Dutchrailnut Safely does not mean track speed in a dense Fog, but your right id does not give you a speed, but in court and company hearings any reduced speed will hold up for engineer.
Safely does not mean track speed in a dense Fog, but your right id does not give you a speed, but in court and company hearings any reduced speed will hold up for engineer.
Wrong slowing down is terms for being fired called delaying a train. that is why you know your territory you run track speed. let me see if i can tell it to you so you can understand, the rules apply to operations moving frieght it has only a few provisions for outside problems and those are handled in the highway crossing at grade . and treaspassers, thats it the rest has to do with getting trains across the road with no delay by crew. the only weather related rule is for flash flooding because it has a effect on moving trains.
Someone said something about flagging that rule was dealing with speed not sight, and it was in train order days not track warrent. it was simple also if flaggng distance was 1 mile due to speed to stop safley then you went 2 miles out put your torpedos down and a fussee then headed back for your train dropping a fussee at intervals not exceed burning time.of previous fussee.
henry6 I think it is clear Wabash (and other HOGGERS who have taken offense here), that the rules give the judgement authority to the engineer...nobody is taking that authority or judgement away from you, so drive the way you want when you want and where you want. But for now cool your heels awhile and tell us what rails you scorch so that the rest of us can use our judgement and not ride upon the railroad nor drive near it when bad weather occurs and you might happen by.
I think it is clear Wabash (and other HOGGERS who have taken offense here), that the rules give the judgement authority to the engineer...nobody is taking that authority or judgement away from you, so drive the way you want when you want and where you want. But for now cool your heels awhile and tell us what rails you scorch so that the rest of us can use our judgement and not ride upon the railroad nor drive near it when bad weather occurs and you might happen by.
Take offense nope you haft to do a little more than this to get to me. you cant be thin skinned and work for the railroad, but for a foamer like you to sit and tell us current employed railroaders what are job is stupid, but to show you that i am open minded, when you are the one who starts signing my paycheck I will run my train the way you want it run, and its been no secreat I am qualified from St.louis to louisville,ky and all trackage in between and soon to start running down the old IC trackage from the ghetto thru belleville freeburg new athens meeting up on the ic around marion then on to fulton,ky.
wabash1Take offense nope you haft to do a little more than this to get to me. you cant be thin skinned and work for the railroad, but for a foamer like you to sit and tell us current employed railroaders what are job is stupid
I would say he has already gotten to you......
Ya gotta lighten up, dude. To worry about what these people say about how you operate is just going to aggravate you. My suggestion is to consider the source, then move on. They can't possibly imagine what it is like to operate a train in dense fog.
zardoz wabash1Take offense nope you haft to do a little more than this to get to me. you cant be thin skinned and work for the railroad, but for a foamer like you to sit and tell us current employed railroaders what are job is stupid I would say he has already gotten to you...... Ya gotta lighten up, dude. To worry about what these people say about how you operate is just going to aggravate you. My suggestion is to consider the source, then move on. They can't possibly imagine what it is like to operate a train in dense fog.
No Sir, I would respectufully state that you are incorrect.
Lets leave the operation of trains to the TRAINED professionals.
blue streak 1Before radios how in the world did any switching get done in heavy fog? Maybe conductor or other crewman dump the air? (dangerous).
Yes, it has been done that way, and yes, it is incredibly dangerous.
blue streak 1Would a back up hose be helpful?
I sure didn't miss those days once they were gone.
Paul_D_North_JrOr, when running on block signal indications - if properly set up, there'd always got at least 1 block's advance notification of what the next signal's most restrictive indication would be - but that might not be visible until the train is right there. Which is why the yellow indication is usually interpreted - simply stated here - as ''Approach next signal prepared to stop short of it'' [emphasis added - PDN]. So after encountering a yellow, the train might very well be creeping up to the next signal, so that it could stop on a dime if it is red when it finally becomes visible from only a short distance away.
It's a creepy feeling to be running at 50-70 mph in fog so dense that all you can see is the nose of the locomotive, knowing that if you were to hit anything, you would never see it beforehand. It's even worse at night, when the glare from the headlight reflecting from the fog is extremely blinding, so much so that I would actually need my sunglasses.
I've encountered fog so dense that I had to dim the headlight (at night) in order to see the wayside signals. These are the times when an engineer discovers how well he does (or does not) know his territory. One must know when to begin whistling for crossings, where the hills and valleys of the track profile are, where the signalsand slow orders are, etc.
