Sat Feb 7 07:35:13 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by Joe V on Sat Feb 7 07:21:19 2015. Her husband is obviously a good earner, because she didn't buy the Mercedes on her jewelry store employee earnings (no mention that she owned the store). He probably owns half the house and most of their savings. |
|
|
| (1338464) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by Dutchrailnut on Sat Feb 7 07:53:58 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by WillD on Fri Feb 6 23:43:15 2015. its not about ticketing for example with red light cameras there is no points on licence, you really think a monetary fine is a problem for these people, when current penalty of death by train does not scare them ??? |
|
|
| (1338465) | |
Re: How 3rd Rail Running Commuter Rail Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by steamdriven on Sat Feb 7 08:14:53 2015, in response to Re: How 3rd Rail Running Commuter Rail Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by Olog-hai on Sat Feb 7 02:00:56 2015. Advantages over over-running 3rd rail. |
|
|
| (1338466) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Sat Feb 7 08:21:19 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by Dutchrailnut on Sat Feb 7 07:53:58 2015. Well, after the third fine they might stop. But it wouldn't help with someone like Ms. Brody who probably didn't make a habit of standing on railroad tracks. |
|
|
| (1338468) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Sat Feb 7 08:22:40 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by jabrams on Fri Feb 6 21:36:20 2015. However, Ms. Brody didn't go through a flashing red. She proceeded beyond the gates before the flashing red ever happened and then stopped. |
|
|
| (1338470) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by Dutchrailnut on Sat Feb 7 08:27:47 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by AlM on Sat Feb 7 08:21:19 2015. do speeders stop speeding ?? |
|
|
| (1338471) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by Dutchrailnut on Sat Feb 7 08:30:23 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by AlM on Sat Feb 7 08:22:40 2015. correct but did violate NY state law by occupying a crossing and ignoring signs that prohibit stopping on tracks. |
|
|
| (1338472) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by Dyre Dan on Sat Feb 7 08:30:33 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. Driveways? Come on. There are blocks that have driveways every few feet, if there is traffic on such a block, you have to block a driveway. (Consider, for example, 28th Ave. in Astoria, Queens, between 32nd and 31st Streets.) I do try never to block an actual intersection when I drive, and often get honked at for it.Red light cameras are not limited to red light violations. I think they generally are. I guess it depends on the particular legislation that authorized the camera. |
|
|
| (1338473) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Sat Feb 7 08:39:18 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by Dutchrailnut on Sat Feb 7 08:27:47 2015. Yes. Fines are a deterrent. |
|
|
| (1338474) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Sat Feb 7 08:40:52 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by Dutchrailnut on Sat Feb 7 08:30:23 2015. Absolutely. Even if she was distracted and confused, it was a criminal level of recklessness. Placing a 4,000 pound object on a railroad track while a train was approaching. |
|
|
| (1338475) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by pragmatist on Sat Feb 7 08:45:00 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by Dyre Dan on Sat Feb 7 08:30:33 2015. Not blocking driveways generally refers to parking, not driving. There are some special cases with signage or interlocked traffic signals to keep them clear like some firehouses. Not the same thing. Red light and speed cameras (in NYS) require enabling legislation in Albany (as would a proposed "crossing camera". The legislation delineates how many in a jurisdiction, where they may be placed, and how they are used. |
|
|
| (1338478) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by Dutchrailnut on Sat Feb 7 08:51:32 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by AlM on Sat Feb 7 08:39:18 2015. no its habit that repeats even after fines, the mind knows it is slim chance to get caught. |
|
|
| (1338480) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by R30A on Sat Feb 7 08:55:22 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by steamdriven on Fri Feb 6 20:46:28 2015. That really makes no sense. If you are going to the effort of modifying the third rail extensively, you'd convert to catenary wherever possible. |
|
|
| (1338482) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by Dutchrailnut on Sat Feb 7 09:01:12 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by R30A on Sat Feb 7 08:55:22 2015. the cost would be twice as high as changing all crossings on MN to viaducts, 700 route miles of third rail and 450 cars at 3 million a car |
|
|
| (1338486) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by steamdriven on Sat Feb 7 09:22:40 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by Dutchrailnut on Sat Feb 7 09:01:12 2015. Ignoring whether or not catenary is better, how hard is it to add a pantograph, a transformer and rectifiers to a 3rd rail car? It does add weight, unless a lightweight transformer has been invented. The cars weighs 50 tons to begin with, another few thousand pounds isn't much difference.With the wire overhead, the dingdongs in charge would have one less excuse to cut service when there's a few snowflakes. A yard of snow didn't seem to both this train, led by an ordinary commodity engine. http://videowall.accuweather.com/detail/videos/top-videos/video/4036353855001/train-barrels-through-massive-mounds-of-snow?autoStart=true |
|
|
| (1338493) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Sat Feb 7 10:41:10 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by Dutchrailnut on Fri Feb 6 22:03:07 2015. Make occupation of active railroad crossing signals a misdemeanor/felony, then charge the owner of the vehicle with an accessory to the crime. |
|
|
| (1338496) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Sat Feb 7 10:46:32 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by Jace on Fri Feb 6 23:26:18 2015. LION doubts that your solution would work. And LIRR *did* have a fiery crash with an automobile that got pushed half way down a platform as I recall.No matter what solution you propose, the NEXT acciden will demonstraite why it did not work. ROAR |
|
|
| (1338502) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Sat Feb 7 10:55:09 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by Jace on Fri Feb 6 23:26:18 2015. Emergency braking rate of 3.2MPHPS is good enough.So is the structural integrity of the M-7. |
|
|
| (1338505) | |
Re: How 3rd Rail Running Commuter Rail Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Sat Feb 7 11:10:00 2015, in response to Re: How 3rd Rail Running Commuter Rail Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by steamdriven on Sat Feb 7 08:14:53 2015. That is the advantage of running steam engines. There is no third rail or overhead wire to be fouled. And aint nothing going to happen to the pax with that big old engine up on the point. |
