CONTENT REMOVED FOR TRANSFER TO NEW THREAD 3/26/24
Detectors i'm familiar with, ours and some foriegn line and/or their predecessors, don't tell an engineer to stop the train. They give a defect tone and message, "defect detected" and maybe detector location if it's talk on defect only. They won't state the nature or location of the defect until the entire train is clear of the detector. Many detectors check for multiple defects. Those require clearing the detector. Stand alone type detectors, usually dragging equipment detectors, also only give the detector location and that a defect has been detected. When you know that you're going over a dragging equipment only type, you are to bring the train to a stop and then the detector gives the location.
Within the last few years, the powers that be decided the minimum speed for our detectors should be set at 15 mph. Most were set slower, some you could even stop on and the detector would not lose it's count on the train when you started moving again. By setting the minimum speed to 15 mph, you will almost always get an integrity failure from the detector if you go much below 15. It can still detect defects, but won't give a type or location for any defect(s) detected. Then the entire train needs to be inspected.
Regarding DP's. The remotes can't be placed into dynamics unless the head end is in idle or power. The system won't let remotes go into dynamics when the head end is in power.
We are to run the fence up on all DP trains. EMS when engaged immediately puts up the fence if it already isn't up. Then EMS normally tries to run the train in a slack bunched condition most of the time.
Jeff
Erik_MagHmmm, setting up the DPU so that only the rearmost units go into dynamic braking?
One obvious problem with rear-end dynamic is the prospect of getting knuckles or snatching drawbars, which is going to produce more problems than it solves. Another is the reliability of radio integrity 'just when it is most needed'.
Overmod But it could be argued, and hopefully will be recognized somewhere in the accident analysis, that any attempt to brake that train which relaxed tension across the car with the defective truck would have produced the beginning of derailment just as substantially.
But it could be argued, and hopefully will be recognized somewhere in the accident analysis, that any attempt to brake that train which relaxed tension across the car with the defective truck would have produced the beginning of derailment just as substantially.
Hmmm, setting up the DPU so that only the rearmost units go into dynamic braking?
One of the points here is that a 'sudden stop' is NOT something the 'final hotbox detector demanded' (at East Palestine). Nor was it something the associated people who would be following data from the proposed set of detectors would demand.
Nor -- pointedly -- was the response of the crew to produce a 'sudden stop'. For that, they would have put the train in emergency, with the almost certain result of a derailment at least similar to the one which occurred.
I'm again surprised that Euclid, of all people, is taking up this line of 'argument', since he well understands the importance of maintaining tension in keeping cars in line when they have become derailed or damaged.
And this isn't about progressively damaged bearings (which hotbox detectors are never going to reliably detect anyway, for reasons I and others have covered ad nauseam. The bearing failed, likely produced the burned axle and truck lozenging, and resulting fiery signature long before the 'final detector' noted bearing temperature above normal and called for an inspection stop. By being conservative with the brakes, likely to prevent stressing the hot bearing by applying brakeshoe pressure on it, their choice of 'heavy dynamic' appears to have actually provoked the initial chain of derailment that resulted in the accident. But it could be argued, and hopefully will be recognized somewhere in the accident analysis, that any attempt to brake that train which relaxed tension across the car with the defective truck would have produced the beginning of derailment just as substantially.
I think if this discussion is going to be continued, it ought to be moved to an East Palestine thread. There is a discussion to be had about whether, when operating dense traffic under restricted speed for visibility reasons, a defect-detector alarm should induce a rapid stop without giving some warning to following, or facing, trains. But that's entirely different technologically from issues with bearings.
Euclid BaltACD Speed isn't a killer - the sudden stop from being at speed is. That’s interesting. A sudden stop is exactly what the final hotbox detector demanded, hmm…
BaltACD Speed isn't a killer - the sudden stop from being at speed is.
Speed isn't a killer - the sudden stop from being at speed is.
My comment applies to the human body, not failing bearings. Bearings fail because their safe friction level has been exceeded - once exceeded it will continue to get worse and worse until it ultimately fails. Once the failure sequence starts it will continue until failure - speed will increase the rate of failure as more revolutions of the bearing surfaces will happen in a shorter span of time, the failure 'spot' is brought to the 'friction spot' more frequently.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
NTSB's final report isn't out yet, so everything is "preliminary."
Their saying that the bearing was the "likely" cause kinda says it was the cause. They didn't seem to offer any alternatives.
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...
Euclid BaltACD We all know a failed bearing was the cause of the East Palestine derailment, ... Although the bearing failure seems to coincide with the East Palestine wreck, the last I understood from the NTSB was that they had not yet concluded that the bearing failure caused the derailment.
BaltACD We all know a failed bearing was the cause of the East Palestine derailment, ...
We all know a failed bearing was the cause of the East Palestine derailment, ...
Get educated and read the article I linked.