It is amazing how time and distance distort when you pass an approach signal at track speed in dense fog. All of the sudden you need to get the speed of the train down in anticipation of the next signal being red, but at the same time you do not want to waste your air with too much reduction too soon.
There have been times when the fog was so thick, and the train so heavy, that while running at "restricted speed" I would sent the head-end crewman out walking ahead of the train looking for a "train or engine, or anything else that might require the speed of the train to be reduced". Yes, sometimes 2-3mph is too fast.
This topic is like an infestation of cockroaches.
They never seem to be gotten rid of, and it's virtually impossible to kill all of them.
Not to mention the more they are around. the madder, and more irrational folks get.
henry6 Then if this is a "fan's page" shouldn't the "TRAINED" professionals let us have our day? No. These guys have insulted the fans and belittled our interests and our avocational spirit. My posting here is nothing more than answereing them in kind. Norris, you may ban me from these pages if that's the way you feel about my postings. It is ok for them to belittle us but not ok for us to question them. Not a matter of one asking a question then not likeing the answers. I know of at least one TRAINED professional posting here that is more aligned with what I have said than what those who you are defending say. So, do what you must. If it is me that has to go, then, good bye.
Then if this is a "fan's page" shouldn't the "TRAINED" professionals let us have our day? No. These guys have insulted the fans and belittled our interests and our avocational spirit. My posting here is nothing more than answereing them in kind. Norris, you may ban me from these pages if that's the way you feel about my postings. It is ok for them to belittle us but not ok for us to question them. Not a matter of one asking a question then not likeing the answers. I know of at least one TRAINED professional posting here that is more aligned with what I have said than what those who you are defending say. So, do what you must. If it is me that has to go, then, good bye.
And for the record, not all of us "professionals" have insulted you. Maybe one has, but there are many rails on this forum that understand both sides of the industry (both as a fan and as an operator):Ed BlysardTree68CShaverRmyselfand many others I cannot immediately think of but I apologize to for forgetting about them.
Before this one gets the lock button...
Props to Coburn for some cool fog shots. The first one, especially, is a well composed, intriguing image. Well done!
-ChrisWest Chicago, ILChristopher May Fine Art Photography"In wisdom gathered over time I have found that every experience is a form of exploration." ~Ansel Adams
oltmannd Paul_D_North_Jr That normally works fine, with the exception of heavy fog condtions. The train and track authorization system still works - but the chief problem is with unprotected grade crossings, where a fast-moving train simply can't be seen until it is just a few seconds from the crossing. Evey couple of years it seems that this is sadly demonstrated in California's Central Valley with the heavy fogs there, and a van full of migrant farm workers or similar is broadsided by a train at a crossing. This is materially different than a regular two way stop or driveway entrance on a highway how? I would say that highway crossing safety decreases in fog, but that is the province of highway safety, not railroad safety. In fact, fog decreases safety in all aspects of driving. [snip] When visibility or audible range are reduced by ambient conditions, the onus is on the highway traffic to react accordingly. [snip]
Paul_D_North_Jr That normally works fine, with the exception of heavy fog condtions. The train and track authorization system still works - but the chief problem is with unprotected grade crossings, where a fast-moving train simply can't be seen until it is just a few seconds from the crossing. Evey couple of years it seems that this is sadly demonstrated in California's Central Valley with the heavy fogs there, and a van full of migrant farm workers or similar is broadsided by a train at a crossing.
This is materially different than a regular two way stop or driveway entrance on a highway how?
I would say that highway crossing safety decreases in fog, but that is the province of highway safety, not railroad safety. In fact, fog decreases safety in all aspects of driving.
[snip] When visibility or audible range are reduced by ambient conditions, the onus is on the highway traffic to react accordingly. [snip]
I'll also add - how is it different than highway traffic approaching a traffic signal/ 'stop light' ?
