|
|
| Re: PHOTOS: MNR Derailment (1261245) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
Page 3 of 4 |
||
|
| (1261534) | |
Re: PHOTOS: MNR Derailment |
|
|
Posted by Dutchrailnut on Sun Dec 1 19:42:04 2013, in response to Re: PHOTOS: MNR Derailment, posted by AlM on Sun Dec 1 18:46:58 2013. it sure as shit was this morning |
|
|
| (1261537) | |
Re: PHOTOS: MNR Derailment |
|
|
Posted by kew gardens teleport on Sun Dec 1 19:44:43 2013, in response to Re: PHOTOS: MNR Derailment, posted by Peter Rosa on Sun Dec 1 19:36:03 2013. Oddly, though, the cars don't seem to have sustained much damage.That's because American trains are specified like tanks. |
|
|
| (1261538) | |
Re: PHOTOS: MNR Derailment |
|
|
Posted by Dutchrailnut on Sun Dec 1 19:45:56 2013, in response to Re: PHOTOS: MNR Derailment, posted by Jersey Mike on Sun Dec 1 19:09:40 2013. no train was on track 2, derailed went accros track 4 into weeds. |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (1261540) | |
Re: PHOTOS: MNR Derailment |
|
|
Posted by Dutchrailnut on Sun Dec 1 19:47:53 2013, in response to Re: PHOTOS: MNR Derailment, posted by j trainloco on Sun Dec 1 19:10:10 2013. no there is no cab signal indication for speed other than MAS or restrictions, a speed reduction to lower MAS is not a speed restriction, and if it were brake failure this conversation won't mean a thing. |
|
|
| (1261548) | |
Re: PHOTOS: MNR Derailment |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Sun Dec 1 19:58:20 2013, in response to Re: PHOTOS: MNR Derailment, posted by Dutchrailnut on Sun Dec 1 19:47:53 2013. Given that the engineer has 20 years in, I'm leaning towards brake stand myself. |
|
|
| (1261550) | |
Re: PHOTOS: MNR Derailment |
|
|
Posted by Dutchrailnut on Sun Dec 1 20:02:13 2013, in response to Re: PHOTOS: MNR Derailment, posted by SelkirkTMO on Sun Dec 1 19:58:20 2013. Correct and all his time is on Hudson and most of it on Bombardier Push-pulls.I know the engineer and he is a very good and very qualified man. |
|
|
| (1261553) | |
Re: PHOTOS: MNR Derailment |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Sun Dec 1 20:08:36 2013, in response to Re: PHOTOS: MNR Derailment, posted by Dutchrailnut on Sun Dec 1 20:02:13 2013. I was kinda expecting that once I saw how much time he had in. That curve is no surprise even to the geese. :( |
|
|
| (1261561) | |
Re: PHOTOS: MNR Derailment |
|
|
Posted by WillD on Sun Dec 1 20:30:44 2013, in response to Re: PHOTOS: MNR Derailment, posted by kew gardens teleport on Sun Dec 1 19:44:43 2013. More likely it was because there wasn't anything in their way to impede their gradual deceleration. |
|
|
| (1261603) | |
Re: PHOTOS: MNR Derailment |
|
|
Posted by j trainloco on Sun Dec 1 21:24:39 2013, in response to Re: PHOTOS: MNR Derailment, posted by SelkirkTMO on Sun Dec 1 19:58:20 2013. So if the control valve on a brake stand fails, there's no way to stop the train? That's certainly not the case on NYCT equipment, and I can't imagine it's the case on MNRR's equipment. |
|
|
| (1261608) | |
Re: PHOTOS: MNR Derailment |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Sun Dec 1 21:33:51 2013, in response to Re: PHOTOS: MNR Derailment, posted by j trainloco on Sun Dec 1 21:24:39 2013. With NYCT, there was another way to win, and that was the conductor EBV in the cab which vented the pipe. Brakes DO fail, and so do stands in locomotives. Damned rare, but it does happen. |
|
|
| (1261611) | |
Re: PHOTOS: MNR Derailment |
|
|
