|
|
| Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash (1338083) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
Page 6 of 14 |
||
|
| (1338768) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Sun Feb 8 13:35:06 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by merrick1 on Sun Feb 8 13:29:25 2015. That's like comparing a Pennsy P70 to a NJT MLV. They both weigh about the same, but the older model fell apart quite readily in accidents. |
|
|
| (1338770) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by steamdriven on Sun Feb 8 13:52:18 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by AlM on Sun Feb 8 12:56:05 2015. It would certainly reduce crowding at the rear of the car ;-) |
|
|
| (1338771) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by j trainloco on Sun Feb 8 13:59:09 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by Joe V on Sun Feb 8 09:11:45 2015. As mentioned before, the speed when the brakes are applied is pretty irrelevant to occupant comfort safety. If the train is going 80, or if the train is going 30, braking at -6mphps is going to have the same impact on you at either speed. |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (1338773) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Sun Feb 8 14:28:37 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by Karl M, Ex New Yorker on Sun Feb 8 11:57:11 2015. Is parallel parking part of road tests anymore ? |
|
|
| (1338775) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Sun Feb 8 14:32:36 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by j trainloco on Sun Feb 8 13:59:09 2015. Except if going 80, the strong negative acceleration would persist for longer, and might be harder for passengers to handle. |
|
|
| (1338776) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by TerrApin Station on Sun Feb 8 14:44:47 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by Joe V on Sun Feb 8 11:45:12 2015. You're wrong. If you put super high end sports car carbon ceramic brakes of a very big size on an Expedition then the stopping distances will be reduced from what they are as built by the factory. With certain materials and technologies, the emergency braking rates of commuter rail cars could come even closer to those of LRVs. |
|
|
| (1338777) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by TerrApin Station on Sun Feb 8 14:45:37 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by #5 - Dyre Ave on Sun Feb 8 11:37:47 2015. Thanks man. |
|
|
| (1338778) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by Dyre Dan on Sun Feb 8 14:47:31 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. It's being said that the woman, Ellen Brody, was not even aware that she was on railroad tracks. How anyone would know that, I'm not sure, but people who know her have said she was a careful driver. Anyway, trying to penalize the dead makes no sense. Harsh penalties are not the answer.I wonder if using normal-looking traffic lights at RR crossings, instead of the traditional two flashing lights, would make sense. In other contexts, a flashing red light means "come to a stop, then proceed". That's not really the message you want to convey. If grade crossings are slowly being eliminated, there will be drivers who are unfamiliar with the special signals used at them. |
|
|
| (1338779) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by TerrApin Station on Sun Feb 8 14:47:47 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by #5 - Dyre Ave on Sun Feb 8 11:31:11 2015. Good post. I'm on Hillside Ave right now as we speak. |
|
|
| (1338780) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by j trainloco on Sun Feb 8 14:56:57 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by AlM on Sun Feb 8 14:32:36 2015. Jerk rate has much more of an effect on passengers losing their balance. In general, passengers lose their balance in the first second of acceleration/deceleration. At the very least, the types of injuries that Joe V keeps mentioning are going to happen at 30 or 80, you're not going to smash your face AFTER the jerk rate is at 0. |
|
|
| (1338781) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by Wado MP73 on Sun Feb 8 15:01:56 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by Dan Lawrence on Sun Feb 8 11:11:23 2015. Baltimore's LRV's maximum speed is 60 mph.Adding cars with motors in a train does not increase maximum speed. WADL. WADL. |
|
|
| (1338786) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by N6 Limited on Sun Feb 8 15:29:06 2015, in response to How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by SLRT on Thu Feb 5 09:14:04 2015. The solution is easy, at railroad crossings, make the arms strong enough to physically push vehicles off the tracks. Right? |
|
|
| (1338788) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Sun Feb 8 15:41:08 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by TerrApin Station on Sun Feb 8 14:44:47 2015. You forgot about slip/slide, steal on steal. |
|
|
| (1338789) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Sun Feb 8 15:46:46 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by Joe V on Sun Feb 8 15:41:08 2015. Same on an LRV. The coefficient of friction of steel on steel is the same, whether it's a heavy vehicle or a light one. A heav y vehicle can exert more braking force, but it weighs nore, and these cancel our, to make for the same possible deceleration. |
|
|
| (1338790) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Sun Feb 8 15:51:35 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by AlM on Sun Feb 8 15:46:46 2015. Surface contact is the same, light or heavy. They will still have wheel lock and slide hundreds of feet just as they do every autumn. Happened to my commuting trains 4 times in October and November.So after throwing everybody around, it would have hit the car at 38MPHG verses 48MPH at best. BFD. |
