|
|
Post by clubcar on Mar 1, 2023 18:05:57 GMT -8
Was wondering:
Though it'd be an immense project, could tracks through neighborhoods be set down in a ditch who's depth would be about a third or half the height of a loco or car ? This way if and when there is a derailment cars would be retained in it and kept from flying all over the place.. And making a ditch would be way easier and way less costly than a complete tunnel. They've already done this in several places in Los Angeles..There's one along Valley Blvd. and one below either Alameda st. or Long Beach Blvd. and other areas..
It's the only thing I can come up with which might solve the crisis of trains scattering all over in flames and smoke and thus would greatly protect people and homes in the event of a derailment or other train crash/collision type...Trains could coast down grade into ditch saving fuel for the lift up out of said ditch, evening out fuel costs...
Some probably ask "Why not make the flanges deeper/taller on the wheels ?" But this can't be done. It's a physics thing.. Deeper flange depth would allow the flange to crack/break away.. Thus flange depth has to remain where it is (seemingly about 1.5"-2").
|
|
|
|
Post by Baikal on Mar 2, 2023 5:06:57 GMT -8
Was wondering: Though it'd be an immense project, could tracks through neighborhoods be set down in a ditch who's depth would be about a third or half the height of a loco or car ? This way if and when there is a derailment cars would be retained in it and kept from flying all over the place.. And making a ditch would be way easier and way less costly than a complete tunnel. They've already done this in several places in Los Angeles..There's one along Valley Blvd. and one below either Alameda st. or Long Beach Blvd. and other areas.. It's the only thing I can come up with which might solve the crisis of trains scattering all over in flames and smoke and thus would greatly protect people and homes in the event of a derailment or other train crash/collision type...Trains could coast down grade into ditch saving fuel for the lift up out of said ditch, evening out fuel costs... Some probably ask "Why not make the flanges deeper/taller on the wheels ?" But this can't be done. It's a physics thing.. Deeper flange depth would allow the flange to crack/break away.. Thus flange depth has to remain where it is (seemingly about 1.5"-2").
In the next decade Americans will be digging trenches, but they won't be for trains.
|
|
|
|
Post by edwardsutorik on Mar 2, 2023 7:38:01 GMT -8
The described ditch would not prevent the derailment, only contain the contents of the crash to the ditch. Examining aerial photos of the East Palestine crash will show that the crash wasn't much wider than such a ditch. No nearby buildings were significantly damaged. No people were hurt.
You would have had the same event, only it would have been 30' wide instead of 100'.
I'll note that, rather than digging a big ditch, you could simply move people away from the railroad tracks.
Ed
|
|
|
|
Post by edwardsutorik on Mar 2, 2023 8:19:09 GMT -8
My wife's opinion is that, by keeping the cars in a ditch and not allowing them to go sideways, MORE cars would crash farther back.
Ed
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 2, 2023 9:18:27 GMT -8
I'm a licensed civil engineer. The 3 most important principles of design are drainage, drainage, and drainage (yes that was actually the answer to a college test question). Draining long trenches or ditches can be very problematic, especially when they are below much of the adjacent ground (as in a relatively flat area like Ohio). Where are you going to go with the water? How are you going to achieve about 0.50% minimum pipe slope (typical DOT design requirement). Water bad for traction motors.
Sure in areas out west where it's desert and DRY much of the time, they have depressed railroads to get them under the cross streets. My college best friend did some of those designs.
That AIN'T going to work in Ohio.
The whole thing especially the dumb@ss media coverage is absolutely insane. The railroads have been safely transporting chemicals for many years, with extremely few incidents ever. The actual data is that train transport is as safe as if not safer than any other mode of travel including air transport (when trains crash most people will walk away, which doesn't happen with air travel). My sister's husband has spent a lifetime in air maintenance for United, US Air, Eastern, Piedmont, and Boeing. He can tell you the airlines are drastically cutting corners today and using too many people who factually are unable to read the manuals because they don't speak English. They are even outsourcing maintenance to other countries like Brazil, which ain't good. No wonder there have been more failures lately. He actually hates to fly now. Doesn't trust the commercial airlines. I now avoid flying at all cost if I can.
So, big government and the environmental wackjobs are totally against any and all pipelines, and we probably don't want all the hard-core chemicals moving on the highways, either. What to do???
