Edit post

Edit your reply below.

Post Body
Enter your post below.
[quote]QUOTE: Originally posted by Roadtrp I thought that collisions between trains and automobiles were usually similar to an automobile running into a dog. The train might be dented, but would suffer no real damage. The automobile would be smashed to smithereens. Why was this accident so different?? [%-)] [/quote] This FRA # 20 order information is from Trainorders, but it shows the FRA has investigated the push pull mode in light of accidents, and no conclusion has been determined. It is interesting to note the leading cars weight much less than a diesel and it would stand to reason they might derail or ride up over the object easier in comparison to a much heavier diesel. We will wait for the FRA report in about six months. I know that this has been mentioned here before but here a few points of interest contained in the FRA Emergency Order 20.... There is no evidence that push/pull or EMU operations are in any way over represented in passenger train accidents. All rail passenger operations, like other forms of transportation, involve some risk of injury due to collision with other vehicles or fixed structures. In certain accident scenarios (e.g. , where the passenger consist in question is impacted from the rear), push-pull operations with the cab car forward actually offer greater protection. However, in collisions involving the front of the passenger train, cab car forward and MU operations do present an increased risk of severe personal injury or death when compared with locomotive-hauled service. This risk is of particular concern where operations are conducted at relatively higher speeds, where there is a mix of various types of trains, and where there are numerous highway-rail crossings over which large motor vehicles are operated. Highway-rail crossings . Cab-forward and MU operations pose a somewhat heightened risk of severe injury for passengers should an accident occur, in comparison to locomotive-hauled passenger coaches. Operators should give consideration to closer interface with private crossing holders that use the crossings for truck access, give greater attention to liaison with law enforcement authorities, and explore other means that may reduce risk at both public and private crossings. Accelerated application of locomotive alerting lights (already authorized by regulation and required by statute) may offer another opportunity for risk reduction. This order requires that each railroad's interim safety plan address these grade crossing issues in the context of cab-forward and MU operations. FRA is very concerned about the safety of such operations in absence of a plan to address grade crossing hazards.
Tags (Optional)
Tags are keywords that get attached to your post. They are used to categorize your submission and make it easier to search for. To add tags to your post type a tag into the box below and click the "Add Tag" button.
Add Tag

Update Reply

Subscriber & Member Login

Login, or register today to interact in our online community, comment on articles, receive our newsletter, manage your account online and more!

Model Railroader Newsletter See all

Sign up for our FREE e-newsletter and get model railroad news in your inbox!

Subscriber & Member Login

Edit post

Post Body

Tags (Optional)

Subscriber & Member Login

Users Online

Search the Community