gardendance I find it very hard to believe that anyone can hand throw anything at 1200 mph.
Seems to me that you sometimes pride yourself on sarcasm, but don't recognize that a hand-thrown object moving at 1200 mph would involve significant whoooooooosh! factor?
Can you tell us where you learned this? I must have gotten it wrong when I thought I had read he had been on this shift for 2 weeks, which I don't consider to be "just before".
Also, what was his work schedule on the prior shift? If it changed only a few hours I don't think I'd consider that to cause much drowsiness.
Patrick Boylan
Free yacht rides, 27' sailboat, zip code 19114 Delaware River, get great Delair bridge photos from the river. Send me a private message
AY-MEN!!! Learned that the engineer of the Metro North overspeed disaster was cleared of Criminal Wrongdoing by virtue of this work schedule arbitrarily changed just before the accident, which presumambly encouraged drowziness.
Euclid Norm48327 Euclid Murray, I note that Norm has conveniently left out a few details. Why was Steve Otte ordering the moderators to delete peoples’ posts? Maybe Norm could chime in and explain that mystery. Convenience memory, or lack of reading comprehension on your part? You know very well what went down. Norm, What went down was a group of posters, who felt I was not properly respecting experts, chose to mob my thread and post lots of snarky little comments in an attempt to provoke me into retaliating and raising the temperature to the point where the thread would be locked. The whole grievance was a figment of their imagination due to the fact that nobody was actually reading deep enough to comprehend anything. So anything I said sounded to them like another insult. I was told by the moderator to not react to the attack, and that he would remove the snarky off topic comments. He removed them and warned the perpetrators. The next day they did it again, so the moderator removed the comments (2-3 pages), and placed the perpetrators on a status requiring moderator approval before posting. Then they started a bitter complaint thread where I was the cause of all the world’s problems and that went for several pages in 24 hours before being deleted by the moderators. The complainers said that I had forced the moderators to remove their comments in my thread because I did not agree with them. That was a lie. It is absurd to think the moderators would have done that even if I asked them to. The comments were removed because they were snarky insults intended to get the thread locked. I was also promised by the moderator, speaking for the editors, that my thread would not be locked as long as I did not push back against the snarky comments, so I did not push back. Then they locked the thread anyway in breach of their promise.
Norm48327 Euclid Murray, I note that Norm has conveniently left out a few details. Why was Steve Otte ordering the moderators to delete peoples’ posts? Maybe Norm could chime in and explain that mystery. Convenience memory, or lack of reading comprehension on your part? You know very well what went down.
Euclid Murray, I note that Norm has conveniently left out a few details. Why was Steve Otte ordering the moderators to delete peoples’ posts? Maybe Norm could chime in and explain that mystery.
Convenience memory, or lack of reading comprehension on your part? You know very well what went down.
Norm and everyone else posting in this thread:
Let's stick to talking about railroads, OK? We're headed into a holiday weekend. Let's self-govern. Follow the rules, and there won't be any problems.
Thanks and have a safe and wonderful holiday weekend celebrating our country.
Ang
Angela Pusztai-Pasternak, Production Editor, Trains Magazine
daveklepper A thrower throws an object at about 100 feet in half a second. That would be 1200 miles an hour.
A thrower throws an object at about 100 feet in half a second. That would be 1200 miles an hour.
I assume you mean a person using a throwing device. I find it very hard to believe that anyone can hand throw anything at 1200 mph. Can we agree that major league baseball pitchers are good examples of the fastest throwers? http://www.efastball.com/baseball/stats/fastest-pitch-speed-in-major-leagues/ says the record's 108 mph.
But I also find it hard to believe anyone's desired vandalism or terrorism device would be a potato launcher or catapult. Wouldn't an old fashioned gun and bullet be much more likely? Aren't you in Jerusalem? How often do folks there decide to use slingshots instead of guns?