Posted by 600vdc on Sun Dec 1 21:35:53 2013, in response to PHOTOS: MNR Derailment, posted by Train Man Paul : Metro-North's Best Conductor FOR ALL 3 LINES!!! on Sun Dec 1 08:56:20 2013. Seeing the accident videos today sent shudders down my spine. When I lived in Croton and commuted into the city daily on the Hudson Line, I got used to knowing when the train operators would begin breaking for the Spuyten Duyvil curve, normally just after passing Riverdale station. Every once in a great while the t/o would not begin braking as normal, but would wait and then apply the brakes a bit later and at a harder rate. When that would happen there was always that short period of several seconds before the brakes were applied that the "something's wrong" feeling came over me. I hadn't thought about that in years...until today when I saw the train off the tracks.My first thought was he hit the curve too fast. (Operator error or equipment failure???) My second thought was to question if the accident was made worse because the train was being pushed rather than pulled. It would seem technically logical that, if the loco was the last vehicle to leave the track and was still under power, it may have conceivably kept pushing - forcing the cars in front of it further onto the ground. If the train had been pulled, it seems that power would have been lost sooner, lessening the impact. The other question I had was, are the Gennies on diesel power or third rail power at that point? When I was commuting with an earlier generation of locos, including FL9s, they would not always switch to third rail power until the train got below 125th Street (that is, if they switched at all). I seem to remember that the FL9s did not like running on third rail power, even after their rebuilds, from what a couple of engineers told me; and that they wouldn't even bother to switch from diesel power. |
|
|
| (1261620) | |
Re: PHOTOS: MNR Derailment |
|
|
Posted by j trainloco on Sun Dec 1 21:57:51 2013, in response to Re: PHOTOS: MNR Derailment, posted by SelkirkTMO on Sun Dec 1 21:33:51 2013. Yep, that handy cord. I can't believe that commuter equipment wouldn't have something similar. |
|
|
| (1261622) | |
Re: PHOTOS: MNR Derailment |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Sun Dec 1 22:00:54 2013, in response to Re: PHOTOS: MNR Derailment, posted by j trainloco on Sun Dec 1 21:57:51 2013. They do ... but as you're bearing down on a wreck, reaction time is everything when you're still trying to pull some brake. |
|
|
| (1261624) | |
Re: PHOTOS: MNR Derailment |
|
|
Posted by j trainloco on Sun Dec 1 22:06:56 2013, in response to Re: PHOTOS: MNR Derailment, posted by SelkirkTMO on Sun Dec 1 22:00:54 2013. Yes, indeed. How much time do you think he would've had to start his braking before the curve under normal operation? How 5 seconds? 10? |
|
|
| (1261626) | |
Re: PHOTOS: MNR Derailment |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Sun Dec 1 22:09:18 2013, in response to Re: PHOTOS: MNR Derailment, posted by j trainloco on Sun Dec 1 22:06:56 2013. I don't know the territory or the ops, so can't guess at an answer. |
|
|
| (1261627) | |
Re: PHOTOS: MNR Derailment |
|
|
Posted by Train Dude on Sun Dec 1 22:23:58 2013, in response to Re: PHOTOS: MNR Derailment, posted by j trainloco on Sun Dec 1 22:06:56 2013. Since we don't know what the train's speed was before the incident, that would be very difficult to determine. I understand that there is a 75 MPH and a 70 MPH zone that precede the curve. The curve has an MAS of 30 MPH. Assuming that all was normal, a smooth reduction of 40 MPH would likely be in the 40-80 second range given a soft rate of 1/2 to 1 MPH/Sec/sec. |
|
|
| (1261628) | |
Re: PHOTOS: MNR Derailment |
|
|
Posted by JayZeeBMT on Sun Dec 1 22:24:57 2013, in response to Re: PHOTOS: MNR Derailment, posted by Bill West on Sun Dec 1 19:33:20 2013. Ejection IS a propelling force. If you are unrestrained in any vehicle, and there is a way for your body to be thrown from your conveyance in a rollover, (whether you are in a car, on a train or in a hydrofoil, for that matter, makes NO difference). Centrifugal force will hurl you right out into the open air through whatever opening is there.Again, you get a lot of C-spine and collarbone injuries in rollover accidents, which certainly was the case here. The G's generated by the sudden deceleration and rollover in this derailment were clearly sufficient to produce the kind of blunt trauma we see here. As for the safety devices, I'm saying that on MNRR equipment, there would have to be a multiple failure for this accident to have occurred as a result of overspeed alone. Cab signaling, alerters, penalty brake system, all would have had to fail, no? |