The answer difference is that in all of those other conditions, the traffic on the 'main line' or 'superior' highway is also ''supposed'' to reduce its speed to the Safe Stopping Distance for the visibility that's apparent = being able to stop within the distance that's visible*, in case something unexpected is encountered, such as a vehicle pulling out in front of it, a slow-moving farm vehicle or broken-down vehicle - or even a red stoplight ! (I know - that rarely occurs, as is evidenced every so often by those spectacular multi-vehicle pile-ups on the Interstates in California, Tennessee, and a few other such places.) But if the highway traffic slowed down as much as it is supposed to in foggy or other low-visibility conditions, the car pulling out of the driveway would have a lot more of a time interval* between when the oncoming car becomes visible, and when it arrives at the driveway, than at the normal higher speed. The railroad, running at its usual full track speed, doesn't slow down correspondingly so as to provide for a similarly longer time interval between when the train is first perceived in those conditions, and when it arrives at the crossing.
*Thinking more about this just reinforces the wisdom in my mind of the typical railroad rule of being able to stop in half of that sight distance, when operating under Restricted or similar signals or rules. But if I or we actually operated that way on the highways, I suspect that we'd soon be run over by the other faster and bigger vehicles . . .
I'm not arguing that the trains should slow down - far from it. Instead, I'm saying that we = society, government, DOT's, etc. - should recognize this weakness in the theory and actuality of the perception of oncoming trains at unprotected grade crossings in such adverse visibility conditions, and do something rational to address or mitigate that risk when and where it occurs. Specifically, I'm suggesting more emphasis be placed on motorists listening for oncoming trains - loud horns are on locomotives and required to be used for a reason, and ships use foghorns too. So there's one rational, low-cost alternative that could be implemented for the cost of a few more warning signs - the same type of signs, by the way, that are so beloved of the tort injury lawyer trial bar as an additional safety step that could have been taken but wasn't, as with the infamous too-hot cup of McDonald's coffee some years ago - but there may well be other and better methods to address and resolve this deficiency.
- Paul North.
Often the loudest, most insistent voices are the ones that get heard, regardless of facts or logic. Other than a brief episode of some slang venting, I thought this thread was going pretty well. henry6's comments and questions seemed pretty calm and got at the nub of the issues.
Some observations. The regulations are vague: there is not a requirement to reduce speed, let alone to a specific number. Yet there is a clear call for engineers exercising caution as they see fit. I guess for 2-3 of the engineers, that judgment calls for full speed ahead. I think wabash1 made an interesting and disturbing comment. Namely, that his railroad management does not want delays and that caution could lead to job security problems. At the same time, a significant number of other professionals seemed to follow the cautionary tendency. Oltmann's notion of speed enhancing safety at RR crossings seems counter-intuitive, but maybe so?
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
There seems to be agreement here that the two conditions for running track speed in visibility-restricting fog are:
1) The engineer must have track authority.
2) The engineer must know where he is at on the rail line.
In my mind, there are some unresolved issues with item #2. In a way, it sounds rather absolute and clear cut, but when you dissect it, there are many possible interpretations of “knowing where you are at” on the railroad.
Certainly, under normal conditions, visual cues are a big part of providing awareness of location. Fog is capable of completely eliminating visual cues. Therefore, it leaves this question: Is it possible or permissible for an engineer to know where he is at on the railroad even if he cannot see past the cab windows?
Some engineers may have enough experience to know where they are at on a run, even if they were blindfolded. But if an engineer possessed that level of familiarity with the road, how would the company know that for certain, in order to permit blind running in fog? Would it not be necessary to test all engineers to see if they possessed the ability to run blind while knowing where they were at on the railroad?
Many engineers will have the familiarity with their line that will enable them to know where they are at, even though deprived of sight, but such knowing may often not be continuous. There are likely to be some lapses of recognition between the familiar mental landmarks.
So, I would like a specific definition of what satisfies the requirement to know where you are at on the railroad line. The railroads must certainly have a rule that clarifies what it means to know where you are at when running a train. What is the language of that rule?
zardoz, thanks for those evocative recollections and descriptions. I can recall driving in early morning fog along the Susquehanna River on U.S. 30 and having the sensation of being so isolated that the little '74 Chevy Vega didn't seem to be moving at all - that it was the occasionally visible roadside marker that was moving backwards instead ! I also recall a night about 15 years ago bringing my daughter home from a friend's - she was just learning to drive at the time, so it was a 'teaching moment' as well - when it seemed as if we were driving in space or the inside of a fluffy eggshell or cocoon - other than the occasional traffic signal that would loom out of the fog for a few seconds and then disappear, there were no visible landmarks.
wabash1's point is well-taken. If I were to take the position of a 'hard-case' Trainmaster 'having words' with a train crew for delay of train account of running slow in fog conditions, I would point to the following carefully-selected excerpts from the quoted rules:
Dutchrailnut [snip] 1.47 Duties of Crew Members The conductor and the engineer are responsible for the . . . observance of the rules. [rest deleted - PDN.] B. Engineer Responsibilities 1. The engineer is responsible for . . . efficiently operating the engine. [rest deleted - PDN.]
