Saturnalia zugmann Euclid Just based on recollections of watching switch points. What is your estimate? When did you watch switch points? And from where? Apparently being an academic makes you an expert inquirer on any potential subject so long as you can ask a billion questions of and seek a billion possible solutions to problems that have no actual solution. Or, you could just listen to the actual authorities on these issues. We have legions of train operating folks on here and yet some ignore their experience and wisdom. Maybe, just maybe, we've found a case where academics will never know more than the people who do that job on a daily basis. But that won't ever stop them. It's tiring to read and detracts from the real discussion and insight that comes from listening to the people who actually DO THIS JOB. They're the authority on this issue, and way more worthwhile to listen to than those who seem hell-bent on ensuring the thread goes on forever with their propositions and academic reasoning. I'm no railroad operating man but I know enough and have heard enough listening to them that I bet a certain somebody here would probably be crapping their pants if they ever had to run a real freight or passenger train - when propositions are worthless and mistakes can kill.
zugmann Euclid Just based on recollections of watching switch points. What is your estimate? When did you watch switch points? And from where?
Euclid Just based on recollections of watching switch points. What is your estimate?
When did you watch switch points? And from where?
Apparently being an academic makes you an expert inquirer on any potential subject so long as you can ask a billion questions of and seek a billion possible solutions to problems that have no actual solution.
Or, you could just listen to the actual authorities on these issues. We have legions of train operating folks on here and yet some ignore their experience and wisdom.
Maybe, just maybe, we've found a case where academics will never know more than the people who do that job on a daily basis.
But that won't ever stop them. It's tiring to read and detracts from the real discussion and insight that comes from listening to the people who actually DO THIS JOB. They're the authority on this issue, and way more worthwhile to listen to than those who seem hell-bent on ensuring the thread goes on forever with their propositions and academic reasoning.
I'm no railroad operating man but I know enough and have heard enough listening to them that I bet a certain somebody here would probably be crapping their pants if they ever had to run a real freight or passenger train - when propositions are worthless and mistakes can kill.
I hope you mean academic as in theoretical or hypothetical and not as relating to higher education or being scholarly.
Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.
OvermodVolker, have you looked in the table provided in the TSB report that NDG cited in String Lining.
No I haven't. I didn't follow that thread.Regards; Volker
Volker, have you looked in the table provided in the TSB report that NDG cited in String Lining. There are data there that might be used to derive a starting place for 'corrections' based on 91's braking ratios, speed profile, etc.
Some one please clarify. It was stated that 91 waited about 10 - 20 minutes at the north end of the signal suspension for a track warrant. Is that correct ?
If so was that because the dispatcher was waiting for the release of the track warrant by the CSX crew ?
How long did it take 91 when released to reach the collision point ?
What did the CSX crew do after they released their warrant ?
The CSX loco recorders if survived may have some indications of what occurred by the CSX crew ?
Observed a signal bungalow at the end of the curve from the north. Any idea what its function could be ? Any possibility that it has been put there to verify switch positions of the switches just to the south ?i
EuclidJust based on recollections of watching switch points. What is your estimate?
The opinions expressed here represent my own and not those of my employer, any other railroad, company, or person.
zugmann Euclid That number is my estimate for distance to switch points when their position became visible How did you arrive at this estimate?
Euclid That number is my estimate for distance to switch points when their position became visible
How did you arrive at this estimate?
Just based on recollections of watching switch points. What is your estimate?
BigJimBut not as much as the news media would have you think. It is remarkable how quickly they can stop!
I don't know if the following chart gives an usefull estimate.www.caltrain.com/assets/_engineering/engineering-standards-2/Drawings/5000s/SD-5006.pdf
The chart gives braking distances for Caltrans trains for signalling purposes. So the results are not the shortest max. service brake applications but contain a safety margin. The given braking distance for 56 mph is 3270 ft.
Now we miss a ratio of max. service application and emergency braking distances.Regards.
BaltACD BigJim Euclid What is your estimate for the stopping distance for #91 with an emergency application, at the location of the collision, assuming it was an engine and eight cars, and traveling at 56 mph? I did not have enough time running AMTRAK equipment to even venture a guess. A whole lot more than the estimated 250 foot sight line, in any event.
BigJim Euclid What is your estimate for the stopping distance for #91 with an emergency application, at the location of the collision, assuming it was an engine and eight cars, and traveling at 56 mph? I did not have enough time running AMTRAK equipment to even venture a guess.
Euclid What is your estimate for the stopping distance for #91 with an emergency application, at the location of the collision, assuming it was an engine and eight cars, and traveling at 56 mph?