Maybe a good investment would be more hotbox detectors spaced closer together so the trains get stopped before hot bearings get out of control? One other question is why was the train not stopped sooner after the initial hot journal indication? That's actually a very good question that the NTSB is looking into. My money is that they will blame human error for not stopping the train in time.
Tank cars are already double wall construction with end shields to protect the tanks themselves, are they going to have to go to triple wall construction? 4 walls?
Government over-reach to tell the railroads how many crew members must be on a train and how long trains cannot be is not going to be very helpful. I mean are we going to go back to having somebody in a caboose to watch the train? How are they going to see the whole train?
There is always a human element and NO amount of engineering can remove ALL the risk. It is simply not possible. I think the railroads are doing a pretty good job overall despite this one tragic incident.
Design must always be balanced against the actual cost of implementation. Some things just cost far too much for the incremental additional improvement of safety that might be achieved.
|
|
|
|
Post by loco8107 on Mar 2, 2023 20:54:29 GMT -8
I'm a licensed civil engineer. The 3 most important principles of design are drainage, drainage, and drainage (yes that was actually the answer to a college test question). Draining long trenches or ditches can be very problematic, especially when they are below much of the adjacent ground (as in a relatively flat area like Ohio). Where are you going to go with the water? How are you going to achieve about 0.50% minimum pipe slope (typical DOT design requirement). Water bad for traction motors. Sure in areas out west where it's desert and DRY much of the time, they have depressed railroads to get them under the cross streets. My college best friend did some of those designs. That AIN'T going to work in Ohio. The whole thing especially the dumb@ss media coverage is absolutely insane. The railroads have been safely transporting chemicals for many years, with extremely few incidents ever. The actual data is that train transport is as safe as if not safer than any other mode of travel including air transport (when trains crash most people will walk away, which doesn't happen with air travel). My sister's husband has spent a lifetime in air maintenance for United, US Air, Eastern, Piedmont, and Boeing. He can tell you the airlines are drastically cutting corners today and using too many people who factually are unable to read the manuals because they don't speak English. They are even outsourcing maintenance to other countries like Brazil, which ain't good. No wonder there have been more failures lately. He actually hates to fly now. Doesn't trust the commercial airlines. I now avoid flying at all cost if I can. So, big government and the environmental wackjobs are totally against any and all pipelines, and we probably don't want all the hard-core chemicals moving on the highways, either. What to do??? Maybe a good investment would be more hotbox detectors spaced closer together so the trains get stopped before hot bearings get out of control? One other question is why was the train not stopped sooner after the initial hot journal indication? That's actually a very good question that the NTSB is looking into. My money is that they will blame human error for not stopping the train in time. Tank cars are already double wall construction with end shields to protect the tanks themselves, are they going to have to go to triple wall construction? 4 walls? Government over-reach to tell the railroads how many crew members must be on a train and how long trains cannot be is not going to be very helpful. I mean are we going to go back to having somebody in a caboose to watch the train? How are they going to see the whole train? There is always a human element and NO amount of engineering can remove ALL the risk. It is simply not possible. I think the railroads are doing a pretty good job overall despite this one tragic incident. Design must always be balanced against the actual cost of implementation. Some things just cost far too much for the incremental additional improvement of safety that might be achieved. It was mentioned in the preliminary report that the temp was well below 150 (I believe 103) that would have made them stop. It was right after they passed the next detector that all hell broke loose and the temp had jumped to 253. A home camera showed it was a hopper car 2 cars ahead of the tanks that was the problem car. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 3, 2023 7:40:59 GMT -8
The first reading was not merely 103 degrees, but 103 degrees above ambient temperature, so it was definitely heating up. What I was trying to allude to is that generally they always want to blame the crew...which I do think is unfortunate. The NTSB et al really want to know why that train kept moving as long as it did before the emergency brake application.
I also just found an article that suggests if there were accelerometers on the freight cars that bearing failures could be detected much farther in advance, before they get out of control.
My sister's father-in-law was blamed (as a conductor) for a head on collision that occurred on Penn Central during the 1970's, which he always said the signals were faulty, and at that time PC was refusing to believe that anything could possibly be wrong with their signal system. He was riding in the caboose. The engineer proceeded into the path of an oncoming train. The engineer and headend brakemen on my relative's train were killed, so not alive to testify as to what happened. The rear end brakeman and my relative, the conductor, waded through pools of diesel fuel to get the other crew out of their cab before it all caught fire. Then the railroad blamed the conductor and fired him. Since he had been a good employee for more than 20 years at the time, the union made a trade for somebody they wanted to get rid of and got the conductor re-instated, but it took a couple years. He finished something like 40 years on the railroad (PRR/PC/CR) without any further incidents. Had started his career washing steam engines, and then firing them, at Renovo, PA.
|
|
|
|
Post by Baikal on Mar 3, 2023 8:37:21 GMT -8
...the union made a trade for somebody they wanted to get rid of and got the conductor re-instated, but it took a couple years.