I agree that there should be some sort of universal practice. But although automobile manufacturers don't make cars with the brake pedal on the right and the gas pedal on the left, as I mentioned before referring to the Valhalla New York SUV grade crossing accident they do things like move gear controls around, which I feel is a more likely contributor to that accident than confusion about throttle direction would be to this accident. As Euclid pointed out, the engineer would have to have been confused for quite a while to have mixed up power vs brake sufficiently to have accelerated from 80 to 106.
Remember that he got off that Acela express in Washington more than 2 hours and 130 miles before. That's quite a stretch to think that he suddenly thought he was back in an Acela express.
gardendance...I can imagine Siemens, or Bombardier wanting to be able to sell to more than 1 customer, and so maybe retaining the capability to produce the handles in both directions...
So long as there's no complicated linkage, I imagine it would simple to manufacture the control to be easily installed either direction.
But are there lines that have a preference counter to whichever would be considered "standard practice?" Seems to me it would be preferable for this to be a universal standard, like the gas, brake, and clutch pedals on a motor vehicle.
Paul of Covington I've always thought the opposite would be desirable. For better control you want negative feedback. If you pull back to accelerate, your body is pulled back tending to increase the amount you pull back. Pushing forward, it has to be a deliberate move. Granted, trains don't accelerate all that quickly, but I still like my idea.
The roots of the practice date back to steam locomotives...
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...
It occurs to me: someone here sent my father a copy of the ACS64 Familiarization and Orientation Manual when the units were being built. I don't remember who that person was, but the information on throttle position and control operation is surely in that manual, with sufficient detail for our purposes. Perhaps they could post the relevant pages, or provide a link to them so we could look them over online.
gardendanceBy the way, I've always thought pull back to accelerate, push forward to brake was the way to go so that sudden braking that might cause your body to slip or lean forward wouldn't result in diminished braking.
I've always thought the opposite would be desirable. For better control you want negative feedback. If you pull back to accelerate, your body is pulled back tending to increase the amount you pull back. Pushing forward, it has to be a deliberate move. Granted, trains don't accelerate all that quickly, but I still like my idea.
_____________
"A stranger's just a friend you ain't met yet." --- Dave Gardner
Unless he was incapacitated or distracted sufficiently. But Mr Lynn wasn't asking about the engineer's reaction to the possible throttle reversal, he only asked if it was reversed.
By the way, I've always thought pull back to accelerate, push forward to brake was the way to go so that sudden braking that might cause your body to slip or lean forward wouldn't result in diminished braking.
It's pretty clear from my memory of the labels on the handles in the photos in this thread attributed to Acela express and ACS-64 cabs that the numbers 1-8 are reversed, and I think the guy who posted them said he got his info from the photos, and not from some independent source. I don't have time to go back to find what page has those photos, I must devote all my energies to in-group recrimination. Maybe the photos are not genuine, or perhaps they're manufacturer demo photos possibly different from what actually got delivered to Amtrak. I can imagine Siemens, or Bombardier wanting to be able to sell to more than 1 customer, and so maybe retaining the capability to produce the handles in both directions, but not necessarilly photographing every unit they make.
But other than in this thread I haven't read anything attributing Bostian's possible confusion to reversed throttles. One would expect the investigators to have mentioned that by now. It's been one month already. Didn't the accounts of the December 2014 Valhalla NY grade crossing accident have the info that the Mercedes SUV had a weird gear selector in less than one month after the accident?
Apparently no one here has any new information or insights about the Philadelphia wreck. We've had several pages now of in-group recrimination and some ancient history that as far as I can see has nothing to do with railroading.
Was it ever determined that the Acela and ACS-64 throttles are or are not markedly different? That question was an outgrowth of speculation about why the engineer apparently sped up while entering the curve. There's nothing wrong with speculation, providing it is identified as such. It's certainly more interesting than talk about personalities.
/Mr Lynn
EuclidMurray, I note that Norm has conveniently left out a few details. Why was Steve Otte ordering the moderators to delete peoples’ posts? Maybe Norm could chime in and explain that mystery.