I did not have enough time running AMTRAK equipment to even venture a guess.
A whole lot more than the estimated 250 foot sight line, in any event.
BaltACDA whole lot more than the estimated 250 foot sight line, in any event.
.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
EuclidWhat is your estimate for the stopping distance for #91 with an emergency application, at the location of the collision, assuming it was an engine and eight cars, and traveling at 56 mph?
VOLKER LANDWEHR RDG467 The Budd cars (ex-SEPTA, nee PRR 244 & 248) were modified with crash energy management "systems", which appear consist mostly of plating over the end door openings to make the carbody more uniform. The Figure 1 shows the CEM frame at the left end. The type of CEM construction is better visible in Figure 3 on page 2 of the following link: https://rosap.ntl.bts.gov/view/dot/9504/dot_9504_DS1.pdf? RDG467 Conclusion was that the FEA model was very reliable in predicting the behaviour of the carbodies, although not 100% accurate in predicting where buckling would occur. FEA models can only be accurate if you insert all the material weaknesses at the right location. That is almost impossible. Perhaps i don't understand you correctly but you can't compare the tests with accident cars. In the tests the load was applied at 4 point, 2 near the roof and 2 on the frame where the CEM frame was applied.Regards, Volker
RDG467 The Budd cars (ex-SEPTA, nee PRR 244 & 248) were modified with crash energy management "systems", which appear consist mostly of plating over the end door openings to make the carbody more uniform.
The Figure 1 shows the CEM frame at the left end. The type of CEM construction is better visible in Figure 3 on page 2 of the following link: https://rosap.ntl.bts.gov/view/dot/9504/dot_9504_DS1.pdf?
RDG467 Conclusion was that the FEA model was very reliable in predicting the behaviour of the carbodies, although not 100% accurate in predicting where buckling would occur.
FEA models can only be accurate if you insert all the material weaknesses at the right location. That is almost impossible.
Perhaps i don't understand you correctly but you can't compare the tests with accident cars. In the tests the load was applied at 4 point, 2 near the roof and 2 on the frame where the CEM frame was applied.Regards, Volker
Volker, you are correct that there is no *direct* correlation between the static tests on the Pioneer III cars and the accident involving Amtk #91 and the Metroliner-based "Heritage" cars.
Just wanted to make note of the design standards for passenger cars and the tremendous forces involved in this tragic collision. I can't recall a collision where one passenger car buckled and a second split in half without hitting a lineside structure. The destroyed cars in the Frankford Junction derailment hit the catenary poles at 90+ mph, which essentially made confetti of the stainless steel shells.
You can see the after-effects of the energy absorbed by both the Amtrak unit and the lead CSX unit, but the 15 foot displacement of the CSX locos isn't visible in the pix. I'm guessing that compressing the slack (buffing) accounted for that, and then when the slack stopped 'running in', and the nose of the P32 was massively deformed, it started climbing over the front of the CSX GE and rolling to the conductor's side on which it landed.
I haven't estimated how much kinetic energy was absorbed in the initial loco to loco collision, but there appears to be enough "left over" to buckle one car (1.15 M+ pounds of force) and virtually split a second car in half. I wonder if the NTSB will be able to model the energy dissipation scenario involved here.
BigJim Murphy Siding OK. I'll try to pretend this is sincere and not be (too) sarcastic. So, you would be sitting stiffly in the engineer’s seat with your eyes intently watching the track for the next signal. Your hand would be on the brake lever, ready hit the brakes in a split second. The very instance that you saw the that a switch was wrong you would hit brakes. I see several things wrong with your theory. I don’t think anyone could sit for that long with a laser-like focus out the windshield You’d have 1000 distractions, anywhere from your conductor asking you a question to scratching an itch. All those normal distractions would break your concentration. I don’t think anyone could react in only one second. Even if you were at an arcade playing Whack-A-Mole and expecting something to pop up, your mind would take more than one second to process what’s going on and to react. I don’t know if they’d pass you in engineer school if you were forsaking everything else in the cab in order to focus on the switch down the track. I doubt anyone would want to work with you if that was your habit. If you could, through super-human ability react in one second, you’d still be only two seconds away from impact. How much braking would the train do in the two seconds left? In conclusion, I’d say you’re living in a dream world if you think you could have done any better than the engineer did. To suggest otherwise is kind of an insult to professional railroaders. Let me give you the short story of something that happened to me. We had one GP38 and three ex-CONRAIL heavyweight passenger cars with 110 lbs. of BP pressure. We were running on a clear signal down a 1.2% grade at 40 mph. The next signal should have been no less than an "Approach" indication. When we came in sight of the signal around a right hand curve, we were about 1,100 ft. from the signal and it was a "STOP" signal!The following is everything that went through my mind at 40 mph and at 1,100 feet;I could make a normal stop, which would have put us past the red board. This would mean that the dispatching center would have to run a signal log to show that the signal had dropped after I had past the "Clear" signal and this would take forever to complete.or,I could put the train in emergency and try to stop as soon as we could, possibly without passing the red board and having to put up with all of the crap associated with that as stated above.Remember we are now at 40 mph & and a wee bit less than 1,100 feet.I put the train in emergency.Where did I stop? Amazingly, short of the red board and far enough back that we didn't have to look straight up to see the signal, which by the way a bolt of lightning had made it drop it in my face! It truly is amazing what your brain can process in a split second!
