|
Cygni posted:the end made me lol I was hoping that the boom gate would bop the tractor on the top of the air deflector. Ah well.
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2017 04:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 08:22 |
|
|
iospace posted:On one hand, THERE IS A HORN FOR A REASON. Snow like that eats both visibility and sound. Doesn't surprise me that he didn't hear it coming since it's pretty unlikely he has a window cracked in that weather. The end was pretty funny.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2017 05:20
|
|
|
Good news is, trucker likely gets to go home. Good news for the railroad, they might only pay hundreds of thousands of dollars instead of thousands of thousands for a fatality. Can't think how the crossing would fail to activate, I thought they failed safe. The signal could get shunted by salty slush covering the crossing, but that should make the gates go down and stay down.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2017 06:42
|
|
|
NoWake posted:Good news is, trucker likely gets to go home. One article I read said that it had failed down and the railroad had sent someone out to fix it a bit before this happened. So I bet that guy screwed something up. http://www.sltrib.com/news/4858097-155/video-shows-frontrunner-train-hit-semi-trailer quote:The gates at the intersection, about 1100 North and 100 East, had been affected by severe ice and snow conditions that day and had successfully defaulted to the "down and active" position, the release says. But after an employee arrived at the location, the gates moved to the upward position and remained up as the crash occurred.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2017 07:11
|
|
|
nm posted:One article I read said that it had failed down and the railroad had sent someone out to fix it a bit before this happened. So I bet that guy screwed something up. Oops.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2017 08:10
|
|
NoWake posted:Good news is, trucker likely gets to go home. youre a dispatcher and former t&e employee right? don't the operating rules specify a slow order or a flagman or something?
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2017 23:24
|
|
|
Signals failed to operate, leaving the driver to assume that things were safe and cross in front of the train. Sad. If there were no level crossing signals, drivers would check the crossing themselves and cross only when safe, averting this tragedy. Later today I will be signing an executive order banning the installation of new level crossing signals, and the removal of existing level crossing signals. This is a great plan, a great plan, that will lead to thousands of tremendous jobs as well as returning freedom to you, the American people.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 00:32
|
|
|
MassivelyBuckNegro posted:youre a dispatcher and former t&e employee right? don't the operating rules specify a slow order or a flagman or something? MOW, but now working for a materials supplier. Any crossing malfunction I'd seen out on our tracks was a mandatory stop & protect for the train crew. Sucked for Amtrak, since the conductor would need to walk up a few car lengths to drop the fusee in the road. Didn't matter if it was the middle of nowhere with perfect sight lines, stop and protect. I'd imagine all the Class 1s have something similar on the books. I read some of the comments on the reddit thread, sounded like the signal maintainer had showed up and raised the gates to let traffic through, so that's why the gates were up in the first place. For some reason the train crew didn't stop short of the crossing, either they didn't get the order from the dispatcher or someone specifically told them to blow right on through at speed. Somebody screwed up baaad.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 00:42
|
|
|
IPCRESS posted:Signals failed to operate, leaving the driver to assume that things were safe and cross in front of the train. Sad. Why not just remove all the at-grade crossings everywhere and rebuild them as over- or underpasses? This would truly lead to a job explosion.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 01:11
|
|
NoWake posted:MOW, but now working for a materials supplier. yeah i figured. unrelated: i was talking to my track maintenance vendor a few months ago and he mentioned that the dc metro was paying six figure salaries to laborers and obviously more to anyone with a skill. the next month a totally new crew showed up.
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 01:33
|
|
|
Pigsfeet on Rye posted:Why not just remove all the at-grade crossings everywhere and rebuild them as over- or underpasses? This would truly lead to a job explosion. It certainly does when you do it through suburbs, as Metro Trains have helped a whole lot of people in Melbourne discover over the past year with their level crossing removal projects. It's a great way to explode the local mainstreet jobs and put shops out of business! 