So they sacrificed somebody else? A person who had nothing to do with the incident? How could your relative live with himself after that? He should have quit, instead he chose dishonor and $.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 3, 2023 20:17:08 GMT -8
Bullcrap. So incredibly arrogant and judgmental of you. You don't know what you are talking about.
Labor unions do this kind of stuff all the time. The employee they wanted to get rid of had a serious drug or alcohol problem and they were looking for an excuse to get rid of the person, and to get my relative back.
This happens with state employees, too. They can be caught stealing on video camera (we had one dead to rights on video stealing from the DOT coffee fund when I worked there) and the Union (AFSCME in that case) will promote them to equipment operator, which is subject to random drug and alcohol testing, and then they can get rid of them quickly once they fail the tests. You have to have a good reason to fire people that can be documented thoroughly and stealing from the coffee fund wasn't good enough.
Drugs and alcohol don't belong on the railroad or in anybody driving state DOT trucks.
Also, you clearly missed or otherwise ignored my statement about the malfunctioning signal system. This was Penn Central. They actually had signal problems. They scapegoated the employees. They had instituted CTC and it was not working correctly. Their maintenance was so bad that some trains actually rocked themselves off the badly warped rail joints. By 1969 they were losing $1 million a day. There's video out there illustrating just how bad their track actually was.
My relative served 40 honorable years for the railroads.
When NS tells prospective conductor trainees about the random drug testing, and that marijuana can show up in your system 30 days after you use it, HALF the people get up and leave the room.
|
|
|
|
Post by Baikal on Mar 4, 2023 7:58:42 GMT -8
Bullcrap. So incredibly arrogant and judgmental of you. You don't know what you are talking about. Labor unions do this kind of stuff all the time. The employee they wanted to get rid of had a serious drug or alcohol problem and they were looking for an excuse to get rid of the person, and to get my relative back. This happens with state employees, too. They can be caught stealing on video camera (we had one dead to rights on video stealing from the DOT coffee fund when I worked there) and the Union (AFSCME in that case) will promote them to equipment operator, which is subject to random drug and alcohol testing, and then they can get rid of them quickly once they fail the tests. You have to have a good reason to fire people that can be documented thoroughly and stealing from the coffee fund wasn't good enough. Drugs and alcohol don't belong on the railroad or in anybody driving state DOT trucks. Also, you clearly missed or otherwise ignored my statement about the malfunctioning signal system. This was Penn Central. They actually had signal problems. They scapegoated the employees. They had instituted CTC and it was not working correctly. Their maintenance was so bad that some trains actually rocked themselves off the badly warped rail joints. By 1969 they were losing $1 million a day. There's video out there illustrating just how bad their track actually was. My relative served 40 honorable years for the railroads. When NS tells prospective conductor trainees about the random drug testing, and that marijuana can show up in your system 30 days after you use it, HALF the people get up and leave the room.
Oh noes! We can't have judgmentalism in 2023!
Bottom line, your realtive had no honor. He let someone else take the fall for something unrelated. Plus you could be making stuff up about the other guy's work history. Boasting about getting someone fired for an unrelated incident is creepy. How can you be trusted now?
I'm a former UTU-represented conductor. Most of the represented employees I worked with would have a serious issue with a member "trading" another member's job away, in any case. Later I was a RR officer, I can see both "sides" of things.
This is a non-modeling subject, I'm done with it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 5, 2023 13:00:10 GMT -8
My relative DIDN'T get anyone fired. He was the one who had been BLAMED for the wreck despite malfunctioning signals and his being in the caboose at the other end of the train. He was very well respected by the other railroaders to the point that 20 years later after his retirement, railroad people asked how he was doing when they saw me at a model train store.