Murphy Siding OK. I'll try to pretend this is sincere and not be (too) sarcastic. So, you would be sitting stiffly in the engineer’s seat with your eyes intently watching the track for the next signal. Your hand would be on the brake lever, ready hit the brakes in a split second. The very instance that you saw the that a switch was wrong you would hit brakes. I see several things wrong with your theory. I don’t think anyone could sit for that long with a laser-like focus out the windshield You’d have 1000 distractions, anywhere from your conductor asking you a question to scratching an itch. All those normal distractions would break your concentration. I don’t think anyone could react in only one second. Even if you were at an arcade playing Whack-A-Mole and expecting something to pop up, your mind would take more than one second to process what’s going on and to react. I don’t know if they’d pass you in engineer school if you were forsaking everything else in the cab in order to focus on the switch down the track. I doubt anyone would want to work with you if that was your habit. If you could, through super-human ability react in one second, you’d still be only two seconds away from impact. How much braking would the train do in the two seconds left? In conclusion, I’d say you’re living in a dream world if you think you could have done any better than the engineer did. To suggest otherwise is kind of an insult to professional railroaders.
Let me give you the short story of something that happened to me.
We had one GP38 and three ex-CONRAIL heavyweight passenger cars with 110 lbs. of BP pressure. We were running on a clear signal down a 1.2% grade at 40 mph. The next signal should have been no less than an "Approach" indication. When we came in sight of the signal around a right hand curve, we were about 1,100 ft. from the signal and it was a "STOP" signal!The following is everything that went through my mind at 40 mph and at 1,100 feet;I could make a normal stop, which would have put us past the red board. This would mean that the dispatching center would have to run a signal log to show that the signal had dropped after I had past the "Clear" signal and this would take forever to complete.or,I could put the train in emergency and try to stop as soon as we could, possibly without passing the red board and having to put up with all of the crap associated with that as stated above.Remember we are now at 40 mph & and a wee bit less than 1,100 feet.I put the train in emergency.Where did I stop? Amazingly, short of the red board and far enough back that we didn't have to look straight up to see the signal, which by the way a bolt of lightning had made it drop it in my face!
It truly is amazing what your brain can process in a split second!
Instructions in effect on the Baltimore Division when such a situation presents itself was to make a Maximum Service Brake Application - especially with freight trains for which a Emergency Brake application will create the need for a walking inspection to insure ALL Hazmat are on the rail. (most all Merchandise trains containe HAZMAT).
It is also amazing the braking power that a GP38 and 24 passenger car axles can provide.
Murphy SidingOK. I'll try to pretend this is sincere and not be (too) sarcastic. So, you would be sitting stiffly in the engineer’s seat with your eyes intently watching the track for the next signal. Your hand would be on the brake lever, ready hit the brakes in a split second. The very instance that you saw the that a switch was wrong you would hit brakes. I see several things wrong with your theory. I don’t think anyone could sit for that long with a laser-like focus out the windshield You’d have 1000 distractions, anywhere from your conductor asking you a question to scratching an itch. All those normal distractions would break your concentration. I don’t think anyone could react in only one second. Even if you were at an arcade playing Whack-A-Mole and expecting something to pop up, your mind would take more than one second to process what’s going on and to react. I don’t know if they’d pass you in engineer school if you were forsaking everything else in the cab in order to focus on the switch down the track. I doubt anyone would want to work with you if that was your habit. If you could, through super-human ability react in one second, you’d still be only two seconds away from impact. How much braking would the train do in the two seconds left? In conclusion, I’d say you’re living in a dream world if you think you could have done any better than the engineer did. To suggest otherwise is kind of an insult to professional railroaders.