Norm
schlimmHijack threads? You don't own it and have never made any useful contribution to it.
Pot calls kettle black.
schlimm1. If ad hominem attacks are allowed, it is a short step to vulgar profanities and thinly veiled threats, IMO. I don't think anyone on here really wants that to occur.
You just want to suck the joy out of everything.
The opinions expressed here represent my own and not those of my employer, any other railroad, company, or person.
Such drama. It's a internet forum, people. Calm down and go outside.
Murray And while we may be among the most vocal, we are not the only long term posters here who feel this way.
And while we may be among the most vocal, we are not the only long term posters here who feel this way.
Yet you have claimed that I'm the only one who, as you say, supports Euclid. Not that I want to beat a dead horse, but I've more than once given examples of others who support him, or at least his, and everyone's right to speak or who've complained or gently noted that the joke got old a long time ago. You're certainly not required to respond to my rebuttals, but I find it curious that you haven't, yet have made more snarky posts against Euclid and some of the others who have posted not negatively about him.
Norm48327 Schlimm, Just a comment: Some of those "miscreants" gave up in disgust and left the forum when Steve Otte was ordering the moderators to delete their posts. We all know who was behind that and it only stopped when someone went over Steve's head. The forum lost a lot of knowledgeable folks when that occurred.
Schlimm,
Just a comment: Some of those "miscreants" gave up in disgust and left the forum when Steve Otte was ordering the moderators to delete their posts. We all know who was behind that and it only stopped when someone went over Steve's head. The forum lost a lot of knowledgeable folks when that occurred.
How do you know why they gave up in disgust? Who are "we all"? I know I'm not part of that group, since I don't know, and don't care to know, who was behind it.
Murray But its OK for YOU Schlimm along with Bucky and Gardendance to highjack threads. The three of you do it all the time. I'm not the only person on this forum who feels this way...I'm only the most vocal.
But its OK for YOU Schlimm along with Bucky and Gardendance to highjack threads. The three of you do it all the time.
I'm not the only person on this forum who feels this way...I'm only the most vocal.
Please explain how I "do it all the time"? There are often days, and weeks, in which I make no posts. As for hijacking threads, I get the impression, recently in this thread at least, that others and I just said that this old joke "Bucky's bad" got old a long time ago, and you and some other posters replied with "Bucky's bad, so you're bad because you said the joke's old, it's vital that we continue the crusade to save you from the evils of Bucky", and "stop telling us not to beat up on Bucky, you're just as bad as we are".
schlimm Murray That fine Bucky. I'm will formally turn this over to the Moderators. Which was undoubtedly your goal, to provoke him with your snarky comments. You also made the remark that someone was kicked out of a non-Kalmbach forum but refused to offer proof.
Murray
That fine Bucky.
I'm will formally turn this over to the Moderators.
Which was undoubtedly your goal, to provoke him with your snarky comments. You also made the remark that someone was kicked out of a non-Kalmbach forum but refused to offer proof.
That's fine Murray, it's your, and anyone else's who cares, right to turn it over to the moderators.
Schlimm, not that he's required to offer proof, but he has also not responded to my evidence, namely a link to a topic in that I created in that forum which proves that I'm not kicked out now, and asked their moderators to say when I was kicked out.
It now looks like the moderators deleted that post. Hopefully the moderators at that other forum, which I guess we cannot name, will not delete theirs.
Murray Then ask him why when he was such a prolific poster there did he just stop. He may still have an open account...But you don't just disappear form regular posting, when he posted at a rate that would make Bucky blush.
Then ask him why when he was such a prolific poster there did he just stop. He may still have an open account...But you don't just disappear form regular posting, when he posted at a rate that would make Bucky blush.
