Did someone hijack this thread? Somebody made mention of a skipping record, and that devolved into a side discussion on audio equipment and the like. Hardly a hijack.
But I suppose a hijack is in the eye of the beholder. However, there is still discussion going on relative to the original topic. So, no - this thread has not been hijacked.
Maybe it's not going the way some folks would like it to go, but that doesn't mean it's been hijacked.
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...
[quote user="SD70Dude"] [quotes from otherposters omitted] A incident report from a similar collision, where a intermodal rear-ended a mixed freight at about 25 mph:
http://www.bst-tsb.gc.ca/eng/rapports-reports/rail/2011/r11e0063/r11e0063.html
[/quote]
Although I didn't read every word, I did see this near the end, under Analysis and The Accident (emphasis added - I kid you not!):
Train Q101 was travelling at 37 mph as it approached signal 2625N. During the approach, the crew's mental model was based upon the following misconceptions:
- PDN.
DeggestyHas the originator of this thread complained? If so, I do ot remember his complaining. So far as I know, no one is obligated to read any thread. Indeed, there are some that do not interest me, and I pass them by.
So far as I know, no one is obligated to read any thread. Indeed, there are some that do not interest me, and I pass them by.
I view threads as a conversation among 'friends' that in most cases have never met each other personally. Conversations among friends rarely remain 'on point' and wander all over the landscape as things happen in a 'stream of consciousness' manner from all the participants.
A mentions something, B brings up something that is similar to what A said, but different and the conversation is 'off to the races'.
Threads are not legal proceedings and don't have to 'remain on point' as if it was a interrogation to judge guilt or innocence or degree of liability.
This forum is for the FUN of the participants - Nothing more and Nothing less.
Have Fun!
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
Euclid tree68 Euclid Who are you kidding? It is not a time honored tradion here. It is petty and vindictive for the purose of getting even with someone or wrecking some topic that you resent. Time honored tradition--give me a break. I"m willing to bet that you won't have to go back very far to find a dozen threads that have crept off their original subject. Stringlining is a perfect example. There are plenty of others - and the topics are in no way controversial. Some threads never make it back to the subject at hand, but remain active because people are interested in the direction they took. I would not compare this hijacking to the String Lining thread by NDG. He started that thread and made it as a serial style with continuous new material, after starting with the particular string line wreck that occurred at that time. Discussion of that wreck ran its course and NDG, just kept the thread going. It is easily one of the most interesting and constructive threads ever on this forum. I don’t see anything off topic about that thread. There are two kinds of off topic. One is off the topic of the forum and the other is off the topic of a thread. This has turned into both kinds of off topic. Anybody is free to start any thread they want to. So what is the point of hijacking a thread to introduce some new topic? Hijacking a thread to start a new unrelated topic is rude to the original poster. It is also a rules violation. It is also pointless and unnecessary. You have all the space in the world to start a new thread if you really wanted to talk about another topic. I don’t buy the BS that this is just some sort of organic subject drift which is a time honored tradition, and that makes it right. We have seen that rodeo before here.
tree68 Euclid Who are you kidding? It is not a time honored tradion here. It is petty and vindictive for the purose of getting even with someone or wrecking some topic that you resent. Time honored tradition--give me a break. I"m willing to bet that you won't have to go back very far to find a dozen threads that have crept off their original subject. Stringlining is a perfect example. There are plenty of others - and the topics are in no way controversial. Some threads never make it back to the subject at hand, but remain active because people are interested in the direction they took.
Euclid Who are you kidding? It is not a time honored tradion here. It is petty and vindictive for the purose of getting even with someone or wrecking some topic that you resent. Time honored tradition--give me a break.
I"m willing to bet that you won't have to go back very far to find a dozen threads that have crept off their original subject. Stringlining is a perfect example. There are plenty of others - and the topics are in no way controversial.
Some threads never make it back to the subject at hand, but remain active because people are interested in the direction they took.
I would not compare this hijacking to the String Lining thread by NDG. He started that thread and made it as a serial style with continuous new material, after starting with the particular string line wreck that occurred at that time. Discussion of that wreck ran its course and NDG, just kept the thread going. It is easily one of the most interesting and constructive threads ever on this forum. I don’t see anything off topic about that thread.
There are two kinds of off topic. One is off the topic of the forum and the other is off the topic of a thread. This has turned into both kinds of off topic. Anybody is free to start any thread they want to. So what is the point of hijacking a thread to introduce some new topic?