I DID work at a DOT where an employee who had a serious drinking problem factually STOLE from the coffee fund (it was hundreds of dollars). MY friend was the union steward, and he resigned as union steward after the union (AFSCME) PROMOTED the thief because my friend couldn't believe the union was that immoral. Subsequently, the thieving employee failed the random drug and alcohol testing for the equipment operator position and was fired by the DOT. I was later told by HR that the whole thing was done on purpose so they could get rid of the bad employee.
Also my friend the former union steward ended up taking his life not all that long after the incident in question though there were other contributing factors.
So DON"T talk to me about dishonor! EVER!
I was NOT bragging about setting up someone to be fired, and for the record, I HATE unions for various good reasons based upon real life experiences. At 18 they factually told my mother that I could only get a job with the DOT if I was registered democrat.
Do NOT call me dishonest; clearly you have no idea whatsoever of what it means to be a licensed professional engineer and the required ethics requirements of that profession.
|
|
|
|
Post by clubcar on Mar 5, 2023 17:17:02 GMT -8
My wife's opinion is that, by keeping the cars in a ditch and not allowing them to go sideways, MORE cars would crash farther back. Ed No. I'm not saying ditch is no wider than trains (what is it, 8'-10' wide cars/locos ?).. I just mean if track is in a ditch say 15' wide and there is a derailment it would prevent cars from flying all over, possibly hitting autos and homes and would retain spilled contents..But someone in thread does make a good point about ditch drainage problems.. So perhaps my 'down in ditch' idea is no good anyway as ditch could possibly fill up with rain/snow.. And, yet, as I'd pointed out, we already have miles of track below street level in Los Angeles.. So whatever they do for drainage could/would possibly work for main lines everywhere..(tho not that I ever want trains hidden everywhere).. I do love to see trains.. Just lookin' out for public safety..  |
|
|
|
Post by edwardsutorik on Mar 5, 2023 18:05:27 GMT -8
The cars didn't "fly all over" in the East Palestine wreck. The width of the wreck is about 100'. Didn't hit any cars. Didn't hit any homes. Rather than dig a ditch, it'd be cheaper to just not build closer than 50' from the tracks. .
By constraining the train in a ditch just wider than the train, the cars have no place to disperse their momentum, and they'll just continue to hit the rear of the preceding cars. So now you have a wreck that's in a nice straight line, but with twice as many cars. And down in a ditch.
Ed
|
|
|
|
Post by Baikal on Mar 5, 2023 18:27:35 GMT -8
My wife's opinion is that, by keeping the cars in a ditch and not allowing them to go sideways, MORE cars would crash farther back. Ed No. I'm not saying ditch is no wider than trains (what is it, 8'-10' wide cars/locos ?).. I just mean if track is in a ditch say 15' wide and there is a derailment it would prevent cars from flying all over, possibly hitting autos and homes and would retain spilled contents..But someone in thread does make a good point about ditch drainage problems.. So perhaps my 'down in ditch' idea is no good anyway as ditch could possibly fill up with rain/snow.. And, yet, as I'd pointed out, we already have miles of track below street level in Los Angeles.. So whatever they do for drainage could/would possibly work for main lines everywhere..(tho not that I ever want trains hidden everywhere).. I do love to see trains.. Just lookin' out for public safety..
The energy involved in a major rail derailment will easily pop freight cars up & out of a small ditch. Drainage is a problem, only one of many (access, utilities, road & rail bridges, etc....)
The entire 20-mile Alameda Corridor (south) project in LA County cost about $3.2 billion in today's dollars. The 10 mile long trench section is 50 ft wide x 30 ft deep- If built today a similar urban trench would cost approx $250-300 million per mile or more. (Transport projects always cost more than estimates, it's the law)
The Alameda projects (south & east) primary function is increasing highway and rail speeds & volume by removing grade xings. And air quality, yada yada. Safety is a secondary benefit.
There is no longer easy money for any big civil engineering projects in the US, rail or anything else. Even an urban grade separation in the US can cost $100-150 million.
If you want to see big engineering projects, and lots of them, look to China and to a lesser extent Russia and India. The Belt and Road Initiative will have some trenches, for sure. No High Speed Rail for America, for multiple good reasons.
I was a project manager for Calif Dept of Transportation Rail Program (engineers were a tool in my toolbox).
An urban
|
|
|
|
Post by csx3305 on Mar 25, 2023 18:31:12 GMT -8
The Class 1’s don’t even want to pay for two man crews, or enough sick days to go to a dental appointment, and you expect them to start excavating ditches to sink their mains into?
|
|