|
|
| (1338791) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Sun Feb 8 15:55:11 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by Dyre Dan on Sun Feb 8 14:47:31 2015. One light on the gate stays solid red. OTOH, I have always thought flashing red lights outnumbering the others sends the wrong message.Do we know how lit up the area is with street lights ? |
|
|
| (1338792) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by Dutchrailnut on Sun Feb 8 15:58:06 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by AlM on Sun Feb 8 15:46:46 2015. yes Coefficient is same but weight/mass will carry you much further with regular train cars. and using rail brakes puts all that weight/mass at whatever holds the rail, even on LRV's the track brakes only work at low speeds. |
|
|
| (1338793) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Sun Feb 8 15:58:52 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by N6 Limited on Sun Feb 8 15:29:06 2015. Arms that should be a bulldozer ? |
|
|
| (1338794) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by Dutchrailnut on Sun Feb 8 15:59:03 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by Joe V on Sun Feb 8 15:51:35 2015. yes but the heavy train will slide much further than a LRV due to mass/weight. |
|
|
| (1338795) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by Dutchrailnut on Sun Feb 8 16:01:18 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by Joe V on Sun Feb 8 15:55:11 2015. there is a MN substation right next to crossing with orange sodium lights on it plus all signs and arms are reflective . |
|
|
| (1338797) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Sun Feb 8 16:06:45 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by Dutchrailnut on Sun Feb 8 15:59:03 2015. Which was why my Raritan train with a big burly Alsom PL42 and 7 68-ton MLV cars shot about 1,000 feet past Westfield station one day last fall.As much as some here try to equate a commuter rail MU car to a PCC, there is no comparison. If we were talking about the highly efficient 48 ton Budd M-1 with Pioneer trucks, their argument would have half a chance, but that era is over. |
|
|
| (1338798) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Sun Feb 8 16:08:42 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by Dutchrailnut on Sun Feb 8 16:01:18 2015. Well that about does it. There is not a damned thing that could have been done except close the crossing. |
|
|
| (1338799) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by Dutchrailnut on Sun Feb 8 16:12:16 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by Joe V on Sun Feb 8 16:08:42 2015. or try to make motorist smarter. |
|
|
| (1338800) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Sun Feb 8 16:13:38 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by Dutchrailnut on Sun Feb 8 16:01:18 2015. And another 16 minutes or so later, train 963 to Wassaic with a P32DM and huge fuel tank, would have come along.Interesting to think what would have happened then: would it have bumped the SUV of the tracks, or had its fuel tank pierced as well ? |
|
|
| (1338811) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by Dutchrailnut on Sun Feb 8 16:42:57 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by Joe V on Sun Feb 8 16:13:38 2015. the Genesis has 4 rather small 550 gallon fuel tanks and they sit rather high in frame . |
|
|
| (1338813) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Sun Feb 8 16:45:47 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by Joe V on Sun Feb 8 11:47:13 2015. So you admit that LRVs go 60 mph. Thanks. |
|
|
| (1338814) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Sun Feb 8 16:46:14 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by Dutchrailnut on Sun Feb 8 16:42:57 2015. Still and all, 550 more gallons on top of the 23 gallons of the SUV, and that 3rd rail went right through the roof line of the M-7. Maybe it would have been deflected by the fuel tank, maybe not. |
|
|
| (1338815) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Sun Feb 8 16:48:32 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by Joe V on Sun Feb 8 15:41:08 2015. I forgot nothing. |
|
|
| (1338817) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Sun Feb 8 16:49:25 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by Joe V on Sun Feb 8 15:41:08 2015. Btw, thanks for admitting that you were wrong about the Expedition. |
|
|
| (1338818) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by ElectricTraction on Sun Feb 8 16:50:16 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by Dyre Dan on Sun Feb 8 14:47:31 2015. Grade crossings in and of themselves aren't going anywhere. Most of them are just fine, many aren't used often. However, grade crossings should not exist on heavily-trafficked electrified commuter lines. |
|
|
| (1338819) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by ElectricTraction on Sun Feb 8 16:50:23 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by j trainloco on Sun Feb 8 14:56:57 2015. What do the subways do? They seem a lot more herky-jerky than even the M-8's. |
|
|
| (1338821) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Sun Feb 8 16:50:58 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by Joe V on Sun Feb 8 11:49:34 2015. Let's wait and find out what the investigations and facts show. |
|
|
| (1338823) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by ElectricTraction on Sun Feb 8 16:53:06 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by Dutchrailnut on Sun Feb 8 15:58:06 2015. Wrong. If the brakes can take advantage of all of the friction between the wheels and rails, then the weight doesn't matter, since normal force goes up as kinetic energy goes up. Doesn't matter whether it's M-7's, Shoreliners, or an LRV. Basic physics here.I'm not saying we should make MN trains stop like LRVs, but it certainly would be physically possible if you could devise a powerful enough braking system that didn't start melting/overheating due to the amount of energy dissipated. |
