UlrichRising consumer prices due to increased safety measures can be counteracted by buying less of everything, especially stuff we don't need in the first place.
However, when you don't buy what you don't need anyways, where is the savings. I guess I'd save the most by not buying anything and then dying from starvation.
In the real world we are humans and will pay what is necessary to live the ways we want to live and complain all the way to the ballot box.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
Ulrich Rising consumer prices due to increased safety measures can be counteracted by buying less of everything, especially stuff we don't need in the first place.
Rising consumer prices due to increased safety measures can be counteracted by buying less of everything, especially stuff we don't need in the first place.
How would this affect freight traffic?
As I mentioned in one of the other threads, on board bearing monitoring systems already exist and certain passenger operators have decades of experience with them by now. This should give a pretty good baseline for how reliable the sensors are.
Greetings from Alberta
-an Articulate Malcontent
tree68 Charlie hebdo If railroads want to continue operating, they need to pay. There are three players in this particular game. The railroads are responsible for the railroad. Upgrades to defect detectors, as discussed, will be covered by the railroads. The second player is the car owners. All of the cars that derailed were private owner cars. They'll be responsible for installing and maintaining the equipment that's been proposed here on the forum. The third player is you, the consumer. You will end up paying for all of these improvements as the costs are passed along to you. Bulletproof tank cars, axle sensors, changes to detectors - all cost money. You'll see those costs on the shelf at your local big box store. You'll complain about the rising costs of things, but remember - you started it. Yes - things can be improved, but this was basically an accident. Some undetected flaw in a single roller bearing may get the blame. It could have been a manufacturing flaw, for all we know. Years ago, following someone's concern about "killer trees" along the highways, someone wrote that we can widen the roads, cut back all the potentially offending trees, etc., but then somebody would end up rolling their car and kill themselves anyhow. A few years ago, despite well-established warnings for a railroad crossing and clear visibility, a dump truck drove into the side of a passenger train. Stuff is going to happen. Figure out what did happen, do what can be done to improve it, and get on with life. Things will never be perfect.
Charlie hebdo If railroads want to continue operating, they need to pay.
There are three players in this particular game.
The railroads are responsible for the railroad. Upgrades to defect detectors, as discussed, will be covered by the railroads.
The second player is the car owners. All of the cars that derailed were private owner cars. They'll be responsible for installing and maintaining the equipment that's been proposed here on the forum.
The third player is you, the consumer. You will end up paying for all of these improvements as the costs are passed along to you. Bulletproof tank cars, axle sensors, changes to detectors - all cost money. You'll see those costs on the shelf at your local big box store. You'll complain about the rising costs of things, but remember - you started it.
Yes - things can be improved, but this was basically an accident. Some undetected flaw in a single roller bearing may get the blame. It could have been a manufacturing flaw, for all we know.
Years ago, following someone's concern about "killer trees" along the highways, someone wrote that we can widen the roads, cut back all the potentially offending trees, etc., but then somebody would end up rolling their car and kill themselves anyhow.
A few years ago, despite well-established warnings for a railroad crossing and clear visibility, a dump truck drove into the side of a passenger train.
Stuff is going to happen. Figure out what did happen, do what can be done to improve it, and get on with life. Things will never be perfect.
To paraphrase tree - When you attempt to 'idiot proof' anything, you just end up finding a higher class of idiots.
Charlie hebdoIf railroads want to continue operating, they need to pay.
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...
charlie hebdo BaltACD Euclid Is that a knee jerk reaction? Your knee is vibrating. Any 'solution' will have some form of cost! Who will participate in paying that cost? A real world question. If railroads want to continue operating, they need to pay. You seem to be afraid of any costs that hurt the profits, as much as you claim to hate PSR, bean counters and Wall Street. Choose If corporate types won't take steps to modernize and operate safely, then your hated government will have to take over.
BaltACD Euclid Is that a knee jerk reaction? Your knee is vibrating. Any 'solution' will have some form of cost! Who will participate in paying that cost? A real world question.
