Trains.com

F Unit Wrecks

2295 views
8 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    January 2007
  • From: Petitcodiac NB Canada
  • 216 posts
F Unit Wrecks
Posted by Boomer Red on Friday, March 21, 2008 8:39 PM

         I've been following a rescent disscusion on a Yahoo group I belong to and wonder if anyone on this forum can help? Basically it revolves around what happens to EMD F units that are involved in Head on Collisions or other bad wrecks. Most pictures show the units breaking in half or at least bending just behind the cab. The question became whether they were designed to do this as a way of absorbing impact and protecting the crew or if it is an unplanned design flaw. Maybe someone can shed some light on this subject. Here is a link to some photos that demonstrate what I'm talking about. 

http://www.geocities.com/cnrailpics2/via.htm

   

   

Home of the Central Atlantic Railway
  • Member since
    November 2007
  • 2,989 posts
Posted by Railway Man on Friday, March 21, 2008 9:00 PM

They were not designed that way.  It's merely the point where the structure is the weakest.

I'm not sure what definition of "design flaw" you are using.  A design flaw is an unanticipated result, where the design did not perform according to intent.  What intent do you think EMD had, and what was unanticipated, and where was the failure to meet design?

RWM 

  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Friday, March 21, 2008 9:49 PM
I recall a reference in Trains stating that they were designed to buckle right behind the cab in order to protect the crew in the case of head-on collisions.  Apparently the buckling was intended to absorb energy that otherwise might crush the cab.  I can see how the buckling might appear to be a design flaw in the form of a weakness in the frame that allows the buckling.  But my understanding is that it was an intentional design feature, kind of like how a fuse is the weakest link for the purpose of protecting the rest of the circuit.
  • Member since
    July 2003
  • From: Elmwood Park, NJ
  • 2,385 posts
Posted by trainfan1221 on Wednesday, March 26, 2008 5:06 PM
Remember, F-units were designed with the carbody bearing the load rather than the frame.  This probably would be a factor.
  • Member since
    December 2001
  • 400 posts
Posted by rrboomer on Wednesday, March 26, 2008 5:17 PM
I too remember seeing references many years ago that they were designed to buckle behind the cab.  If it was a design error, it's a happy one that EMD would be glad to take credit for.
  • Member since
    January 2008
  • From: Big Blackfoot River
  • 2,788 posts
Posted by Geared Steam on Wednesday, March 26, 2008 6:31 PM
 Railway Man wrote:

They were not designed that way.  It's merely the point where the structure is the weakest.

I'm not sure what definition of "design flaw" you are using.  A design flaw is an unanticipated result, where the design did not perform according to intent.  What intent do you think EMD had, and what was unanticipated, and where was the failure to meet design?

RWM 

Sign - Ditto [#ditto]

The only "flaw" concerning those pictures was human, not mechanical.

People who call that a design flaw do not understand the meaning. 

"The true sign of intelligence is not knowledge but imagination."-Albert Einstein

http://gearedsteam.blogspot.com/

  • Member since
    October 2006
  • From: heart of the Pere Marquette
  • 847 posts
Posted by J. Edgar on Thursday, March 27, 2008 4:22 PM
if youve ever been in the cab of an E or F unit the first thing you notice is the "thickness" of the steel in the nose....you would almost think theyre cast and the pillars on either side of the front windshields are soild.....i believe the cab is a seperate piece on the platform the main carbody behind is the structual support..but ive been wrong before
i love the smell of coal smoke in the morning Photobucket
  • Member since
    April 2007
  • From: Redneck Land(Little Rock), Arkansas
  • 919 posts
Posted by arkansasrailfan on Thursday, March 27, 2008 4:40 PM
I guess Via now has a 2/3 of a F unit and a 1/3 of a F-unit.
-Michael It's baaaacccckkkk!!!!!! www.youtube.com/user/wyomingrailfan
  • Member since
    September 2002
  • From: CANADA
  • 126 posts
Posted by Grinandbearit on Thursday, April 3, 2008 7:45 PM
Try this for a story and pictures on a Ontario Northlander F unit wreck http://uwacadweb.uwyo.edu/RGodby/trains/Northlander_collision.htm.

Join our Community!

Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.

Search the Community

Newsletter Sign-Up

By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our privacy policy