The conductor and the engineer are responsible for the . . . observance of the rules. [rest deleted - PDN.]
1. The engineer is responsible for . . . efficiently operating the engine. [rest deleted - PDN.]
Then I would say: ''Mister Engineer and Conductor, these rules - among others - say that you are to ''observe the rules'' which also means by running at track speed unless and until told otherwise, and that is also ''efficiently operating the engine''. If you can't do that, we'll find a nice midnight yard engine for you both to herd cars with until you retire.''
OK, I'm seeing that the fog issue will now be a lockable topic. I'm going to suggest that the train engineer be given a wee bit of a break in this. Yes, the rules are vague. That is for a reason. We MUST assume that these guys may KNOW SOMETHING. Would we prefer it to be in black/white with NO variation? Why should fog shut everything down? The way some seem to imply it looks like we have those who advocate for complete safety....
I find myself driving in thick fog a lot myself at this time of year---should I stop driving simply because it is foggy out?
Any argument carried far enough will end up in Semantics--Hartz's law of rhetoric Emerald. Leemer and Southern The route of the Sceptre Express Barry
I just started my blog site...more stuff to come...
http://modeltrainswithmusic.blogspot.ca/
I've encountered fog so dense that I had to dim the headlight (at night) in order to see the wayside signals. These are the times when an engineer discovers how well he does (or does not) know his territory.
Hey Henry6,We don't need to see where we are going. The rails will take us there. We just have to know where we are at!
.
Paul_D_North_JrI'm saying that we = society, government, DOT's, etc. - should recognize this weakness in the theory and actuality of the perception of oncoming trains at unprotected grade crossings in such adverse visibility conditions, and do something rational to address or mitigate that risk when and where it occurs. Specifically, I'm suggesting more emphasis be placed on motorists listening for oncoming trains - loud horns are on locomotives and required to be used for a reason, and ships use foghorns too. So there's one rational, low-cost alternative that could be implemented for the cost of a few more warning signs - the same type of signs, by the way, that are so beloved of the tort injury lawyer trial bar as an additional safety step that could have been taken but wasn't, as with the infamous too-hot cup of McDonald's coffee some years ago - but there may well be other and better methods to address and resolve this deficiency.
-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/)
Ok guys Let me say it again. IT WAS NOT OFFENSIVE I was NOT OFFENDED. it seems others were offended for me. Henry was speaking his mind or opinion, I am not GOD. ( dont lock it im not going religon here) I do not have the right to judge what he says. In most cases henry states and makes great points of what he post, and while his post was strong and also his opinoin, ive made some statements that mgiht have ruffeled his feathers, The statement i made back to norris was simple Im not bitching but strongly making a point.
Now if everyone would just tone down the feelings they are feeling for whats being said, this post might get back on line,
also if the foamers would just think of the rule book as dealing with railroad right of way, and its tunnel vision looking straight ahead. and not more than 20 foot off to the side. that is what the rule book deals with anything else dont exsist. only when the cars get in the way at crossing is their any rules that apply to that other wise 8 and sand the only weather related slow down is flooding and there is a rule for that.
wabash1 [snip] the rule book as dealing with railroad right of way, and its tunnel vision looking straight ahead. and not more than 20 foot off to the side. that is what the rule book deals with anything else dont exsist. only when the cars get in the way at crossing is their any rules that apply to that other wise 8 and sand the only weather related slow down is flooding and there is a rule for that.
That's how I understand it, too, from this and the previous discussion. Kinda like running the MicroSoft ''Train Simulator'' game on a computer screen, don'tcha think ?
-Paul North.
P.S. - I'm still laughing over the ''step, step, step'' and Oreos example of knowing where you are.