Euclid Is that a knee jerk reaction?
Your knee is vibrating.
Any 'solution' will have some form of cost! Who will participate in paying that cost? A real world question.
If railroads want to continue operating, they need to pay. You seem to be afraid of any costs that hurt the profits, as much as you claim to hate PSR, bean counters and Wall Street. Choose
If corporate types won't take steps to modernize and operate safely, then your hated government will have to take over.
As a personal matter I AM not afraid of costs. I AM not the CEO of any Class 1's or any Rail Leasing Companies. They are the ones that will have to deal with the costs going forward.
The Carriers and the Leasors are the ones that have to make decisions about how they will go about moving forward.
BaltACD Ulrich It seems to me that on board sensors would be a good idea to identify problems early on. Sensors that continuously monitor and report data to both the crew and to management, augmented by wayside detectors. Crews can't see what's going on 8000 ft behind them unless things have already gone terribly wrong. Maybe further along the sensors can feed a computer that does some quick math to establish maximium safe brake pressure given train length, speed, and location in the network. Until then, let the sensors alert the crew, and let their expertise determine how to safely bring the train to a stop. Locomotives have sensors galore.. that same level of technology needs to be applied to the rolling stock. Who will maintain the sensors? What will be the Inspection cycle for the sensors? 92 day inspection cycle like it is for locomotives? 5 years like it is for Air Brake Valves? Somewhere in between? Will sensor inspection require the equipment be taken out of service for the inspection? What happens when a sensor fails while moving in a train? Contine? Set the car out?
Ulrich It seems to me that on board sensors would be a good idea to identify problems early on. Sensors that continuously monitor and report data to both the crew and to management, augmented by wayside detectors. Crews can't see what's going on 8000 ft behind them unless things have already gone terribly wrong. Maybe further along the sensors can feed a computer that does some quick math to establish maximium safe brake pressure given train length, speed, and location in the network. Until then, let the sensors alert the crew, and let their expertise determine how to safely bring the train to a stop. Locomotives have sensors galore.. that same level of technology needs to be applied to the rolling stock.
Who will maintain the sensors? What will be the Inspection cycle for the sensors? 92 day inspection cycle like it is for locomotives? 5 years like it is for Air Brake Valves? Somewhere in between? Will sensor inspection require the equipment be taken out of service for the inspection? What happens when a sensor fails while moving in a train? Contine? Set the car out?
Another issue to be considered is how well will these sensors hold up in a railroad environment. I would think that they would have to be at least as robust as an EOT device.
Euclid CSX Robert Euclid What make you so sure the price would go up? Why would anyone buy it if there was no payback. The paybak should save money that would be otherwise spent on picking up train wrecks and paying the damage claims, settling law suits, etc. If it would save them money they would've already implemented it. That is the old saying: "If it were a good idea someone would have already invented it." Obviously that cannot possibly true. Think about it. If it were true, nothing good would have ever been invented because it all was a bad idea. It had to have been a bad idea because it had never been invented. So if nobody has never invented it yet it can't be a good idea. And there are excellent new breakthrough ideas and inventions coming forward all the time. The potential for improvement is infinite. There is a constant flow of good and bad invention concepts coming forward all the time. In a lot of cases, when condtions align to make a useful new idea possible, many people see the idea and turn it into the same invention at the same time.
CSX Robert Euclid What make you so sure the price would go up? Why would anyone buy it if there was no payback. The paybak should save money that would be otherwise spent on picking up train wrecks and paying the damage claims, settling law suits, etc. If it would save them money they would've already implemented it.
Euclid What make you so sure the price would go up? Why would anyone buy it if there was no payback. The paybak should save money that would be otherwise spent on picking up train wrecks and paying the damage claims, settling law suits, etc.
What make you so sure the price would go up? Why would anyone buy it if there was no payback. The paybak should save money that would be otherwise spent on picking up train wrecks and paying the damage claims, settling law suits, etc.
If it would save them money they would've already implemented it.
That is the old saying: "If it were a good idea someone would have already invented it."