|
|
| (1338511) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by steamdriven on Sat Feb 7 11:38:51 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by R30A on Sat Feb 7 08:55:22 2015. I agree that catenary is better, but merely adding dragged-vehicle deflectors near crossings isn't a huge change. It could need be as many as 4 per track per crossing, but they should require no maintenance.There might be reasons those ramps won't work in practice ... I don't design railroads for a living. |
|
|
| (1338520) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by Jace on Sat Feb 7 12:28:20 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by Joe V on Sat Feb 7 10:55:09 2015. And just why is that emergency braking rate good enough? Why can't it be better? LRVs have rates of 5 to +6 mphps. It's clearly not the presence of passengers that dictate the rate.The structural integrity of the shell is not in question - I've already noted that it held up fine, but collision and corner posts are not going to stop rails from puncturing the front end of the car. |
|
|
| (1338522) | |
Re: How 3rd Rail Running Commuter Rail Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by j trainloco on Sat Feb 7 12:31:30 2015, in response to Re: How 3rd Rail Running Commuter Rail Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by Broadway Lion on Sat Feb 7 11:10:00 2015. I've been wondering how this crash would have played out if one of the DM locomotive's had been at the head of the consist. |
|
|
| (1338523) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Sat Feb 7 12:35:16 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by Jace on Sat Feb 7 12:28:20 2015. The rail did not puncture the front of the car. It came up through the floor possibly even aft of the lead truck.Even if the emergency brake rate were a lot better, there is still no way for a train to stop for a vehicle on the tracks. You are comparing emergency braking on a heavy train operating at with speed with a little LRV operating at relatively low speeds. ROAR |
|
|
| (1338525) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by Jace on Sat Feb 7 12:45:22 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by Broadway Lion on Sat Feb 7 10:46:32 2015. "No matter what solution you propose, the NEXT accident will demonstraite why it did not work."So does that mean something like, I don't know, air brakes or anticlimbers should never have been designed much less installed because they were doomed to fail? What a defeatist statement. |
|
|
| (1338526) | |
Re: How 3rd Rail Running Commuter Rail Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Sat Feb 7 12:48:57 2015, in response to Re: How 3rd Rail Running Commuter Rail Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by steamdriven on Sat Feb 7 08:14:53 2015. Nothing seems to be particularly advantageous with the MTA running anything. |
|
|
| (1338527) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Sat Feb 7 12:55:02 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by Jace on Sat Feb 7 12:28:20 2015. Would you like to throw everyone in the train about and cause more injury and deaths to passengers ? |
|
|
| (1338529) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Sat Feb 7 13:00:37 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by Jace on Sat Feb 7 12:45:22 2015. No, it means that not at all. Just keep making the improvements as the are needed and discovered. Point is, you cannot fix everything, and no matter what you fix, the next disaster is going to bite you in the ass anyway. Brakes and anti-climbers do work.These cars had good brakes and anti-climbers...  ROAR |
|
|
| (1338530) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Sat Feb 7 13:03:46 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by Broadway Lion on Sat Feb 7 10:41:10 2015. That wouldn't have prevented this tragedy. |
|
|
| (1338534) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Sat Feb 7 13:32:44 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by Broadway Lion on Sat Feb 7 10:41:10 2015. Do you amateur legislators even know what an "accessory" is? |
|
|
| (1338536) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by jabrams on Sat Feb 7 13:41:02 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by AlM on Sat Feb 7 08:22:40 2015. Where does it state that she did not proceed through the flashing lights. How many seconds does it take for the lights to start and the gates to his her vehicle? |
|
|
| (1338537) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Sat Feb 7 13:43:07 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by jabrams on Sat Feb 7 13:41:02 2015. 39 seconds warning |
|
|
| (1338541) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by Jace on Sat Feb 7 13:56:37 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by Broadway Lion on Sat Feb 7 12:35:16 2015. You're splitting hairs. As I said several times, third rail cannot be allowed to enter a car again. That will be the mantra. Cars will be more puncture resistant as a result.I don't understand your logic about braking. A higher braking rate means a shorter braking time and hence distance. Stopping from 60 mph at 3.0 mphps takes 20 seconds, at 5.0 mphps it takes 12 seconds. Braking distance is about 350 feet less at the higher rate, maybe just enough to prevent this accident. LRV: 65 mph, 6.15 mphps. This at least shows that much higher brake rates are possible on rail vehicles. Maybe hydraulic brakes are next for MUs? |
|
|
| (1338543) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by Jace on Sat Feb 7 13:58:14 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by Joe V on Sat Feb 7 12:55:02 2015. No seated passengers or standees on an LRV? What about buses? |
|
|
| (1338545) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Sat Feb 7 14:00:54 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by jabrams on Sat Feb 7 13:41:02 2015. Where does it state that she did not proceed through the flashing lights.It's an inference from everything that has been said. The most likely explanation is that there was a line of cars waiting at the Taconic traffic light. She followed the car in front of her and came to a stop with the rear of her car under the raised gate (which of course is grossly unsafe and illegal). Then while she was stopped the train approached and the gate came down on her car. |
|
|
| (1338547) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Sat Feb 7 14:08:31 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by Jace on Sat Feb 7 13:58:14 2015. What are you talking about ? You will throw everyone into the seat back ahead of them, give concussions, whiplash, knock out a lot of teeth, and they would have been even less able to self-evacuate.No we cannot stop trains that fast and it would not have prevented this wreck, when the brakes were applied to reduce speed from 58 to 48 MPH. |
|
|
|
Page 3 of 14 |
||