Hijacking a thread to start a new unrelated topic is rude to the original poster. It is also a rules violation. It is also pointless and unnecessary. You have all the space in the world to start a new thread if you really wanted to talk about another topic. I don’t buy the BS that this is just some sort of organic subject drift which is a time honored tradition, and that makes it right. We have seen that rodeo before here.
Deggesty said:
Has the originator of this thread complained? If so, I do ot remember his complaining.
Johnny
***************************************************
This has nothing to do with being obligated to read a thread.
I would not compare this hijacking to the String Lining thread by NDG. He started that thread and made it as a serial style with continuous new material, after starting with the particular string line wreck that occurred at that time. Discussion of that wreck ran it course and NDG, just kept the thread going. It is easily one of the most interesting and constructive threads ever on this forum. I don’t see anything off topic about that thread.
SD70Dude BaltACD Flintlock76 Anyone remember Lafayette Electronics, and their kits? How about Edmund Scientific? Good stuff from both! Remember both - I think Radio Shack was starting into the marketplace at about the same point in time. Careful you two, you are showing your age!
BaltACD Flintlock76 Anyone remember Lafayette Electronics, and their kits? How about Edmund Scientific? Good stuff from both! Remember both - I think Radio Shack was starting into the marketplace at about the same point in time.
Flintlock76 Anyone remember Lafayette Electronics, and their kits? How about Edmund Scientific? Good stuff from both!
How about Edmund Scientific? Good stuff from both!
Remember both - I think Radio Shack was starting into the marketplace at about the same point in time.
Careful you two, you are showing your age!
Showing age beats being in ashes or under dirt!
Convicted One Who's up for rootbeer?
Who's up for rootbeer?
I'm in. Can we get A&W, I could really go for a teen burger right now too!
I'll put some popcorn on too.
Greetings from Alberta
-an Articulate Malcontent
Murphy Siding. To be fair, I'm going to go back and zip my posts to nothing.
Evidently snarky editorial about Darwinisms laced with personal insults are okay with them, they just don't like polite conversation they can't throw daggers at?
Flintlock76Anyone remember Lafayette Electronics, and their kits? How about Edmund Scientific? Good stuff from both!
Regarding AC/DC radios, I worked on quite a few of those "five-tube radios" when I was in high school. Someone here (Johnny, I think) described the series filament setup, but must have edited it out. I remember reading back in the '50's that some older neighborhoods still had DC power to their houses. One big advantage was that it eliminated the expense of the power transformer. I've long wondered that UL approved the design since depending on which way you plugged it in, the whole chassis might have 120 volts on it.
(edit) Johnny, I just came across your post that I accused you of editing. Sorry about that.
_____________
"A stranger's just a friend you ain't met yet." --- Dave Gardner
I remember most of these. I also bought all sorts of things from Burstein-Applebee--and I still have one box (with photographs in it now) that came from there.
And Heathkit.
Anyone remember Lafayette Electronics, and their kits?
And EICO and Heathkit and Radio Shack and Allied. The last two merged if I remember right.
Allied Radio out of Chicago had a great catalog, jncluding that crystal radio, one of several devices you could construct from a 10 in 1 kit back in the 50s.
zugmann jeffhergert he RA article is somewhat wrong about hand throw switches in signalled blocks with PTC overlayed. It's true PTC doesn't know their position, but it knows their location. If you're operating under restricted speed conditions, it won't let you pass a facing point hand throw switch without verifying the position of the switch on the PTC screen. Now, if you're already past the governing block signal for that block, and someone opens a hand throw switch (or a rail breaks) within that signal block, you're SOL. Current overlay PTC won't notice the change. (Remember Stanwood, IA last June.) PTC has it stands, is pretty good. It has it's short comings. Most of those of us that work with it know what they are. (It's amazing to find those above field level managment who don't know about the limitations of current PTC.) However no one with the power to do anything seems to want to talk of them. While PTC is being upgraded, I've never heard of any schedule to take it beyond just being an overlay, or at least integrating more items (switch position, etc) into it. Jeff I heard they were going to eventually have GPS switch indicators. At least for dark territory - so if a switch is reported open, it won't give unrestricted authority on said track. IMO, some of the things Jeff pointed out show why PTC is fine for mainline trains, but it is an absolute nightmare for locals. It's not made for them. It requires way too much human input and isn't able to process/handle all the things locals have to do. Hence the whole "restricted mode". Hey look - kinda sorta back on topic. I must be a great and powerful mage.
