I just looked at a couple of videos of Amtrak's Philadelphia to Harrisburg line. It was entitled 80 to 90 mph. I don't know when the videos were shot. The trains were being operated in a a push/pull configuration.
When the train is being pushed, or was being pushed, it does not appear that the engineer in the cab car had much protection in the case of a grade crossing accident. Am I correct?
Yup, not much protection.
It was the same with the Budd RDC cars. A wise engineer stayed ready to vacate the cab and run back into the body of the car at a moment's notice if the vehicle on the grade crossing was large, such as a truck or construction equipment. Maybe apply the brake as he leaves, not that it will make a great deal of difference. Some grade crossings were known to be more risky than others.
If I recall, I believe that there are only three grade crossings left on this line. The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania is working to eliminate these, if they have not done so already. In addition to improved safety, would these trains be able to go faster?
A McIntosh If I recall, I believe that there are only three grade crossings left on this line. The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania is working to eliminate these, if they have not done so already. In addition to improved safety, would these trains be able to go faster?
I believe that you are correct with respect to the grade crossings. Also, if I remember correctly, the line has been upgraded, thanks to the Great Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, and can support up to 110 mph.
After one of the trains passed the grade crossing that was a focal point in the video that I referred to, two Amish buggies crossed over the tracks. Presumably, the engineer would not have to run very far into the car in case he or she believed that a collision with the buggy was about to happen.
Whereas Amtrak California is still using a cab car with its Surfliner trains, Amtrak corridor trains pretty much put a battering ram at each end of a push-pull consist -- either a locomotive at one end and a "dummy" (to use a model railroading term) at the other end (OK, OK, a Non-Powered Control Cab or NPCC, a locomotive with the motor removed and replaced with a concrete weight so they didn't have to change out the trucks and springs). I have seen Amtrak place a full fledged 4000 HP locomotive at each end of a shorter (and slower) consist than a British Intercity 125 that has a much lighter weight 2000 HP "power car at each end."
Yes, these consists save lives of Amtrak crews, but you are adding a lot of fuel consuming weight to the train. One thing that has been tried with multiple unit trains (and even RDCs -- think of the old New Haven Roger Williams RDCs with locomotive style cabs) is to put some kind of locomotive front end on it. The French/Rohr Turboliners had such a thing too -- the front part of the power car was a proper locomotive whereas the back half had seats in it.
The problem there is the you lose mix and match flexibility in the consist. An answer to that is to place the drive up in dome or elevated cab set back from the front of the train. You can keep the front of the train free of seats for safety purposes.
The United Aircraft Turbo Train did just that -- the "power car" incorporated a passageway that allowed coupling multiple articulated consists together. The driver was up in a dome, separated from passenger seating in the dome with a Plexiglas partition. There is a video out there of the Turbo Train in Canada having a grade crossing collision with a truck on its inaugural run with press people in the dome to film this, showing the lightweight Turbo Train being stout enough to split the truck in half.
The Japanese have some trains on their 3' 6" gauge lines with that kind of arrangement too -- operator seated up in a dome of a multiple unit car and set back for protection, with a passageway to allow coupling consists together to make bigger consists.
If GM "killed the electric car", what am I doing standing next to an EV-1, a half a block from the WSOR tracks?
Here is a webpage that has some information regarding Metrolink's Collision Absorption Technology Cab Car. I saw several of these during my trip to California in January.
http://www.metrolinktrains.com/agency/page/title/our_trains
Paul Milenkovic Whereas Amtrak California is still using a cab car with its Surfliner trains, Amtrak corridor trains pretty much put a battering ram at each end of a push-pull consist -- either a locomotive at one end and a "dummy" (to use a model railroading term) at the other end (OK, OK, a Non-Powered Control Cab or NPCC, a locomotive with the motor removed and replaced with a concrete weight so they didn't have to change out the trucks and springs).
Whereas Amtrak California is still using a cab car with its Surfliner trains, Amtrak corridor trains pretty much put a battering ram at each end of a push-pull consist -- either a locomotive at one end and a "dummy" (to use a model railroading term) at the other end (OK, OK, a Non-Powered Control Cab or NPCC, a locomotive with the motor removed and replaced with a concrete weight so they didn't have to change out the trucks and springs).
True only for the the bi-level trains, the one Amfleet/Horizon car trainset used has an ex-Sounder "cabbage" "car" (de-engined F40). When in push mode, the first four or five rows are cordoned off and the front half of the lower level is set aside for bicycle storage.
One thought I had with the "cabbage" was putting some ultracaps in them for use as a braking and acceleration booster.
- Erik
For a while, Amtrak was using leased SEPTA Silverliner mu's Phills -Harrisburg. Also downgraded Metroliner mu's. Pennsy often had run trips with MP54's.
erikemTrue only for the the bi-level trains, the one Amfleet/Horizon car trainset used has an ex-Sounder "cabbage" "car" (de-engined F40). When in push mode, the first four or five rows are cordoned off and the front half of the lower level is set aside for bicycle storage.
Ex-Cascades. Lately none of the Cascades trips I have seen have had cabbages, strangely.
There are several commuter operators in the US utilizing cab cars of newer design that feature a locomotive-style nose that affords a higher and better protected location for the engineer. Metrolink is one.
IINM, the FRA mandates better crash protection for all new cab cars built for US service.....
"I Often Dream of Trains"-From the Album of the Same Name by Robyn Hitchcock
Someone mentioned Japan...
The original Shinkansen 'bullets' had that curved pilot below the 'radome' - a system of layered armor that a battleship would envy! I don't doubt that the front ends of the present crop are just as capable of punting a motor vehicle into low orbit.
I have a photo of a private railway MU control car that looks like Darth Vader's helmet. It's heavy steel plate and has 'studs' to keep anything hit from climbing into the d'raiba's window. Aft of the cab, the rest of the train looks like conventional urban heavy rail equipment - until you get to the cab at the opposite end.
In both examples above, the bottom of the armor was/is low enough to keep odd pieces from getting between the wheels and the rails.
Chuck
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.