In no world does a failed bearing in a train operating at track speed end up in a 'happily ever after' scenario.
We all know a failed bearing was the cause of the East Palestine derailment, however, how much do we know about current roller bearings on cars?
https://www.railwayage.com/mechanical/freight-cars/bearing-down-on-bearings/
Someone wasn't having a good day...
The falling cranes looked a bit like horses with their legs buckling.
Railroading is not the only industry with Speed issues
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YDOMhCCpTnQ
jeffhergertWe had a rear end collision about 15 years ago, an engineer from the same engineer's class that I was in. As I recall, they were running on red intermediates, shortly after the signal rules had been changed to a "Restricted Proceed" which no longer required stopping at each intermediate. Listening to radio traffic, he thought the train ahead of him was farther down the line. There was a second train in between his train and the train he heard on the radio. (It may have not been a conversation, but hearing a talking hot box detector announcing a train clearing it.) Why he didn't heed the intermediates and run restricted speed I can't say. He got fired, but reinstated because of a technicality. The railroad screwed something up on the paperwork. His brother, also an engineer with a few more years, also got into trouble around the same time and reinstated along the same lines. Eventually they both again got fired for something else. Last I knew, the brother from my class went into train service for Amtrak. The other brother went to the CN, got canned there and left railroading. Jeff
He got fired, but reinstated because of a technicality. The railroad screwed something up on the paperwork. His brother, also an engineer with a few more years, also got into trouble around the same time and reinstated along the same lines. Eventually they both again got fired for something else. Last I knew, the brother from my class went into train service for Amtrak. The other brother went to the CN, got canned there and left railroading.
Screw ups tend to repeatedly screw up.
We had a rear end collision about 15 years ago, an engineer from the same engineer's class that I was in. As I recall, they were running on red intermediates, shortly after the signal rules had been changed to a "Restricted Proceed" which no longer required stopping at each intermediate. Listening to radio traffic, he thought the train ahead of him was farther down the line. There was a second train in between his train and the train he heard on the radio. (It may have not been a conversation, but hearing a talking hot box detector announcing a train clearing it.) Why he didn't heed the intermediates and run restricted speed I can't say.
EuclidWell, whatever caused restricted speed to fail to prevent the Pennsylvania collision on the NS, both the NTSB and the FRA are investigating it. I expect quick results from the FRA.
Euclid Well, whatever caused restricted speed to fail to prevent the Pennsylvania collision on the NS, both the NTSB and the FRA are investigating it. I expect quick results from the FRA.
All the back and forth about: 1/2 the sight distance, extent of vision, etc.
This is written in RR rules. We as teachers signed contracts each year. Our specific jobs were mentioned but fine print included, "and outher jobs as assigned". What could that be? Never stated. In RR rules, regardless of wording, DON'T Hit Anything is the meaning.
While in the National Guard we approached a low water bridge, 3/4 ton p-u, pullying a fully loaded tool trailer (pintel hook attachment). Tool trailer (very heavy) had only parking brake. The incline to bridge caused the tool trailer to push us down the incline and off the low water concrete "bridge". Truck was shoved off into the creek and turned over in the slow moving progress. MP ticket writer said driving too fast. I volunteered he was very careful to go extremely slow. MP, I gotta say something.
Same site years before an APC did the same. All inside perished. endmrw0316241240
Paul of Covington Some people enjoy arguing.
Some people have NEVER been in a position to operate a train - no matter the territory or the speed.
jeffhergert There's a similar rule, Movement on Other than Main Track. It reads almost exactly like the Restricted Speed rule except: It doesn't have a 20 mph top speed limit and you don't have to look out for a broken rail. (To be fair, most other than main tracks would already have an imposed speed limit of 20 mph or less.)
There's a similar rule, Movement on Other than Main Track. It reads almost exactly like the Restricted Speed rule except: It doesn't have a 20 mph top speed limit and you don't have to look out for a broken rail. (To be fair, most other than main tracks would already have an imposed speed limit of 20 mph or less.)
On the BNSF line between Willmar, MN to Ashland, NE via Sioux City, the method of operation on the mainline is track warrant control and the sidings have a track speed of 35 MPH. (I think I've mentioned the rather unusual dual-control-switches-in-dark-territory used on this line as well.) But sidings in track warrant territory are other-than-majn track that fall under the rule Jeff describes above. So it would be rare for a train heading into the siding to be going 35 MPH and not be violating the rule.
So, we put a 20 MPH head-end speed restriction on the sidings. Doesn't affect train speeds much, and allows MOW to still use portable derails as a force of track protection. (We don't have portable derails rated for higher than 20 MPH.) Once the head-end is back on the mainline, they can start accelerating to 35.
Dan
Some people enjoy arguing.
_____________
"A stranger's just a friend you ain't met yet." --- Dave Gardner
BaltACDBovine Dump
Agreed.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.