|
|
| (1261629) | |
Re: PHOTOS: MNR Derailment |
|
|
Posted by JayZeeBMT on Sun Dec 1 22:28:21 2013, in response to Re: PHOTOS: MNR Derailment, posted by Train Dude on Sun Dec 1 22:23:58 2013. Agreed. We don't know the initial speed or initial deceleration, although given time and precise measurements, the investigators will figure that out. I would imagine the equilibrium speed and overturning speed for this equipment on a curve of a given radius is known, or can be calculated, giving a point from which to start looking for causal factors, no? |
|
|
| (1261630) | |
Re: PHOTOS: MNR Derailment |
|
|
Posted by Train Dude on Sun Dec 1 22:29:50 2013, in response to Re: PHOTOS: MNR Derailment, posted by JayZeeBMT on Sun Dec 1 22:24:57 2013. Not according to what DRN says. It's not like the LIRR system which enforces lower speeds. |
|
|
| (1261631) | |
Re: PHOTOS: MNR Derailment |
|
|
Posted by Train Dude on Sun Dec 1 22:32:09 2013, in response to Re: PHOTOS: MNR Derailment, posted by JayZeeBMT on Sun Dec 1 22:28:21 2013. Recorder should answer all the questions as to initial speed & when and how much brake was applied as well as the final speed before the train left the tracks. |
|
|
| (1261632) | |
Re: PHOTOS: MNR Derailment |
|
|
Posted by JayZeeBMT on Sun Dec 1 22:33:58 2013, in response to Re: PHOTOS: MNR Derailment, posted by Train Dude on Sun Dec 1 22:29:50 2013. I know the LIRR system, which gives the engineer several seconds after a signal aspect change to reduce speed. A bell rings, the engineer must acknowledge by hitting the button, and reduce to whatever the new speed restriction is, or the train stops.I just can't imagine MNRR doesn't have some similar system. The LIRR has had their system since at least the introduction of the M-1s in 1969. |
|
|
| (1261634) | |
Re: PHOTOS: MNR Derailment |
|
|
Posted by JayZeeBMT on Sun Dec 1 22:35:30 2013, in response to Re: PHOTOS: MNR Derailment, posted by Train Dude on Sun Dec 1 22:32:09 2013. Would the recorder also show other events, such as overturning? |
|
|
| (1261637) | |
Re: PHOTOS: MNR Derailment |
|
|
Posted by nostalgia on Sun Dec 1 23:03:28 2013, in response to Re: PHOTOS: MNR Derailment, posted by JayZeeBMT on Sun Dec 1 22:33:58 2013. But you're assuming that the engineer got a signal less favorable than clear to trigger the alerter. Just because there is a curve doesn't mean the signal isn't clear (proceed at maximum authorized speed). |
|
|
| (1261641) | |
Re: PHOTOS: MNR Derailment |
|
|
Posted by JayZeeBMT on Sun Dec 1 23:24:28 2013, in response to Re: PHOTOS: MNR Derailment, posted by nostalgia on Sun Dec 1 23:03:28 2013. I'm thinking the speed restrictions for the curve itself would trigger the alerter through track circuitry? |
|
|
| (1261642) | |
Re: PHOTOS: MNR Derailment |
|
|
Posted by Henry R32 #3730 on Sun Dec 1 23:26:07 2013, in response to Re: PHOTOS: MNR Derailment, posted by SelkirkTMO on Sun Dec 1 22:00:54 2013. Is there a chance the same issue preventing normal brake operation would also impede the cord in the head car? Perhaps the only possible way to stop the train would have been someone in a different car pulling the brake... but the only way to get that to work would be to shout "someone pull the emergency brake!" over the PA and hope someone in one car would succeed... |
|
|
| (1261643) | |
Re: PHOTOS: MNR Derailment |
|
|
Posted by Henry R32 #3730 on Sun Dec 1 23:29:12 2013, in response to Re: PHOTOS: MNR Derailment, posted by JayZeeBMT on Sun Dec 1 23:24:28 2013. My understanding is cab signalling is mainly for variables like signals (because travelling at high speeds there is a not insignificant chance at missing a wayside aspect). MAS is a constant, not a variable, so no need to transmit it to the train (the human operator keeps track of that stuff). |
|
|
| (1261649) | |
Re: PHOTOS: MNR Derailment |
|
|