Obviously that cannot possibly true. Think about it. If it were true, nothing good would have ever been invented because it all was a bad idea. It had to have been a bad idea because it had never been invented. So if nobody has never invented it yet it can't be a good idea.
And there are excellent new breakthrough ideas and inventions coming forward all the time. The potential for improvement is infinite. There is a constant flow of good and bad invention concepts coming forward all the time. In a lot of cases, when condtions align to make a useful new idea possible, many people see the idea and turn it into the same invention at the same time.
And things don't exist..until they do.
Obviously that cannot possibly true. Think about it. If it were true, nothing good would have ever been invented because it all was a bad idea. It had to have been a bad idea because it had never been invented.
And there are excellent new breakthrough ideas and inventions coming forward all the time. The potential for improvement is infinite. There is a constant flow of good and bad invention concepts coming forward. In a lot of cases, when condtions align to make a useful new idea possible, many people see the idea and turn it into the same invention at the same time.
Ultimately..you, me, and every other civilized consumer..The cave dwellers we evolved from didn't need any of this stuff..
Sure.. if you have a magic wand. In real life things take time..even good ideas take time, usually years, to develop and implement.
Euclid Ulrich It seems to me that on board sensors would be a good idea to identify problems early on. Sensors that continuously monitor and report data to both the crew and to management, augmented by wayside detectors. Crews can't see what's going on 8000 ft behind them unless things have already gone terribly wrong. Maybe further along the sensors can feed a computer that does some quick math to establish maximium safe brake pressure given train length, speed, and location in the network. Until then, let the sensors alert the crew, and let their expertise determine how to safely bring the train to a stop. Locomotives have sensors galore.. that same level of technology needs to be applied to the rolling stock. I wonder what the pros and cons are with these various sensor systems. Here is an article about current sensor technology for freight trains: Health Monitoring in Real Time https://www.railwayage.com/news/health-monitoring-in-real-time/
It seems to me that on board sensors would be a good idea to identify problems early on. Sensors that continuously monitor and report data to both the crew and to management, augmented by wayside detectors. Crews can't see what's going on 8000 ft behind them unless things have already gone terribly wrong. Maybe further along the sensors can feed a computer that does some quick math to establish maximium safe brake pressure given train length, speed, and location in the network. Until then, let the sensors alert the crew, and let their expertise determine how to safely bring the train to a stop. Locomotives have sensors galore.. that same level of technology needs to be applied to the rolling stock.
I wonder what the pros and cons are with these various sensor systems. Here is an article about current sensor technology for freight trains:
Thanks, this is what I'm talking about..maybe we're not too far from sensors that could have alerted the crew of that E. Palestine train accident before it became catastrophic.
CSX Robert Ulrich that same level of technology needs to be applied to the rolling stock. Add Quote to your Post Ok, lete's do it. Are you going to complain when the price of pretty much everything goes up even more?
Ulrich that same level of technology needs to be applied to the rolling stock. Add Quote to your Post
Ok, lete's do it. Are you going to complain when the price of pretty much everything goes up even more?
No, the cost of the sensors would be offset by fewer accidents and addressing wear issues before they become catastrophic. And..complaining isn't really my thing.
It's an idea, not a PhD thesis, and we're just talking here. Obviously there would be costs involved, and an inspection cycle and maintenance schedule would need to be developed.
One phone call in Chatsworth sure changed a lot of things.
Is that a knee jerk reaction?
Reality.
EuclidIs that a knee jerk reaction?
UlrichIt seems to me that on board sensors would be a good idea to identify problems early on. Sensors that continuously monitor and report data to both the crew and to management, augmented by wayside detectors. Crews can't see what's going on 8000 ft behind them unless things have already gone terribly wrong. Maybe further along the sensors can feed a computer that does some quick math to establish maximium safe brake pressure given train length, speed, and location in the network. Until then, let the sensors alert the crew, and let their expertise determine how to safely bring the train to a stop. Locomotives have sensors galore.. that same level of technology needs to be applied to the rolling stock.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.