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 01:50
|
|
|
I guarantee they open the CIL and find a jumper in there by some idiot signalman that didn't know what they are doing.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 02:28
|
|
|
iospace posted:On one hand, THERE IS A HORN FOR A REASON. The driver was probably screwed because THE loving CROSSING WARNING WASN'T WORKING. Seriously, why the gently caress wasn't the crossing warning working? nm posted:One article I read said that it had failed down and the railroad had sent someone out to fix it a bit before this happened. So I bet that guy screwed something up. Yep, this one's on the railroad. Vincent Van Goatse fucked around with this message at 03:03 on Jan 26, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 03:01
|
|
|
Pigsfeet on Rye posted:Why not just remove all the at-grade crossings everywhere and rebuild them as over- or underpasses? This would truly lead to a job explosion. Why not just build a wall at all crossings?
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 03:13
|
|
|
Vincent Van Goatse posted:The driver was probably screwed because THE loving CROSSING WARNING WASN'T WORKING. Seriously, why the gently caress wasn't the crossing warning working? Yes, but you're still supposed to be aware. While yes, it's on the railroad, aren't you taught in driver's ed to double check to make sure? I was, at least.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 18:30
|
|
|
Neddy Seagoon posted:It certainly does when you do it through suburbs, as Metro Trains have helped a whole lot of people in Melbourne discover over the past year with their level crossing removal projects. It's a great way to explode the local mainstreet jobs and put shops out of business! True, but goddamn is it so much better to not have to wait for trains going past anymore - or my favourite, they stop the train at the point where the crossing is engaged and we all get to sit there for 15-20 minutes whilst whatever is happening back at the control room finishes.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2017 00:45
|
|
|
They rebuilt one of our stations near a level crossing as two platforms, one on either side of the boom gates. Not a bad idea, though of course a bridge would always be better.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2017 04:41
|
|
|
Australia.jpg Theres a loving bushfire burning in the background 
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2017 08:05
|
|
|
Ferremit posted:Australia.jpg You can still see the sky, though? 
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2017 08:23
|
|
|
iospace posted:Yes, but you're still supposed to be aware. While yes, it's on the railroad, aren't you taught in driver's ed to double check to make sure? I was, at least. Visibility looked pretty bad in that video, he might not have seen the train at all, double check or not.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2017 07:13
|
|
|
http://imgur.com/gallery/Ql2qj
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2017 06:35
|
|
|
http://fox13now.com/2017/01/30/uta-fires-employee-for-causing-accident-involving-frontrunner-train-fedex-truck/ I friggin called it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2017 02:01
|
|
|
Latest update on UP's work on restoring the big boy: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lak-ch765YA dem leaf springs 
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2017 00:39
|
|
|
JuffoWup posted:Latest update on UP's work on restoring the big boy: Inb4 those guys over at TrainOrders.com start spouting all the things they see wrong in that video and how it will inevitably end with Ed Dickens blowing up the locomotive.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2017 04:40
|
|
|
But does RTD's Silverliner V have the equalizer beam problem that SEPTA has?
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2017 05:45
|
|
|
The NTSB released the final report on the Grain/Oil train collision that happened in North Dakota three years ago. As suspected, a faulty axle on one of the grain cars failed, causing it to derail and partially block the second track of the double main line. Due to this accident the NTSB is recommending that all used axles go through extra non-destructive testing before being put into service and all future oil trains have five buffer cars between the power units and the tank cars instead of the one currently required. Full NTSB Report Page: https://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/pages/casselton_nd.aspx Video of the crash from both the lead power units, the actual collision occurs around the 2:35 mark: https://youtu.be/ZhraoVIJ1OE
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2017 04:54
|
|
|
^^^^^ Holy crap, you posted it while I was still typing! ^^^^^ NTSB releases train crash video from Bakken Oil Train in ND http://kfgo.com/news/articles/2017/feb/07/video-ntsb-says-broken-axle-from-casselton-derailment-had-manufacturing-defect/ B4Ctom1 fucked around with this message at 18:53 on Feb 8, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2017 04:56
|
|
|
What are the advanced brake systems that NTSB says could help reduce the severity of the accident? Also, what caused the auto emergency stop? Do the cars have electric sensors in their wheels?
