Befuddled Amtrak should bring in foreign experts because they know what they are doing

[Paul Milenkovic]

CMStPnP

 

 

ronrunner

N EUROPE THE RAILWAYS ARE OWNED BY THE STATE AND PAYDED FOR BY CONFISCOTOTORY HIGH TAX RATES BY SOCIALIST REGIEMES THAT PROVIDE CRADLE TO GRAVE BENIFITS IN EXCHANGE FOR THRRE CITIZENS FREEDOM TO SUCEED AND FAIL UNLIKE USA

 

 

In part I do think this is why the attention or focus to preserving human life in a crash is missing.   The other part of course is a healthy dose of arrogance in that they do not engineer towards failure like the United States does because they do not believe they should.    Remember the fly by wire Airbus's that crashed due to lack of redundant or backup systems.    See this again and again with European designs even more so among the poorer European countries.

 

Even human factors can combine with non-electronic purely mechanical 19th century technology such as the the failure to set enough hand brakes and follow the procedure to test them resulting in a fatal accident.

Yes, the Airbus is fly-by-wire, no, it indeed has redundancy and backups, yes, there are human-factor considerations on its safe use.  Do you have an accident in mind -- each one is different?

Can one defend the assertion that US engineers consider failure modes that European engineers disregard after the 737 Max debacle?

[Overmod]

Paul Milenkovic

Can one defend the assertion that US engineers consider failure modes that European engineers disregard after the 737 Max debacle?

I am tempted to note 'don't feed the trolls' because this isn't really a 'European vs. Murican' design issue -- kept to the correct railroad context.

The only American stab at practical HSR can only run to 150mph, and is colossally overweight even there, with the usual kinds of issue that come with Flying Pig mass (cracked yaw dampers, disintegrating disc-brake webs).  The Europeans long ago went to designing trains to be more like aircraft, deciding to reduce the risk of accidents with better CEM and better operations; one reason I noted the Eischeide accident as an 'unfair' comparison is that it involved collision and collapse of a (non-CEM-optimized) bridge; we might as well look at the car that hit the cat bridge in Bostian's wreck (fat lot of good the nominal 850K buff compliance did there!) or the car that buckled in the middle at Cayce.

Any true HSR even at original 186mph speed is unlikely to meet the old RPO standard... and would require a waiver... and could be expected to use CEM to manage passenger survival at the expense, and it's a humongous expense, of even slight damage 'totaling' the train's equipment.  Those European governments have the access to funds and the political will to build equipment that way, and to run it at the speeds designed.

While the Amtrak attempt to revitalize the old NH Mack railbus idea with 100mph Leyland 'failed to thrive' I can't help but wonder if it's moral successor four decades later might have promise where things like Colorado Railcar DMU failed.

https://www.railjournal.com/fleet/first-revolution-vlr-vehicle-for-britain-ready-for-testing/

 Note the implicit suitability for hydrogen fuel-cell operation.  Increasing the shell size to take advantages of American clearances would not be major, especially if wound-fiber construction to make the shells were used...

Major CEM in the noses likely expected for American practice.  Interesting to see how good (or otherwise) they can get the car to ride on various routes with various sorts of track quality.