jeffhergert he RA article is somewhat wrong about hand throw switches in signalled blocks with PTC overlayed. It's true PTC doesn't know their position, but it knows their location. If you're operating under restricted speed conditions, it won't let you pass a facing point hand throw switch without verifying the position of the switch on the PTC screen. Now, if you're already past the governing block signal for that block, and someone opens a hand throw switch (or a rail breaks) within that signal block, you're SOL. Current overlay PTC won't notice the change. (Remember Stanwood, IA last June.) PTC has it stands, is pretty good. It has it's short comings. Most of those of us that work with it know what they are. (It's amazing to find those above field level managment who don't know about the limitations of current PTC.) However no one with the power to do anything seems to want to talk of them. While PTC is being upgraded, I've never heard of any schedule to take it beyond just being an overlay, or at least integrating more items (switch position, etc) into it. Jeff
I heard they were going to eventually have GPS switch indicators. At least for dark territory - so if a switch is reported open, it won't give unrestricted authority on said track.
IMO, some of the things Jeff pointed out show why PTC is fine for mainline trains, but it is an absolute nightmare for locals. It's not made for them. It requires way too much human input and isn't able to process/handle all the things locals have to do. Hence the whole "restricted mode".
Hey look - kinda sorta back on topic. I must be a great and powerful mage.
GPS switch-position indicators? Why can' they use DCC? It works over the tracks and doesn't need extra wiring
If GM "killed the electric car", what am I doing standing next to an EV-1, a half a block from the WSOR tracks?
Lithonia Operator 243129 All of the discussed 'accoutrements' are fine but one must be current in the basics because electronic devices can and will fail. Steps must be taken to avoid 'automated addiction'. Precisely. And this is why I always carry paper charts on my boat, in addition to having a backup GPS.
243129 All of the discussed 'accoutrements' are fine but one must be current in the basics because electronic devices can and will fail. Steps must be taken to avoid 'automated addiction'.
All of the discussed 'accoutrements' are fine but one must be current in the basics because electronic devices can and will fail. Steps must be taken to avoid 'automated addiction'.
A prudent mariner.
EuclidWho are you kidding? It is not a time honored tradion here. It is petty and vindictive for the purose of getting even with someone or wrecking some topic that you resent. Time honored tradition--give me a break.
charlie hebdo jeffhergert I don't think the events happened the way the Railway Age article says they did. I think the J B Hunt containers were on the moving train on the adjacent track. The empty oil train rear ended the stopped intermodal train, but most of those cars appear to have derailed away from the adjacent track. (It's hard to tell about the cars ahead of those on there side towards the top of the second picture. Some may have indeed derailed to the inside.) The engines, however, do appear to have nosed toward the inside, between the tracks and caused the other train to derail. I would like to know how fast they were going, too. Going around that curve, with a train on the adjacent track, sight distance would probably be 3 or 4 cars. PTC enforces the restricted speed, but the high end of it. Ours will start alerting at 18 mph and will make a penalty application at 21 mph. Because current PTC doesn't protect the rear end of trains ahead in restricted speed conditions, engineers are required to be stop tested under PTC RS conditions. While integrating EOTs and rear end DP units is a good idea, I'm not sure I would depend on them always communicating their location. Intermittant comm loss is an almost everyday occurrance. Sometimes it's the location, some spots are worse than others, and sometimes it's equipment (antennas, wire connections, etc) related. Usually, the comm loss is minor, but if it's going to fail you know it will probably fail at the worst possible time. (Remember the runaway out in Wyoming.) Since the "back office" is supposed to know where all the trains are and their lengths, I would think following trains could be alerted to where the end of the train ahead is by the back office calculating where the end of the train is. I would add a safety factor to the length of each train, say 500 feet, to allow for mistakes in entered train length. The RA article is somewhat wrong about hand throw switches in signalled blocks with PTC overlayed. It's true PTC doesn't know their position, but it knows their location. If you're operating under restricted speed conditions, it won't let you pass a facing point hand throw switch without verifying the position of the switch on the PTC screen. Now, if you're already past the governing block signal for that block, and someone opens a hand throw switch (or a rail breaks) within that signal block, you're SOL. Current overlay PTC won't notice the change. (Remember Stanwood, IA last June.) PTC has it stands, is pretty good. It has it's short comings. Most of those of us that work with it know what they are. (It's amazing to find those above field level managment who don't know about the limitations of current PTC.) However no one with the power to do anything seems to want to talk of them. While PTC is being upgraded, I've never heard of any schedule to take it beyond just being an overlay, or at least integrating more items (switch position, etc) into it. Jeff It's refreshing to read the astute, objective observations and opinions of an experienced mainline engineer. Thank you.