Posted by Bill West on Mon Dec 2 00:52:45 2013, in response to Re: PHOTOS: MNR Derailment, posted by JayZeeBMT on Sun Dec 1 22:35:30 2013. JayZee -Overturning speed is well known in the engineering office. Do note that it is often way above MAS (30-80% ??) because passenger comfort can be more limiting above 25-45 mph. This is a common reasoning in tilt trains. I wouldn't imagine there is any tilt meter in the event recorder, the derailment point is usually very obvious on the rail.Bill |
|
|
| (1261653) | |
Re: PHOTOS: MNR Derailment |
|
|
Posted by Bill West on Mon Dec 2 01:37:07 2013, in response to Re: PHOTOS: MNR Derailment, posted by Henry R32 #3730 on Sun Dec 1 23:29:12 2013. We are in agreement that ejection is a propelling force. My point was caution against building an argument from the word ejection. Maybe the reporter made an incorrect choice of word and a more accurate word explained the person being outside the car. That would then change what subsequent arguments could be made.Seat inaction alerters only cover a collapse of the engineer, not an incorrect action. Cab signal audio sounds lead to penalty brakes which react for not acknowledging a downward cab signal change or for exceeding the speed on the cab signal. Here the cab signal would have been "proceed" at whatever the prevailing MAS was. It is not a system for reading out the rule book's speed zones to the engineer, that's what his qualifying is for. I would be interested to know if the LIRR's system covers every MAS change or only some of them, say the circumstances where unlike Sputyen Duyvil there once was a history of accidents. Generally, just because you have an accident does not mean that there are devices for every condition and that they will cover every combination of those conditions. Reason forward from what IS there not back from the direness of what happened. Bill |
|
|
| (1261654) | |
Re: PHOTOS: MNR Derailment |
|
|
Posted by Mr. MTA on Mon Dec 2 02:00:55 2013, in response to Re: PHOTOS: MNR Derailment, posted by Henry R32 #3730 on Sun Dec 1 19:31:03 2013. Agreed. |
|
|
| (1261655) | |
Re: PHOTOS: MNR Derailment |
|
|
Posted by Train Dude on Mon Dec 2 02:36:55 2013, in response to Re: PHOTOS: MNR Derailment, posted by JayZeeBMT on Sun Dec 1 22:35:30 2013. I think that at the point of derailment, the event recorder will show instantaneously skewed data such as speed going from 45 MPH to 0 or brake pipe air going to zero at the same instant due to the train coming apart. It will be the data in the minutes and seconds preceding the incident that will likely be the most telling.If the train was moving at or close to MAS and braking was normal then one has to look to mechanical failure or track failure BUT in this case, the engineer has already stated that the train failed to brake properly when a brake was called for. The event recorder should be able to tell how fast the train was going, whether the wheels were turning or locked and when and how much brake was called for. Then the investigators will have a solid basis for their investigation. |
|
|
| (1261657) | |
Re: PHOTOS: MNR Derailment |
|
|
Posted by Train Dude on Mon Dec 2 02:41:52 2013, in response to Re: PHOTOS: MNR Derailment, posted by JayZeeBMT on Sun Dec 1 23:24:28 2013. As DRN has explained, on MNRR, the cab signal would not show a reduced MAS unlike the LIRR system where the engineer gets a code based on the actual MAS. So on the LIRR, if a train is approaching a similar curve, the engineer would receive a "30" code in advance of the curve and the engineer would be required to acknowledge and comply or the emergency brake would apply. |
|
|
| (1261672) | |
Re: PHOTOS: MNR Derailment |
|
|
Posted by Dutchrailnut on Mon Dec 2 04:37:06 2013, in response to Re: PHOTOS: MNR Derailment, posted by JayZeeBMT on Sun Dec 1 23:24:28 2013. no it does not, unless crossing over the cab signal remains at clear cab (MAS) |
|
|
| (1261673) | |
Re: PHOTOS: MNR Derailment |
|
|