The moderators seem to have deleted your post in which you quoted my post in which I said that I stopped participating mainly because I was tired of behavior there similar to what I see here. Namely repeated "jump on this guy because he posts poorly". And why do you ask others to ask me, why can't you ask me yourself, if you doubt my stated reason? By the way, I'm deeply disappointed noone noted my "Boy I sure taught railroad.net a lesson they'll soon forget". Do you see where I left out the "not" in "soon not forget"? Now that's Larry the Cable Guy.
Who knows, maybe I'll also disappear from regular posting here as well. I'm sure the outcry will be something to be seen for many seconds. It's my decision, and nobody should require me to announce it or explain it.
And I believe your continually rebutting, and cherry picking your rebuttals, yet claiming others have hijacked this thread, ranks up pretty high on the hypocrisy meter.
Murray schlimm Which was undoubtedly your goal, to provoke him with your snarky comments. You also made the remark that someone was kicked out of a non-Kalmbach forum but refused to offer proof. I wanted this thread to be a discussion of the ACCIDENT itself...not the wherewithalls on whay "may" have happened. I explained that early in the thread. Others explained it as well. You obviously understood it because you did not post any speculation. I would no sooner, for example, go to the passenger forum and take one of your threads that YOU started and bend and twist it all around. I at least have that amount of respect for you as a poster. You show none for me as a poster. But you are the first on who cries when someone calls Bucky out on the spot
schlimm
I wanted this thread to be a discussion of the ACCIDENT itself...not the wherewithalls on whay "may" have happened. I explained that early in the thread.
Others explained it as well. You obviously understood it because you did not post any speculation. I would no sooner, for example, go to the passenger forum and take one of your threads that YOU started and bend and twist it all around. I at least have that amount of respect for you as a poster. You show none for me as a poster.
But you are the first on who cries when someone calls Bucky out on the spot
And behold you immediately gave a great example of that cherry picking with a double whammy:
1. say you explained that early in the thread, yet have not responded to my post which pointed out that the thread started with only 2 posts from you which were only links to news items. I have a sleepless night, and probably should devote my time to something worthier, but
page 1, first post Tuesday, May 12, 2015 9:07 PM. The only posts from you are 6 links to news items, the only text from you is "The death toll is now at 6:"
no posts from you till page 4 Thursday, May 14, 2015 12:02 PM "Death toll now at 8:"
no posts from you till page 11 Tuesday, May 19, 2015 2:05 PM "However, I would respectfully request that anyone contributing to this thread kindly stop sniping at each other."
I think folks could argue both ways, some might say "early" should have been within the 1st couple of posts. I do find it hypocritical for you to have asked folks to stop sniping, yet you have made several sniping, and untrue, remarks against me.
page 12 you started out gently asking Euclid not to speculate. Please note, I never said you attack Euclid, or anyone. I'm pretty sure my posts in this vein were, as I said before, even in this post, that the joke got old long ago.
AND you're now saying that Schlimm's "the first on who cries when someone calls Bucky out on the spot", but have not replied to any of my posts where I rebutted your saying I'm Bucky's only supporter.
Murray schlimm Hijack threads? You don't own it and have never made any useful contribution to it. All you can do is belittle and whine and claim you are in some majority, as though you knew anything about that. I started it within minutes of the incident taking place. I most certainly did contribute to it. What I didn't do is start speculating like your friends did. Ya know what Schlimm...You are just a narcissistic idiot. I'm done with you, Bucky, Gardendance and the whole bunch of you. Happy now Doc?
Hijack threads? You don't own it and have never made any useful contribution to it. All you can do is belittle and whine and claim you are in some majority, as though you knew anything about that.
I started it within minutes of the incident taking place. I most certainly did contribute to it. What I didn't do is start speculating like your friends did.
Ya know what Schlimm...You are just a narcissistic idiot.
I'm done with you, Bucky, Gardendance and the whole bunch of you.
Happy now Doc?
Yes, but were they useful contributions? As I noted above, your 1st 7 posts were just links to news articles. I think most people could, and probably did, find out about the wreck without this thread. My first notice was facebook, then philly.com, long before I looked on trains.com.