jeffhergert I don't think the events happened the way the Railway Age article says they did. I think the J B Hunt containers were on the moving train on the adjacent track. The empty oil train rear ended the stopped intermodal train, but most of those cars appear to have derailed away from the adjacent track. (It's hard to tell about the cars ahead of those on there side towards the top of the second picture. Some may have indeed derailed to the inside.) The engines, however, do appear to have nosed toward the inside, between the tracks and caused the other train to derail. I would like to know how fast they were going, too. Going around that curve, with a train on the adjacent track, sight distance would probably be 3 or 4 cars. PTC enforces the restricted speed, but the high end of it. Ours will start alerting at 18 mph and will make a penalty application at 21 mph. Because current PTC doesn't protect the rear end of trains ahead in restricted speed conditions, engineers are required to be stop tested under PTC RS conditions. While integrating EOTs and rear end DP units is a good idea, I'm not sure I would depend on them always communicating their location. Intermittant comm loss is an almost everyday occurrance. Sometimes it's the location, some spots are worse than others, and sometimes it's equipment (antennas, wire connections, etc) related. Usually, the comm loss is minor, but if it's going to fail you know it will probably fail at the worst possible time. (Remember the runaway out in Wyoming.) Since the "back office" is supposed to know where all the trains are and their lengths, I would think following trains could be alerted to where the end of the train ahead is by the back office calculating where the end of the train is. I would add a safety factor to the length of each train, say 500 feet, to allow for mistakes in entered train length. The RA article is somewhat wrong about hand throw switches in signalled blocks with PTC overlayed. It's true PTC doesn't know their position, but it knows their location. If you're operating under restricted speed conditions, it won't let you pass a facing point hand throw switch without verifying the position of the switch on the PTC screen. Now, if you're already past the governing block signal for that block, and someone opens a hand throw switch (or a rail breaks) within that signal block, you're SOL. Current overlay PTC won't notice the change. (Remember Stanwood, IA last June.) PTC has it stands, is pretty good. It has it's short comings. Most of those of us that work with it know what they are. (It's amazing to find those above field level managment who don't know about the limitations of current PTC.) However no one with the power to do anything seems to want to talk of them. While PTC is being upgraded, I've never heard of any schedule to take it beyond just being an overlay, or at least integrating more items (switch position, etc) into it. Jeff
I don't think the events happened the way the Railway Age article says they did. I think the J B Hunt containers were on the moving train on the adjacent track. The empty oil train rear ended the stopped intermodal train, but most of those cars appear to have derailed away from the adjacent track. (It's hard to tell about the cars ahead of those on there side towards the top of the second picture. Some may have indeed derailed to the inside.) The engines, however, do appear to have nosed toward the inside, between the tracks and caused the other train to derail.
I would like to know how fast they were going, too. Going around that curve, with a train on the adjacent track, sight distance would probably be 3 or 4 cars. PTC enforces the restricted speed, but the high end of it. Ours will start alerting at 18 mph and will make a penalty application at 21 mph. Because current PTC doesn't protect the rear end of trains ahead in restricted speed conditions, engineers are required to be stop tested under PTC RS conditions.
While integrating EOTs and rear end DP units is a good idea, I'm not sure I would depend on them always communicating their location. Intermittant comm loss is an almost everyday occurrance. Sometimes it's the location, some spots are worse than others, and sometimes it's equipment (antennas, wire connections, etc) related. Usually, the comm loss is minor, but if it's going to fail you know it will probably fail at the worst possible time. (Remember the runaway out in Wyoming.)
Since the "back office" is supposed to know where all the trains are and their lengths, I would think following trains could be alerted to where the end of the train ahead is by the back office calculating where the end of the train is. I would add a safety factor to the length of each train, say 500 feet, to allow for mistakes in entered train length.
The RA article is somewhat wrong about hand throw switches in signalled blocks with PTC overlayed. It's true PTC doesn't know their position, but it knows their location. If you're operating under restricted speed conditions, it won't let you pass a facing point hand throw switch without verifying the position of the switch on the PTC screen. Now, if you're already past the governing block signal for that block, and someone opens a hand throw switch (or a rail breaks) within that signal block, you're SOL. Current overlay PTC won't notice the change. (Remember Stanwood, IA last June.)