Posted by Dutchrailnut on Mon Dec 2 04:41:47 2013, in response to Re: PHOTOS: MNR Derailment, posted by JayZeeBMT on Sun Dec 1 22:35:30 2013. the lead recorders shows:cab signal aspects speed throttle position brakepipe pressure equalizing pressure headlight door light hand brake bell horn E mode/D mode. |
|
|
| (1261675) | |
Re: PHOTOS: MNR Derailment |
|
|
Posted by Dutchrailnut on Mon Dec 2 04:48:22 2013, in response to Re: PHOTOS: MNR Derailment, posted by j trainloco on Sun Dec 1 21:57:51 2013. it does, but time is factor in all crashes. |
|
|
| (1261676) | |
Re: PHOTOS: MNR Derailment |
|
|
Posted by Dutchrailnut on Mon Dec 2 04:49:29 2013, in response to Re: PHOTOS: MNR Derailment, posted by Dutchrailnut on Mon Dec 2 04:41:47 2013. add to that the distance traveledand direction. |
|
|
| (1261677) | |
Re: { Helicopter view } PHOTOS: MNR Derailment |
|
|
Posted by 3-9 on Mon Dec 2 04:56:58 2013, in response to { Helicopter view } PHOTOS: MNR Derailment, posted by Gold_12th on Sun Dec 1 14:58:06 2013. If the abandoned portion of the wye is still there, the crash probably tore it right out. |
|
|
| (1261687) | |
Re: PHOTOS: MNR Derailment |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Mon Dec 2 07:28:26 2013, in response to Re: PHOTOS: MNR Derailment, posted by Peter Rosa on Sun Dec 1 19:36:03 2013. Nonetheless, they are extruded aluminum alloy, there is some skin damage, and I don't think you can spot weld it like you can stainless steel. |
|
|
| (1261698) | |
Re: PHOTOS: MNR Derailment |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Mon Dec 2 08:55:05 2013, in response to Re: PHOTOS: MNR Derailment, posted by Jersey Mike on Sun Dec 1 19:12:33 2013. Forgetting the problem cause , which is a complete failure of this train's braking system, there is a serious flaw in MN's system of ASC and cab-signalling. The train should have been forced to step down in speed 2 signal blocks back. Simply displaying "MAS" would not prevent a 12 year old from hijacking the train and wrecking it.No doubt the feds will say so, and also use as a justification for PTC. |
|
|
| (1261706) | |
Re: PHOTOS: MNR Derailment |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Mon Dec 2 09:28:06 2013, in response to Re: PHOTOS: MNR Derailment, posted by j trainloco on Sun Dec 1 22:06:56 2013. Getting down from 75 to 30 is from 110 feet per second to 44 feet per second, a reduction of 66 feet per second. "Typical" braking is going to be something on the order of 1/10th g or less, or 3 feet per second per second or less.So he should start braking at least 22 seconds in advance of the curve. This is all based on keeping the passengers comfortable even if they are standing up - actual MNRR rules are whatever they are, and like Selkirk I have no idea what they are. |
|
|
| (1261707) | |
Re: PHOTOS: MNR Derailment |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Mon Dec 2 09:31:42 2013, in response to Re: PHOTOS: MNR Derailment, posted by Train Dude on Sun Dec 1 22:23:58 2013. Ah, you answered that already. I came up with 22 seconds based on 2 mph per second. But maybe I was being cavalier about what is comfortable for passengers. |
|
|
| (1261713) | |
Re: PHOTOS: MNR Derailment |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Mon Dec 2 10:12:31 2013, in response to Re: PHOTOS: MNR Derailment, posted by WillD on Sun Dec 1 20:30:44 2013. If their deceleration had been truly gradual no one would have been injured. They did after all probably decelerate from 110 feet per second to 0 feet per second over the course of 4 car lengths, or 340 feet. v^2 = 2ad, so a = 18 feet/sec/sec, or 0.6 g's.It's obviously a combination: they didn't hit any brick wall, but on the other hand if they had been more flimsy they would have sustained more damage being dragged on their side along the dirt. |
|
|
| (1261717) | |
Re: PHOTOS: MNR Derailment |
|
|
Posted by Avid Reader on Mon Dec 2 10:30:28 2013, in response to Re: PHOTOS: MNR Derailment, posted by 600vdc on Sun Dec 1 21:35:53 2013. I'm wondering if LIRR, as well as Metro North are scrutinizing "PUSH" over "PULL" in certain areas.Could this force the creation of more loops at Terminal locations to enable Locos to always be in the lead? |