Paul_D_North_Jr wabash1 [snip] the rule book as dealing with railroad right of way, and its tunnel vision looking straight ahead. and not more than 20 foot off to the side. that is what the rule book deals with anything else dont exsist. only when the cars get in the way at crossing is their any rules that apply to that other wise 8 and sand the only weather related slow down is flooding and there is a rule for that. That's how I understand it, too, from this and the previous discussion. Kinda like running the MicroSoft ''Train Simulator'' game on a computer screen, don'tcha think ? -Paul North. P.S. - I'm still laughing over the ''step, step, step'' and Oreos example of knowing where you are.
Paul do us a favor the man bucurys( if i spelled it right) is asking for rules the rule that comes to mind is right there with engineer duties and conductors dutys the one that states it is the conductors resposibility to make sure that the trains is started on time and no delays etc... that set of rules could you cut and paste that whole thing in here, it also has referance to engineers doing the same in a efficient manner . If i remeber ( dont have rle book infront of me) toward the end of that rule it says about delays and qualifications post what you can that deals with that. PLEASE.
Oh and i ate oreos this morning, with regular milk.
Murphy Siding henry6 I think it is clear Wabash (and other HOGGERS who have taken offense here), that the rules give the judgement authority to the engineer...nobody is taking that authority or judgement away from you, so drive the way you want when you want and where you want. But for now cool your heels awhile and tell us what rails you scorch so that the rest of us can use our judgement and not ride upon the railroad nor drive near it when bad weather occurs and you might happen by. henry6, You seem to have taken offence at what I said, so let me clarify. To me, the statement you made above was intended to stir up emotions of those whose opinions you find at odds with your own. To be honest, I find offence in what you are saying in the post. Basically, you seem to be saying "Oh yeah? Well, so's your mother", in an effort to get people hot. To me, that's not right. -Norris
me being good doggie
BucyrusSo, I would like a specific definition of what satisfies the requirement to know where you are at on the railroad line. The railroads must certainly have a rule that clarifies what it means to know where you are at when running a train. What is the language of that rule?
But, you need only minimal visibility to know where you are. Even super-dense fog would still leave you with tens of feet of visibility, enough to see the stuff along the ROW (mileposts, road Xings, etc.)
wabash1 Paul do us a favor the man bucurys( if i spelled it right) is asking for rules the rule that comes to mind is right there with engineer duties and conductors dutys the one that states it is the conductors resposibility to make sure that the trains is started on time and no delays etc... that set of rules could you cut and paste that whole thing in here, it also has referance to engineers doing the same in a efficient manner . If i remeber ( dont have rle book infront of me) toward the end of that rule it says about delays and qualifications post what you can that deals with that. PLEASE.
I am specifically interested in learning the specific definition of "knowing the road" so to speak. All engineers are expected to know the road. But when you say that running blind is okay as long as you know where you are at on the railroad, it raises the requirement to know the road to a much more critical level.
To "know the road" needs a very precise definition. And I expect the industry has one.
BucyrusI am specifically interested in learning the specific definition of "knowing the road" so to speak.
What exactly does it mean? Let us examine this carefully. If I am talking about a specific road then I should know what is generally aound me at any time. Crossings, crossovers, turnouts, sidings, industrial switchpoints etc PP so on. If it is not specific enough then it could also include the local vegetational features, landscape, woodlots and such.
This almost comes off like an exercise in epistemology---how do we know what we know?
blue streak 1 Paul_D_North_JrIt seems to me that most such accidents occur just after sunrise - when it's still dark, the train's headlight might penetrate and illuminate the fog just enough to provide a dim visual warning of its approach - but when it's light out, the headlight doesn't have that effect. Paul you are so correct: The FAA and ICAO recognize this difference. When approaching an airport near dawn if the visibility to see runway and approach lights is say 600 ft when the day night sensor goes to days the visibility may then be only 200ft. We had fog here this morning and I could see abut 1200 ft but at dawn vis rapidly decreased to 300 ft.
Paul_D_North_JrIt seems to me that most such accidents occur just after sunrise - when it's still dark, the train's headlight might penetrate and illuminate the fog just enough to provide a dim visual warning of its approach - but when it's light out, the headlight doesn't have that effect.
Paul you are so correct: The FAA and ICAO recognize this difference. When approaching an airport near dawn if the visibility to see runway and approach lights is say 600 ft when the day night sensor goes to days the visibility may then be only 200ft. We had fog here this morning and I could see abut 1200 ft but at dawn vis rapidly decreased to 300 ft.