|
|
| (1338827) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Sun Feb 8 16:58:31 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by ElectricTraction on Sun Feb 8 16:53:06 2015. And when you have no friction between wheel and rail, brakes mean nothing.http://www.mta.info/news-metro-north-metro-north-slip-slide/2014/10/15/working-reduce-slip-slide-your-ride-metro-north |
|
|
| (1338829) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Sun Feb 8 17:00:29 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by Terrapin Station on Sun Feb 8 16:50:58 2015. We will never really know what was in her head.We know the circuitry all worked, the train's brakes worked as intended, and the area was well lit. Yes, the NTSB will take a year to say anything more. |
|
|
| (1338831) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Sun Feb 8 17:04:45 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by Joe V on Sun Feb 8 17:00:29 2015. Like I said... |
|
|
| (1338833) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by ElectricTraction on Sun Feb 8 17:05:55 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by Joe V on Sun Feb 8 16:06:45 2015. If, hypothetically, an LRV had been on that same track, with the same amount of leaf goo, going the same speed, it would have slid just as far. Since the rail was slick enough to already have less friction available than braking capacity, the braking capacity difference would no longer have been a factor at all. |
|
|
| (1338839) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by ElectricTraction on Sun Feb 8 17:07:33 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by Joe V on Sun Feb 8 16:58:31 2015. Well, they mean something, but not as much as they otherwise would. If the coefficient of friction is that low, then just about anything with any limited braking capacity, regardless of weight will slide just as far from a given speed. |
|
|
| (1338840) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Sun Feb 8 17:08:06 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by Terrapin Station on Sun Feb 8 16:45:47 2015. Yes and so what. An M7 is not an LRV. It's irrelevant. |
|
|
| (1338846) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Sun Feb 8 17:15:00 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by Joe V on Sun Feb 8 17:08:06 2015. Why are you asking me? You are the one who brought it up! Read up the subthread! |
|
|
| (1338855) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by Dutchrailnut on Sun Feb 8 17:24:36 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by Joe V on Sun Feb 8 16:46:14 2015. Diesel fuel does not explode or burn well unless its heated or atomized . |
|
|
| (1338859) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by Dutchrailnut on Sun Feb 8 17:26:41 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by ElectricTraction on Sun Feb 8 16:50:23 2015. average speed of subways is 35 mph max . |
|
|
| (1338861) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Sun Feb 8 17:27:33 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by Terrapin Station on Sun Feb 8 17:15:00 2015. Oh you have been at me all day. I don't have time to go back and read and re-read every thing back and forth. |
|
|
| (1338863) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by Dutchrailnut on Sun Feb 8 17:28:02 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by ElectricTraction on Sun Feb 8 16:53:06 2015. what is your knowledge besides a big attitude, my 30 years of RR tell me different , whats your mileage ?? |
|
|
| (1338864) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by ElectricTraction on Sun Feb 8 17:28:35 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by Dutchrailnut on Sun Feb 8 17:26:41 2015. I was think deceleration. I know Subways typically (ever) don't get above 40. |
|
|
| (1338866) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by Dutchrailnut on Sun Feb 8 17:29:37 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by ElectricTraction on Sun Feb 8 17:05:55 2015. no it would not but let me know how many trains or LRV's you operated and we compare notes.... ok |
|
|
| (1338869) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by j trainloco on Sun Feb 8 17:36:32 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by ElectricTraction on Sun Feb 8 16:53:06 2015. The force of friction is impacted by mass, as is the inertia of the train in motion. |
|
|
| (1338871) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Sun Feb 8 17:38:10 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by Dutchrailnut on Sun Feb 8 17:24:36 2015. What I was thinking was the MARC/Amtrak train disaster 20 years ago near Silver Spring, there was an inferno when the F40's fuel tank got ruptured. The F40 was leading, the Genie was following, the Sumitomo cab car was leading the MARC train. |
|
|
| (1338872) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by ElectricTraction on Sun Feb 8 17:38:16 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by Dutchrailnut on Sun Feb 8 17:29:37 2015. Clearly you don't understand basic physics. You don't really have to know anything about trains to understand high school physics. |
|
|
| (1338874) | |
Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash |
|
|
Posted by j trainloco on Sun Feb 8 17:39:22 2015, in response to Re: How Railroad Could Have Avoided / Ameliorated Fiery Crash, posted by Dutchrailnut on Sun Feb 8 17:26:41 2015. Again, that has no impact on jerk rate, which is what really causes you to go flying. |
|
|
|
Page 6 of 14 |
||
