Going back to the original post, It is true that in a derailment one car will pull over the next but I also know that those same tight couplers will keep a derailed car upright for a long time. The gain in one scenario might offset the loss in the other.
deleted.
The opinions expressed here represent my own and not those of my employer, any other railroad, company, or person.
I remember reading in TRAINS about a block of tank cars equipped with shelf couplers. A truck on one of the cars came apart and the shelf couplers held that end of the car upright. I believe that the train ran for several miles before the situation was discovered.
CSSHEGEWISCHI remember reading in TRAINS about a block of tank cars equipped with shelf couplers. A truck on one of the cars came apart and the shelf couplers held that end of the car upright. I believe that the train ran for several miles before the situation was discovered.
I've seen more than a few photos of trucks coming off under trains without uncoupling. So yeah, that does happen.
But then you say you'd "wear a harness" even though you can't/shouldn't. I'm happy to answer questions that I can, but if you're going to argue the answers, then I'll just skip it next time. Maybe I read your intent wrong?
You can't take everything to be adversarial (or maybe you can). I know that I will never fit in here because I'm an outsider. I appreciate the help I've received in the past and will hopefully get in the future but until I get banned, I will continue to ask questions that may seem (be?) idiotic to those who have been in the world of railroading most of their adult lives. The fact that I may question certain practices doesn't mean I believe they're wrong. I may simply want to know why I don't fully understand why things are done that way.
An outsider? Most on here are not RRers. Most are fans. So the victim card is not a good one to play.
But don't worry, I'll try to avoid answering any questions you have, and I apologize in advance if I accidently do.
I see very few posters who ask questions who are not long-term RRs. I do, however, see a lot of people reading posts. Far more than the 10 or so that commonly post.
A victim, not even close.
Apology accepted in advance if you make a mistake.
If any members of this forum see something that I've done wrong, please tell me what it was so I can change my behaviour to better conform to the norm.
"behaviour"? Interesting...
I don't know what makes it interesting. What have I done that has been generally offensive? I've tried to be polite.
One place things started to run off the trolley was around the time of 'previous statement. Still stands.'
My opinion -- and it is only an opinion -- is that drawing parallels between a theoretical knowledge of climbing gear and a proper fall-protection system useful for shoves is not the hill you want to die on in a technical argument with working railroaders. It is also my opinion that retreating into passive aggressiveness when a discussion doesn't seem to be going one's way is not a way that friends carry on a friendly discussion... or even a friendly disagreement.
Railroaders can be brusque at times. Since so much of railroading is promptly written in blood, they may not have much time or enthusiasm for unproven ideas presented as objectively 'better' unless the ideas are demonstrated to be objectively safer in the areas of concern -- which long-fall protection systems for mountain climbing, or ever typical shock-absorbing fall protection systems as used in historic preservation, most certainly will NOT be.
Two potential examples: Within the three-odd months you've been here, we had a thread about a dump truck colliding obliquely with a shove move with the person riding the point unable to move away from being horribly crushed at the point of contact. Being tethered by even an elastic contact would have made it even more impossible to swing away from the 'zone of collision'. Meanwhile, a tether system would have to be short enough that feet and ankles of a rider would not be pulled under the car to where injury might result, and restricted in breakaway not to pull a rider around to a dangerous position or trajectory and then release him without warning.
If you're going to argue for a tether, or even a temporary hook with a handle that a shove rider could use to relieve full reliance on hand grip -- you need to understand the various dangers and 'design' accordingly. Be civil about what you don't know even if railroaders are short with you. Let the truth of an argument develop -- even if some people associate it with certain tiresome behaviors (or behaviours) that characterize certain threads here in the past.
As I stated before, I'll never be near a train except at a crossing. I'm just asking questions that help me to understand things from multiple angles/perspectives. I don't want arguments. I'm not trying to convince anyone to change their way of doing things and I'm certainly not telling them that their way of doing things is wrong.
Perry Babin As I stated before, I'll never be near a train except at a crossing. I'm just asking questions that help me to understand things from multiple angles/perspectives. I don't want arguments. I'm not trying to convince anyone to change their way of doing things and I'm certainly not telling them that their way of doing things is wrong.
.
Wonderful example and not a situation that I had thought of. I don't think it's a good idea for me to ask any other questions regarding fall prevention harnesses so I'll just move on to other topics.
Perry BabinWhat have I done that has been generally offensive? I've tried to be polite.
croteauddA very experienced railroader I know, upon seeing the linked video, came to the conclusion that a rail turned over.
People who have been here long enough may remember Nora's thread on 'stupid railroad questions'. I don't recall anyone responding there in a snarky or adversarial manner. I gently suggest that attitude is important, and humility next important, when finding out or learning about things you have accepted in advance that you don't yet understand.
OvermodBut did the rail turn over solely under the weight of the consist, or was it 'helped' by the sequential torque of overturning cars?
Depends on if Transportation or Engineering gets there first.
zugmann Overmod But did the rail turn over solely under the weight of the consist, or was it 'helped' by the sequential torque of overturning cars?
Overmod But did the rail turn over solely under the weight of the consist, or was it 'helped' by the sequential torque of overturning cars?
zugmann Overmod But did the rail turn over solely under the weight of the consist, or was it 'helped' by the sequential torque of overturning cars? Depends on if Transportation or Engineering gets there first.
Or if Transportation & MofW gang up on the Car Dept. and put the cause on a car truck that refused to slew and turned the rail over.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
BaltACDOr if Transportation & MofW gang up on the Car Dept. and put the cause on a car truck that refused to slew and turned the rail over.
I left mechanical out because overmod only presented two scenarios that didn't involve them.
zugmann BaltACD Or if Transportation & MofW gang up on the Car Dept. and put the cause on a car truck that refused to slew and turned the rail over. I left mechanical out because overmod only presented two scenarios that didn't involve them.
BaltACD Or if Transportation & MofW gang up on the Car Dept. and put the cause on a car truck that refused to slew and turned the rail over.
When Transportation & MofW gang up they can put the squeeze on Mechanical in any scenario.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.