This is why they fly IFR, the Localizer and Glidescope if monitored, can get you pretty close. Of the NTSB accident reports I have read, it was failure to verify those instruments on the approach in limited visability conditions.
blownout cylinder This almost comes off like an exercise in epistemology---how do we know what we know?
We just know.
You guys got to page 5 without much help from me on the fog issue. I'm impressed!
It's been fun. But it isn't much fun anymore. Signing off for now.
The opinions expressed here represent my own and not those of my employer, any other railroad, company, or person.t fun any
blownout cylinder BucyrusI am specifically interested in learning the specific definition of "knowing the road" so to speak. What exactly does it mean? Let us examine this carefully. If I am talking about a specific road then I should know what is generally aound me at any time. Crossings, crossovers, turnouts, sidings, industrial switchpoints etc PP so on. If it is not specific enough then it could also include the local vegetational features, landscape, woodlots and such. This almost comes off like an exercise in epistemology---how do we know what we know?
Not so to speak. GCOR SSI states that an engineer will be qualified on a subdivision prior to taking a job. Other orders and bulletins speak to familiarity, and the requirement to contact your manager prior to taking a job where you have not run in the last six months.
I have not been on the road in five years. I can still remember where the crossings are on the Branch, where the old coaling tower was, State Line crossing, and most twists and turns. I would need to take familiarization trips however because automatic switches have been added, Control points, and one new industry.
Prior to the Branch being rebuilt in 1999, we took a night trip south on a foggy night. While it was 10 mph, at every unprotected crossing we dropped fusees off to visually warn the public. I got pretty good doing without the darned things going out on impact. If you saw the whistle post, that is all the warning you needed.
Today at 49 mph, highball and make enough noise to wake the dead. To the motorists who fail to stop, look, and listen, oh well, their Fail!
For me, working on ATC provided the most reliability, knowing the block ahead was clear, who needs wayside signals. Again, highball.
coborn35oltmanndThe only things the engineer has to know are his movement authority and where he is at the moment. The type of movement authority, whether it's from a train order, fixed signal, cab signal, or track warrant doesn't really matter. The only time line of sight is important is when the you are operating at restricted speed which requires you to be able to stop in half the distance you can see. Oltmannd, I believe you are an engineer or something, so I will not directly disagree with you. However in our GCOR we are taught that in conditions such as fog, snow etc, we must only operate at a speed at which we are able to stop in half our line of sight.
oltmanndThe only things the engineer has to know are his movement authority and where he is at the moment. The type of movement authority, whether it's from a train order, fixed signal, cab signal, or track warrant doesn't really matter. The only time line of sight is important is when the you are operating at restricted speed which requires you to be able to stop in half the distance you can see.
6.21: Precautions Against Unusual Conditions
Protect trains and engines against any known condition that may interfere with their safety.
When conditions restrict visibility, regulate speed to ensure that crew members can observe
and comply with signal indications.
In unusually heavy rain, storm, or high water, trains and engines must approach bridges,
safely, they must stop until it is safe to resume movement.
Advise the train dispatcher of such conditions by the first available means of communication.
22.5: Precautions Against Unusual Conditions
to provide maintenance employee access to track.
Nothing at all about fog. I would say to use common sense, but it is lacking on the part of many people of late. Same goes in a snow storm, highball unless you feel there is some sort of impediment. Use your brain for more than a hat-rack.
With this having bounced back and forth over a couple of threads, I thought somebody might have come up with the story of a PennCentral wreck on the Chicago Line. I can't recall details of location, Ohio or Indiana I think, and the year, but a PC train running at track speed rear ended a stopped train. The NTSB report found that there were heavy patches of fog for some stretch at the time of the accident, that the conditions were known by the dispatch desk, but they pressed crews operating in the area to maintain speeds. The engine crew was killed in the accident, burt it was obvious that they had missed the approach and possibly the last stop ( or restricted speed) signals.
As I recall, the NTSB, perhaps with some testing, concluded that between the fog and the engineers line of sight, the signals would have been visible for well less than a second. Keep in mind that at 60MPH a train is traveling 88 feet per second. If the visible range is 10 feet, don't blink.
"We have met the enemy and he is us." Pogo Possum "We have met the anemone... and he is Russ." Bucky Katt "Prediction is very difficult, especially if it's about the future." Niels Bohr, Nobel laureate in physics
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.