BaltACD zugmann Randy Stahl Doesn't matter , the whole point of the post was to see how many people had me on ignore. I don't. I don't even have Euclid on ignore!
zugmann Randy Stahl Doesn't matter , the whole point of the post was to see how many people had me on ignore. I don't.
Randy Stahl Doesn't matter , the whole point of the post was to see how many people had me on ignore.
I don't.
I don't even have Euclid on ignore!
There's an ignore option!?
Never mind, wouldn't want to use it anyway. Why miss out on all this fun reading.
Greetings from Alberta
-an Articulate Malcontent
Randy StahlDoesn't matter , the whole point of the post was to see how many people had me on ignore.
Randy Stahl Not making fun of, just saying I'm quite good at whacking them when I'm drunk.
Not making fun of, just saying I'm quite good at whacking them when I'm drunk.
Euclid Murphy Siding Euclid Murphy Siding Euclid I am indeed asking what the definitive action on the part of the engineer should be. I don’t expect everyone to agree. I know what I would do. You have 3 seconds. What would you do? Oops! Too late. This is what I would do. I would always look at every switch as I approached it and determine which way it is lined as early as possible. Even before seeing which way the switch is lined, I would plan on the need to make an emergency application. Then if I were to see a wrongly lined switch, I would immediately make an emergency application. My process for assimilation of the open switch and the making of the emergency application would take less than one second. OK. I'll try to pretend this is sincere and not be (too) sarcastic. So, you would be sitting stiffly in the engineer’s seat with your eyes intently watching the track for the next signal. Your hand would be on the brake lever, ready hit the brakes in a split second. The very instance that you saw the that a switch was wrong you would hit brakes. I see several things wrong with your theory. I don’t think anyone could sit for that long with a laser-like focus out the windshield You’d have 1000 distractions, anywhere from your conductor asking you a question to scratching an itch. All those normal distractions would break your concentration. I don’t think anyone could react in only one second. Even if you were at an arcade playing Whack-A-Mole and expecting something to pop up, your mind would take more than one second to process what’s going on and to react. I don’t know if they’d pass you in engineer school if you were forsaking everything else in the cab in order to focus on the switch down the track. I doubt anyone would want to work with you if that was your habit. If you could, through super-human ability react in one second, you’d still be only two seconds away from impact. How much braking would the train do in the two seconds left? In conclusion, I’d say you’re living in a dream world if you think you could have done any better than the engineer did. To suggest otherwise is kind of an insult to professional railroaders. Oh no need to pretend not to be sarcastic. Let’s start from the end and go back to the beginning of your report. 1) I never said I could have done better than the engineer did. I never suggested it. All I said is what I would have done. And no professional railroaders would be insulted by what I said. These ideas are all in your head and you always project them onto everything I say here. It goes back to the time when you accused me of driving off all of the professional railroaders. 2) How do you come up with two seconds for braking? One second would be to react and make the application, and there would be about ten seconds left. 3) There is no need to maintain laser-like focus on the track in order to spot any switches that show up. Engineers are supposed to know where they are at all times. Certainly they are expected to know where all mainline switches are. So when you know one is coming up, you watch for it. 4) Why do you think it not possible to make an emergency application in one second? A lot can happen in one second. How long would it take you to make an emergency application? 5) If you have 1000 distractions going on, you are doing something wrong.
Murphy Siding Euclid Murphy Siding Euclid I am indeed asking what the definitive action on the part of the engineer should be. I don’t expect everyone to agree. I know what I would do. You have 3 seconds. What would you do? Oops! Too late. This is what I would do. I would always look at every switch as I approached it and determine which way it is lined as early as possible. Even before seeing which way the switch is lined, I would plan on the need to make an emergency application. Then if I were to see a wrongly lined switch, I would immediately make an emergency application. My process for assimilation of the open switch and the making of the emergency application would take less than one second. OK. I'll try to pretend this is sincere and not be (too) sarcastic. So, you would be sitting stiffly in the engineer’s seat with your eyes intently watching the track for the next signal. Your hand would be on the brake lever, ready hit the brakes in a split second. The very instance that you saw the that a switch was wrong you would hit brakes. I see several things wrong with your theory. I don’t think anyone could sit for that long with a laser-like focus out the windshield You’d have 1000 distractions, anywhere from your conductor asking you a question to scratching an itch. All those normal distractions would break your concentration. I don’t think anyone could react in only one second. Even if you were at an arcade playing Whack-A-Mole and expecting something to pop up, your mind would take more than one second to process what’s going on and to react. I don’t know if they’d pass you in engineer school if you were forsaking everything else in the cab in order to focus on the switch down the track. I doubt anyone would want to work with you if that was your habit. If you could, through super-human ability react in one second, you’d still be only two seconds away from impact. How much braking would the train do in the two seconds left? In conclusion, I’d say you’re living in a dream world if you think you could have done any better than the engineer did. To suggest otherwise is kind of an insult to professional railroaders.