|
|
| (1261720) | |
Re: PHOTOS: MNR Derailment |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Mon Dec 2 10:40:31 2013, in response to Re: PHOTOS: MNR Derailment, posted by Avid Reader on Mon Dec 2 10:30:28 2013. Nope. Push-Pull is here to stay, and will increase.There is no way to turn trains in NYC, and very little possibility of turning them out in the sticks. ROAR |
|
|
| (1261726) | |
Re: PHOTOS: MNR Derailment |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Mon Dec 2 10:50:58 2013, in response to Re: PHOTOS: MNR Derailment, posted by Avid Reader on Mon Dec 2 10:30:28 2013. Thousands of trains have been successfully pushed through that curve. |
|
|
| (1261728) | |
Re: PHOTOS: MNR Derailment |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Mon Dec 2 10:59:10 2013, in response to Re: PHOTOS: MNR Derailment, posted by Train Dude on Sun Dec 1 22:29:50 2013. The LIRR system DOES control for speed.The speedometer is ringed with lamps for every 10 mph, and a lamp tells the train operator how fast he may travel He cannot exceed a change in indication without reacting to it, lest the train react to it for him. His indication DOES indicate what speed he may operate at, and the signal does change with changing track conditions. I have watched it do so. It does not indicate diverging tracks, but the reduction in speed will tell the engineer that there is something ahead, and he can see the wayside signals. ROAR |
|
|
| (1261729) | |
Re: PHOTOS: MNR Derailment |
|
|
Posted by JayZeeBMT on Mon Dec 2 11:03:07 2013, in response to Re: PHOTOS: MNR Derailment, posted by Broadway Lion on Mon Dec 2 10:40:31 2013. GCT does have a loop track, though. |
|
|
| (1261735) | |
Re: PHOTOS: MNR Derailment |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Mon Dec 2 11:13:32 2013, in response to Re: PHOTOS: MNR Derailment, posted by JayZeeBMT on Mon Dec 2 11:03:07 2013. Sending every Pgh, Wassaic, and Danbury train into the loop track wouldn't work. Not likely that Pgh and Wassaic have wyes either. |
|
|
| (1261747) | |
Re: PHOTOS: MNR Derailment |
|
|
Posted by Dutchrailnut on Mon Dec 2 11:43:54 2013, in response to Re: PHOTOS: MNR Derailment, posted by Avid Reader on Mon Dec 2 10:30:28 2013. it would have made no differece, worldwide on any week day over 35000 push pull trains are operated |
|
|
| (1261755) | |
Re: PHOTOS: MNR Derailment |
|
|
Posted by Stephen Bauman on Mon Dec 2 12:14:45 2013, in response to Re: PHOTOS: MNR Derailment, posted by AlM on Mon Dec 2 11:13:32 2013. Sending every Pgh, Wassaic, and Danbury train into the loop track wouldn't work.That's not how they did it back in the day. There kept an extra engine at GCT. When a train arrived, they hooked the spare to the north end of the train and unhooked the incoming engine. The spare became the outgoing engine and the incoming engine became the spare. If you have one spare assigned to each branch, you have enough equipment to avoid using one of the 6 loop tracks at GCT. Also, the Danbury Branch was electric. |
|
|
| (1261770) | |
Re: PHOTOS: MNR Derailment |
|
|
Posted by Jace on Mon Dec 2 14:31:19 2013, in response to Re: PHOTOS: MNR Derailment, posted by Avid Reader on Mon Dec 2 10:30:28 2013. What difference would push vs. pull make? In Chatsworth the arguement was/is putting a locomotive up front will help protect passengers in the event of a collision (do we therefore need a locomotive on every MU or subway train?). That wasn't the case here where the thought seems to be that the locomotive somehow kept pushing the cars further towards the drink after the intial derailment. Train was in emergency, throttle cut off, locomotive was just another car at that point. Ignoring this and instead following the 'logic' of this out of control locomotive, putting it on the head end is no better: the train surely was have gone into the river. At least then the train wouldn't have jack-knifed... |
|
|
|
Page 3 of 4 |
||