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2017 08:33
|
|
|
CharlesM posted:What are the advanced brake systems that NTSB says could help reduce the severity of the accident? It's a failsafe system, the brakes on trains are pneumatic, if they lose pressure they immediately go to the "Apply 100% NOW" setting. When the car in question derailed, it severed the air hose, causing the system to lose pressure. On the oil train, the emergency braking was commanded by the crew. Kilonum fucked around with this message at 08:43 on Feb 8, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2017 08:39
|
|
|
PremiumSupport posted:The NTSB released the final report on the Grain/Oil train collision that happened in North Dakota three years ago. As suspected, a faulty axle on one of the grain cars failed, causing it to derail and partially block the second track of the double main line. I agree with the 5 buffer cars. Especially when you're dealing with GEs. One buffer isn't enough when those things decide to eat a turbo.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2017 15:01
|
|
|
PremiumSupport posted:Video of the crash from both the lead power units, the actual collision occurs around the 2:35 mark: https://youtu.be/ZhraoVIJ1OE
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2017 15:33
|
|
|
evil_bunnY posted:I always forget how anemic train brakes are. He's got the e-brakes on and he's losing maybe 1mph/s. lol Show me a way to slow down over a mile of 80+ ton train cars faster, that is actually feasible in the real world.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2017 16:38
|
|
|
It looks like they already tried the most obvious thing.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2017 16:45
|
|
|
Terrible Robot posted:lol More braking capacity per-car? Here's a 487-ton vehicle stopping from 200mph in 30 seconds: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qc_v6tXsv6g
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2017 17:04
|
|
|
As far as obvious goes, I think the 'Schwellenpflug' trumps retro-rockets:
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2017 17:07
|
|
|
Cocoa Crispies posted:More braking capacity per-car? Here's a 487-ton vehicle stopping from 200mph in 30 seconds: Yeah, but it's not just about braking capacity, it's friction that actually stops the vehicle. The video shows a 487-ton jet with rubber tires interfacing a concrete surface. There's a lot of surface area there which generates a lot of friction when brakes are applied slowing the jet quite quickly. The tanker train in question weighed in at a staggering 8,480-tons and used steel wheels contacting a steel rail, a setup designed to minimize friction. The actual contact area per wheel is about the same as a dime, and given 8 contacts per car the whole train only has around 850 dimes worth of contact with the rails. Doing some rounding and quick math and you have each dime sized steel-on-steel contact expected to somehow stop around 10-tons worth of moving mass. There's just no way it's going to happen quickly, and adding more braking capacity just means that the wheels are more likely to lock and slide like a car on ice instead of rolling to a stop.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2017 18:06
|
|
|
How about, like, a big long shoe that extended down from the car itself to basically pick the car up off the rail? You could just have a few cars retrofitted or specific braking cars that sat throughout the train. Friend of mine works for bnsf up in glacier, they just got a whole boatload of snow so he's having a fun time dealing with trains stuck in the snow and the tracks blocked by avalanches.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2017 18:17
|
|
|
A "specific braking car" that puts out more brake force than the other cars sounds like a pretty easy way to snap a train in half. Clearly what we need are parachutes.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2017 18:36
|
|
|
Terrible Robot posted:lol NoWake posted:As far as obvious goes, I think the 'Schwellenpflug' trumps retro-rockets: evil_bunnY fucked around with this message at 18:55 on Feb 8, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2017 18:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 08:22 |
|
|
evil_bunnY posted:I'm not saying they're purposefully under engineered, it's just shocking how little influence they have on their speed. Momentum is a hell of a thing. And inertia. E: for comparison, the 747 at 200 mph has the same energy as the train in question at 48 mph. However, a train at 11.5 mph has the same momentum, if I remember my formulas right. iospace fucked around with this message at 19:02 on Feb 8, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2017 18:48
|
|