I can't imagine anyone could interpret "You are just a narcissistic idiot" as a compliment. I believe the rules ask that we not make insults.
For what it's worth, I would not have announced that I'm done with the whole bunch of you, I just would have stopped posting.
Murray Norm48327 Schlimm, Just a comment: Some of those "miscreants" gave up in disgust and left the forum when Steve Otte was ordering the moderators to delete their posts. We all know who was behind that and it only stopped when someone went over Steve's head. The forum lost a lot of knowledgeable folks when that occurred. What a surprise: It was Schlimm, and Bucky who did that. I'm Shocked....SHOCKED.
What a surprise: It was Schlimm, and Bucky who did that.
I'm Shocked....SHOCKED.
Wizlish Euclid schlimm IMO, the OP of a thread should neither "own" it nor retain editorial content control. That’s right. It is the height of hypocrisy to violate the rule on personal attacks and then make up a rule saying that the original poster gets to dictate editorial policy over his thread. It is especially hypocritical for people to make up that rule while trying to get other peoples’ threads locked by causing a disturbance because they think the discussion has continued long enough. Just because Murray started this thread does not give him the right to dictate how the topic should be discussed. If Murray does not want speculation here, Murray can pound sand. It's not a question either of 'ownership' or editorial/content control; it's the interpretation of what the 'on topic' of the Kalmbach rule about 'keep discussions on topic' means. We have plenty of people on here who are of the opinion that a thread should take whatever direction its contributors want. That is fine, except that official policy here is different. The current moderation style -- which i happen to respect, by the way -- is not to make an issue out of topic drift in the absence of complaint. But lack of enforcement is not the same thing as amending a law. It does seem fair to me, though, that IF someone has started a discussion on a particular topic and does not want distracted anything-goes commentary (I'm thinking of some of the threads juniatha started) they have some authority to ask for the on-topic rule to be enforced. Having said that, the topic of the present thread is "Amtrak wreck in Philadelphia". That doesn't rule out supposition about the Amtrak wreck, nor does it rule out boneheaded theorizing, and indeed even though some rather wacky things have been expressed, they have been tied fairly closely to the wreck and its circumstances. Hence my suggestion that Murray be the one to start the new thread -- one explicitly rejecting speculation, perhaps? -- and then invoke the TOS if 'things happen" that start to derail or hijack the thread. I don't know what would happen if somebody started a thread specifically addressing the Bucyrus/Euclid/etc. stuff, including the tendency toward 'relatively unbased speculation'. To extend the beliefs of some people here, that would be a nifty topic, and would allow all the bashing on the guy that enlightened fed-up minds could produce. There is just one little problem with that, however, and Angela has come in to remind us again. First thing you know, we'll be back to insulting Brother Lion or the guy from Chilliwack over their religion; that's another thing in the TOS that conflicts with 'free speech rights'. I honestly can't say whether it's "better" to allow rudeness or even character assassination in the name of 'free speech' than it is to have, and enforce, a TOS that is intended to keep a community with strong opinions civil. I think it's a bit of a shame that 'love the sinner, hate the sin' is not more of a principle when discussing unpopular postings.
Euclid schlimm IMO, the OP of a thread should neither "own" it nor retain editorial content control. That’s right. It is the height of hypocrisy to violate the rule on personal attacks and then make up a rule saying that the original poster gets to dictate editorial policy over his thread. It is especially hypocritical for people to make up that rule while trying to get other peoples’ threads locked by causing a disturbance because they think the discussion has continued long enough. Just because Murray started this thread does not give him the right to dictate how the topic should be discussed. If Murray does not want speculation here, Murray can pound sand.
schlimm IMO, the OP of a thread should neither "own" it nor retain editorial content control.
IMO, the OP of a thread should neither "own" it nor retain editorial content control.
1. If ad hominem attacks are allowed, it is a short step to vulgar profanities and thinly veiled threats, IMO. I don't think anyone on here really wants that to occur.