PTC has it stands, is pretty good. It has it's short comings. Most of those of us that work with it know what they are. (It's amazing to find those above field level managment who don't know about the limitations of current PTC.) However no one with the power to do anything seems to want to talk of them. While PTC is being upgraded, I've never heard of any schedule to take it beyond just being an overlay, or at least integrating more items (switch position, etc) into it.
Jeff
It's refreshing to read the astute, objective observations and opinions of an experienced mainline engineer. Thank you.
A incident report from a similar collision, where a intermodal rear-ended a mixed freight at about 25 mph:
Euclid BaltACD 243129 Way to go fellas, 'mob up' and derail the thread. Congratulations on your success. The time honored internet forum tradition of thread jacking. Nothing new. Just as time honored as the Old Foggy hollering 'Get off my Grass!' Who are you kidding? It is not a time honored tradion here. It is petty and vindictive for the purose of getting even with someone or wrecking some topic that you resent. Time honored tradition--give me a break.
BaltACD 243129 Way to go fellas, 'mob up' and derail the thread. Congratulations on your success. The time honored internet forum tradition of thread jacking. Nothing new. Just as time honored as the Old Foggy hollering 'Get off my Grass!'
243129 Way to go fellas, 'mob up' and derail the thread. Congratulations on your success.
The time honored internet forum tradition of thread jacking. Nothing new.
Just as time honored as the Old Foggy hollering 'Get off my Grass!'
Who are you kidding? It is not a time honored tradion here. It is petty and vindictive for the purose of getting even with someone or wrecking some topic that you resent. Time honored tradition--give me a break.
Very sheltered aren't you. There is a whole wide world outside your keyboard.
Overmodou need some means of ascertaining the CORRECT switch status (which ought to be more than just what position it was thrown to be in) and then providing it to 'whoever is interested in knowing that position' but not whoever isn't supposed to know or influence it'.
Electric locks have been doing the first part for many years. With the ones we use, the handle has to be in normal postiion with the lock inserted for it to register as "padlocked".
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
zugmannI heard they were going to eventually have GPS switch indicators.
It has been a mystery to me since 'early on' why this wasn't explicitly included in the spec in some way. Even relatively imprecise non-differential would work for most of the switches that pose an actual risk to trains moving at speed. Even the cheapest modern cell-phone core has all the capability needed for this, and in fact only a few cents' more expense puts in in a temperature-controlled oven that makes the effect of jitter negligible for a stationary application. Can easily be powered with a battery and small solar panel, which is also needed for the required radio or line communications. Not by any means difficult to allow in the design for graceful degrade and plenty of advance warning of damage, tampering, attempted hacking, or a range of other potential 'evils'.
All the GPS on a switch does is identify it to a system. You need some means of ascertaining the CORRECT switch status (which ought to be more than just what position it was thrown to be in) and then providing it to 'whoever is interested in knowing that position' but not whoever isn't supposed to know or influence it'. You can do that with SDR-compatible radio, or a connection to some kind of wireline at the switch ... or just have it come up on demand, when it detects an approaching train, with the locomotive aware of a 'directory' of switch GPS positions so that the engineer can go promptly to restricted speed if any switch fails to pass muster.
There's a corollary for putting GPS at grade crossings ... including private ones.
jeffhergerthe RA article is somewhat wrong about hand throw switches in signalled blocks with PTC overlayed. It's true PTC doesn't know their position, but it knows their location. If you're operating under restricted speed conditions, it won't let you pass a facing point hand throw switch without verifying the position of the switch on the PTC screen. Now, if you're already past the governing block signal for that block, and someone opens a hand throw switch (or a rail breaks) within that signal block, you're SOL. Current overlay PTC won't notice the change. (Remember Stanwood, IA last June.) PTC has it stands, is pretty good. It has it's short comings. Most of those of us that work with it know what they are. (It's amazing to find those above field level managment who don't know about the limitations of current PTC.) However no one with the power to do anything seems to want to talk of them. While PTC is being upgraded, I've never heard of any schedule to take it beyond just being an overlay, or at least integrating more items (switch position, etc) into it. Jeff
BaltACDThe time honored internet forum tradition of thread jacking. Nothing new.
Natural conversational shift. I don't think there was any ill intent.
Way to go fellas, 'mob up' and derail the thread. Congratulations on your success.
Nah - Just regular thread morphing/thread creep. Happens all the time.
Squirrel!
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.