Euclid Murphy Siding Euclid I am indeed asking what the definitive action on the part of the engineer should be. I don’t expect everyone to agree. I know what I would do. You have 3 seconds. What would you do? Oops! Too late. This is what I would do. I would always look at every switch as I approached it and determine which way it is lined as early as possible. Even before seeing which way the switch is lined, I would plan on the need to make an emergency application. Then if I were to see a wrongly lined switch, I would immediately make an emergency application. My process for assimilation of the open switch and the making of the emergency application would take less than one second.
Murphy Siding Euclid I am indeed asking what the definitive action on the part of the engineer should be. I don’t expect everyone to agree. I know what I would do. You have 3 seconds. What would you do? Oops! Too late.
Euclid I am indeed asking what the definitive action on the part of the engineer should be. I don’t expect everyone to agree. I know what I would do.
I am indeed asking what the definitive action on the part of the engineer should be. I don’t expect everyone to agree. I know what I would do.
You have 3 seconds. What would you do? Oops! Too late.
OK. I'll try to pretend this is sincere and not be (too) sarcastic. So, you would be sitting stiffly in the engineer’s seat with your eyes intently watching the track for the next signal. Your hand would be on the brake lever, ready hit the brakes in a split second. The very instance that you saw the that a switch was wrong you would hit brakes. I see several things wrong with your theory.
I don’t think anyone could sit for that long with a laser-like focus out the windshield
You’d have 1000 distractions, anywhere from your conductor asking you a question to scratching an itch. All those normal distractions would break your concentration.
I don’t think anyone could react in only one second. Even if you were at an arcade playing Whack-A-Mole and expecting something to pop up, your mind would take more than one second to process what’s going on and to react.
I don’t know if they’d pass you in engineer school if you were forsaking everything else in the cab in order to focus on the switch down the track.
I doubt anyone would want to work with you if that was your habit.
If you could, through super-human ability react in one second, you’d still be only two seconds away from impact.
How much braking would the train do in the two seconds left? In conclusion, I’d say you’re living in a dream world if you think you could have done any better than the engineer did. To suggest otherwise is kind of an insult to professional railroaders.
1) I never said I could have done better than the engineer did. I never suggested it. All I said is what I would have done. And no professional railroaders would be insulted by what I said. These ideas are all in your head and you always project them onto everything I say here. It goes back to the time when you accused me of driving off all of the professional railroaders.
2) How do you come up with two seconds for braking? One second would be to react and make the application, and there would be about ten seconds left.
3) There is no need to maintain laser-like focus on the track in order to spot any switches that show up. Engineers are supposed to know where they are at all times. Certainly they are expected to know where all mainline switches are. So when you know one is coming up, you watch for it.
4) Why do you think it not possible to make an emergency application in one second? A lot can happen in one second. How long would it take you to make an emergency application?
5) If you have 1000 distractions going on, you are doing something wrong.
Randy StahlNot making fun of, just saying I'm quite good at whacking them when I'm drunk.
I'll keep you in mind next time I have a burrowing rodent problem. I'll supply the bat and adult beverages...
Now back to your regular programming.
Larry Resident Microferroequinologist (at least at my house) Everyone goes home; Safety begins with you My Opinion. Standard Disclaimers Apply. No Expiration Date Come ride the rails with me! There's one thing about humility - the moment you think you've got it, you've lost it...
zugmann Randy Stahl Not making fun of, just saying I'm quite good at whacking them when I'm drunk. ...nah, I won't. Too easy.
...nah, I won't. Too easy.
Doesn't matter , the whole point of the post was to see how many people had me on ignore.
Randy StahlMoles are animals ??
Don't make fun of my emotional support mole.
zugmann Randy Stahl I'm better at whack a mole when I'm drunk And that's how you got banned from the pet store.
Randy Stahl I'm better at whack a mole when I'm drunk
I'm better at whack a mole when I'm drunk
And that's how you got banned from the pet store.
Moles are animals ??
NP EddieWhat was the year and location of the NYC Gulf Curve Wreck? Was that the same as the 1940 Little Falls, NY wreck?
One in the same.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.