2. This thread was totally on the topic of the various aspects of the Philly crash. Lots of speculation, some informed, some wild, but interesting to many. It only went off-topic when some decided to start an anti-Bucky/Euclid campaign.
3. Murray's last post confirms the need for civility on this forum.
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
schlimm Murray schlimm IMO, the OP of a thread should neither "own" it nor retain editorial content control. But its OK for YOU Schlimm along with Bucky and Gardendance to highjack threads. The three of you do it all the time. I'm not the only person on this forum who feels this way...I'm only the most vocal. This will going to the Moderators. Hijack threads? You don't own it and have never made any useful contribution to it. All you can do is belittle and whine and claim you are in some majority, as though you knew anything about that.
Murray schlimm IMO, the OP of a thread should neither "own" it nor retain editorial content control. But its OK for YOU Schlimm along with Bucky and Gardendance to highjack threads. The three of you do it all the time. I'm not the only person on this forum who feels this way...I'm only the most vocal. This will going to the Moderators.
This will going to the Moderators.
schlimm Murray Euclid schlimm gardendance Schlimm, why are you so nice to WDGF? Where's my credit? According to Murray I'm the only one supporting Euclid. IMO, the OP of a thread should neither "own" it nor retain editorial content control. That’s right. It is the height of hypocrisy to violate the rule on personal attacks and then make up a rule saying that the original poster gets to dictate editorial policy over his thread. It is especially hypocritical for people to make up that rule while trying to get other peoples’ threads locked by causing a disturbance because they think the discussion has continued long enough. Just because Murray started this thread does not give him the right to dictate how the topic should be discussed. If Murray does not want speculation here, Murray can pound sand. That fine Bucky. I'm will formally turn this over to the Moderators. Which was undoubtedly your goal, to provoke him with your snarky comments. You also made the remark that someone was kicked out of a non-Kalmbach forum but refused to offer proof.
Murray Euclid schlimm gardendance Schlimm, why are you so nice to WDGF? Where's my credit? According to Murray I'm the only one supporting Euclid. IMO, the OP of a thread should neither "own" it nor retain editorial content control. That’s right. It is the height of hypocrisy to violate the rule on personal attacks and then make up a rule saying that the original poster gets to dictate editorial policy over his thread. It is especially hypocritical for people to make up that rule while trying to get other peoples’ threads locked by causing a disturbance because they think the discussion has continued long enough. Just because Murray started this thread does not give him the right to dictate how the topic should be discussed. If Murray does not want speculation here, Murray can pound sand. That fine Bucky. I'm will formally turn this over to the Moderators.
Euclid schlimm gardendance Schlimm, why are you so nice to WDGF? Where's my credit? According to Murray I'm the only one supporting Euclid. IMO, the OP of a thread should neither "own" it nor retain editorial content control. That’s right. It is the height of hypocrisy to violate the rule on personal attacks and then make up a rule saying that the original poster gets to dictate editorial policy over his thread. It is especially hypocritical for people to make up that rule while trying to get other peoples’ threads locked by causing a disturbance because they think the discussion has continued long enough. Just because Murray started this thread does not give him the right to dictate how the topic should be discussed. If Murray does not want speculation here, Murray can pound sand.
schlimm gardendance Schlimm, why are you so nice to WDGF? Where's my credit? According to Murray I'm the only one supporting Euclid. IMO, the OP of a thread should neither "own" it nor retain editorial content control.
gardendance Schlimm, why are you so nice to WDGF? Where's my credit? According to Murray I'm the only one supporting Euclid.
I wanted this thread to be a discussion of the ACCIDENT itself...not the wherewithalls on whay "may" have happened. I explained that early in the thread. Others explained it as well. You obviously understood it because you did not post any speculation. I would no sooner, for example, go to the passenger forum and take one of your threads that YOU started and bend and twist it all around. I at least have that amount of respect for you as a poster. You show none for me as a poster.
But you are the first on who cries when someone calls Bucky out on the spot.
What is it with you anyway?
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.