Why does the United States have safety cabs and Europe has the locomotive cabs on the end and they do not have safety issues. Gary
thatweirdwriterdudewhat do you mean by "safety cabs" could you explain it a bit more?
What he means directly is cab structure that conforms to the requirements of AAR standard S-580 as amended. By extension this includes many of the current 'wide-cab' designs with various anticollision and safety provisions, including relatively heavy construction and anticollision posts.
If Volker Landwehr were still posting here, he could comment much better than I about the different European approaches to cab safety, largely including more reliance on CEM (collision energy management), the careful use of energy-absorbing construction and materials to reduce crash danger to crews rather than the use of very heavy construction for the same purpose.
It has been noted that, once the CEM has done its job, or in accidents where the forces involved don't engage the construction as expected, the remaining structure in much European design tends to come apart like wet tissue paper. It has also been noted that no matter how much armoring goes into an S-580-compliant cab, something awful will cause it to fail to protect (as in a recent accident where standing flatcars went right up over the nose and took out the cab from the windows up, which no collision-post construction practical to use would likely prevent.)
Some of the 'written in blood' accidents leading to the adoption of S-580 bear looking at, including several involving collisions of passenger trains with standing trucks that would have been survivable if, say, the number board boxes hadn't let burning fuel straight into the cab.
See some of the posts in this thread. (I miss Ed, again!)
http://cs.trains.com/trn/f/111/t/190807.aspx
IA and eastern Why does the United States have safety cabs and Europe has the locomotive cabs on the end and they do not have safety issues. Gary
On both sides of the Atlantic, I don't think the crews on either side would survive a relatively high speed head-on or rear-end collision, but I think the European railroads have better protected ROW's with fewer grade crossings. I suspect that grade crossing incidents were a bigger concern over here. Just my guess.
_____________
"A stranger's just a friend you ain't met yet." --- Dave Gardner
What i was trying to get to was in Europe they run a lot of faster trains but have fewer crashes. In the United States they run less trains but this country seems to have more crashes. Gary
IA and easternWhat i was trying to get to was in Europe they run a lot of faster trains but have fewer crashes. In the United States they run less trains but this country seems to have more crashes. Gary
The ocean absorbs a great number of the Europen rail accident (we never hear about anything but the major accidents). So trying to equate the relative safety of the systems, from the 'outside', is next to impossible.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
Trains in the UK and on the continent tend to be shorter then in the US, so are more likely to be pulled by only one diesel or electric engine, so more of their engines have a cab at each end so it doesn't need to be turned to take a train back toward where it came from with the last train. Since many UK and European tunnels were built 150 years ago, their trains are limited in height compared to the US, so the space between the cabs has to all be used for the engine to power the locomotive. There wouldn't be enough space if you had two "snouts" sticking out in front of each cab.
British and European crossings are more likely to have some sort of gating that blocks all lanes of traffic so drivers can't go around them...plus from a cultural point of view, I suspect in many European countries, people may be less likely to want to try to go around a gate to sneak across in front of a train.
BaltACD IA and eastern What i was trying to get to was in Europe they run a lot of faster trains but have fewer crashes. In the United States they run less trains but this country seems to have more crashes. Gary The ocean absorbs a great number of the Europen rail accident (we never hear about anything but the major accidents). So trying to equate the relative safety of the systems, from the 'outside', is next to impossible.
IA and eastern What i was trying to get to was in Europe they run a lot of faster trains but have fewer crashes. In the United States they run less trains but this country seems to have more crashes. Gary
I learned a long time ago from European friends that if all we know about Europe is what the American press is telling us, then we don't know what's really going on in Europe.
And on the other hand, if Europeans only know what's going on HERE from what their press tells them, then THEY don't know what's going on in the US either!
Not pointing fingers or promoting any political agenda, just sayin'.
wjstixTrains in the UK and on the continent tend to be shorter then in the US,
When I went to Europe, I was very surprised at just how small European freight trains and equipment are. Lots and lots of 40-45 foot cars that were shorter in height than North American equipment.
Take something like a Class 66 over there and is just as long as, say, a Dash 9 at 70 feet versus 73 feet. But the weight difference is 140 tons versus 212 tons. That's a huge difference.
A Class 66 (JT46CWR) is basically an SD60 shoehorned into a much tighter clearance diagram.
Saftey Cabs offer more headroom and space for the engineer and conductor. Spartan cabs don't and are much smaller. It seems Spartan Cab diesels are used more for local/switching runs, while diesels with Comfort or Saftey Cabs are seen in Mainline service.
Is it true Spartan Cabs had a habbit of defecting vehicles towards the cab in a grade crossing incident?
ATSFGuySaftey Cabs offer more headroom and space for the engineer and conductor. Spartan cabs don't and are much smaller. It seems Spartan Cab diesels are used more for local/switching runs, while diesels with Comfort or Saftey Cabs are seen in Mainline service. Is it true Spartan Cabs had a habbit of defecting vehicles towards the cab in a grade crossing incident?
Locomotives on Class 1's are subject to trickle down service. When new they get assigned to the 'hot shots' the carrier runs - from there it is all down hill. As more 'new' engines are obtained each generation is moved to a lower priority form of service. Eventually, before being sold or scrapped, locomotives are used in some form of work train service.
One thing to remember - the first series of AC traction engines have now been in service for 25 years+.
ATSFGuy Saftey Cabs offer more headroom and space for the engineer and conductor. Spartan cabs don't and are much smaller. It seems Spartan Cab diesels are used more for local/switching runs, while diesels with Comfort or Saftey Cabs are seen in Mainline service. Is it true Spartan Cabs had a habbit of defecting vehicles towards the cab in a grade crossing incident?
The difference between head room is not that great. With the railroads going back to the old style control stand and placement of the third chair, the newest wide noses are more cramped than some of the old standard cab models. It's getting hard to find a place to stow your grips where they aren't considered a tripping hazard by managers.
The only thing really better is the toilet compartment on the wide noses is usually more accommodating than on a standard cab. Especially on ease of access. Although it may not be any cleaner.
Jeff
jeffhergertAlthough it may not be any cleaner.
Servicing a restroom in a locomotive (or for that matter Amtrak passenger car) should be just as high priority as fuel, sand, and the rest. It is really sad and also fairly high risk that it isn't.
The answer lies in the official stats from the FRA and the European version (UIC?).
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.