|
|
| Re: BREAKING: NJ TRANSIT Train Collides With Wall At Station In Hoboken (1410484) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
Page 4 of 6 |
||
|
| (1410741) | |
Re: BREAKING: NJ TRANSIT Train Collides With Wall At Station In Hoboken |
|
|
Posted by Jersey Mike on Fri Sep 30 07:49:17 2016, in response to Re: BREAKING: NJ TRANSIT Train Collides With Wall At Station In Hoboken, posted by WillD on Fri Sep 30 04:06:58 2016. Except that passengers are not permitted to exit from the front of the car, so they were likely at the rear end of the lead car.Sometimes they open up the front steps, depends on the crew. There is not enough isle room for everyone who may have been seated to crowd to the back, especially since the train was SRO. Absolutely not. How can you possibly make that argument when we've just seen a train depart the track area resulting in a fatality? Regardless of why the train did not stop, it cannot be debated that the bumping block was inadequate to the task of protecting the structure from the train. The car struck and travelled past past the bumping block before striking the structure. Neither the bumping block or the car were designed to absorb any meaningful amount of crash energy without deforming either the railcar's cabin or the station's structure. There could not be a better illustration of the dangers present even at low speeds with the FRA's insistence on absolute structural rigidity. It's not the rolling stock's job to deform. It's the rolling stock's job to make the other guy deform. Remember, the most likely accident will be of the grade crossing variety where you have low bow trucks with construction equipment getting stuck on the tracks. You suspect wrongly. At most terminal stations in Europe the bumping blocks are equipped to dissipate energy when they're struck by a train. The displacement may be a matter of a few feet, or something a bit more elaborate: We have those here, but Hoboken was never upgraded from its original 1907 configuration. I'm assuming it will be now. I'm all for better bumper blocks at stub terminals. Just like in a grade crossing accident, the cheap stuff gets crushed and the railcar can be returned to service. |
|
|
| (1410742) | |
Re: BREAKING: NJ TRANSIT Train Collides With Wall At Station In Hoboken |
|
|
Posted by Jersey Mike on Fri Sep 30 07:52:51 2016, in response to Re: BREAKING: NJ TRANSIT Train Collides With Wall At Station In Hoboken, posted by TransitChuckG on Fri Sep 30 06:19:18 2016. From the photos there was little deformation of the coach body and the engineer was not seriously injured. The crash looks way worse than it was since the roof fell down. The train stayed in line, which is why I suspect the speed was < 20mph as per the ATC system. |
|
|
| (1410743) | |
Re: [PHOTOS] Re: BREAKING: NJ TRANSIT as of 2:00 PM |
|
|
Posted by Jersey Mike on Fri Sep 30 08:06:00 2016, in response to Re: [PHOTOS] Re: BREAKING: NJ TRANSIT as of 2:00 PM, posted by WillD on Fri Sep 30 04:13:12 2016. It's not the train's job to protect anyone in it's path. Same reason why I'm pissed off at the new pedestrian safety crap being built into motor vehicles. Hoboken probably should have had better overrun barriers installed. |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (1410745) | |
Re: BREAKING: NJ TRANSIT Train Collides With Wall At Station In Hoboken |
|
|
Posted by Dutchrailnut on Fri Sep 30 08:12:55 2016, in response to Re: BREAKING: NJ TRANSIT Train Collides With Wall At Station In Hoboken, posted by Bill Newkirk on Fri Sep 30 06:02:57 2016. I am sure they downloaded both event recorders, both cabcar and locomotive. |
|
|
| (1410746) | |
Re: BREAKING: NJ TRANSIT Train Collides With Wall At Station In Hoboken |
|
|
Posted by Dutchrailnut on Fri Sep 30 08:17:53 2016, in response to Re: BREAKING: NJ TRANSIT Train Collides With Wall At Station In Hoboken, posted by Jersey Mike on Fri Sep 30 07:49:17 2016. most NJT cab cars if not al, do not have exit at front on engineers side. |
|
|
| (1410749) | |
Re: BREAKING: NJ TRANSIT Train Collides With Wall At Station In Hoboken |
|
|
Posted by terRAPIN station on Fri Sep 30 08:19:57 2016, in response to Re: BREAKING: NJ TRANSIT Train Collides With Wall At Station In Hoboken, posted by Dutchrailnut on Fri Sep 30 08:12:55 2016. They'll get around to it when they can. |
|
|
| (1410750) | |
Re: BREAKING: NJ TRANSIT Train Collides With Wall At Station In Hoboken |
|
|
Posted by 3-9 on Fri Sep 30 08:22:52 2016, in response to Re: BREAKING: NJ TRANSIT Train Collides With Wall At Station In Hoboken, posted by Jersey Mike on Fri Sep 30 07:36:17 2016. No, their pilot doctrine was at least as important. The Japanese had their pilots fly until they died or were incapable of flying. That means the lessons those pilots learned were much less likely to get passed onto new recruits, so their level of training wasn't much better than the beginning of the war, if not worse. OTOH, the US rotated their pilots out after a certain period so that they could pass on the lessons they learned, so the US had a constant supply of pretty good to good pilots. Couple that with aircraft that could eventually fly faster, maneuver, had good armament, AND take damage, as well as the losses at Coral Sea and the catastrophic losses at Midway, and you end up with things like the Marianas Turkey Shoot. |
|
|
| (1410751) | |
Re: BREAKING: NJ TRANSIT Train Collides With Wall At Station In Hoboken |
|
|
Posted by Dutchrailnut on Fri Sep 30 08:28:15 2016, in response to Re: BREAKING: NJ TRANSIT Train Collides With Wall At Station In Hoboken, posted by terRAPIN station on Fri Sep 30 08:19:57 2016. Pretty sure it was done within hour or so, as their trying to preserve as much of preceding events.The recorder while running overrides previous info, most of them are on a 24 or 48 hour loop. |
|
|
| (1410754) | |
Re: BREAKING: NJ TRANSIT Train Collides With Wall At Station In Hoboken |
|
|
Posted by fset on Fri Sep 30 08:49:29 2016, in response to Re: BREAKING: NJ TRANSIT Train Collides With Wall At Station In Hoboken, posted by Dutchrailnut on Fri Sep 30 08:28:15 2016. Friday morning Sept 1, 2016, walking through the Dey Street passageway to the WTC Occulus, there is considerably less foot traffic.I spoke to an attendant (who was holding a people counter) at the entrance of 4WTC, and she said that at 8:15am, usually there are 600 people and today, FRI morning, there were just about 250. I can see that most of the foot traffic comes via Hoboken. |
|
|
| (1410756) | |
Re: BREAKING: NJ TRANSIT Train Collides With Wall At Station In Hoboken |
|
|
Posted by terRAPIN station on Fri Sep 30 08:51:32 2016, in response to Re: BREAKING: NJ TRANSIT Train Collides With Wall At Station In Hoboken, posted by Dutchrailnut on Fri Sep 30 08:28:15 2016. Dude, I was being sarcastic or something. Of course they downloaded the data ASAP. It's not even a question. |
|
|
| (1410759) | |
Re: BREAKING: NJ TRANSIT Train Collides With Wall At Station In Hoboken |
|
|
Posted by Jersey Mike on Fri Sep 30 09:10:37 2016, in response to Re: BREAKING: NJ TRANSIT Train Collides With Wall At Station In Hoboken, posted by Dutchrailnut on Fri Sep 30 08:17:53 2016. If the platform is on the other side, sometimes the crew will let people exit out the front. SEPTA crews usually allow it, MARC and NJT not so much. |
|
|
| (1410760) | |
Re: [PHOTOS] Re: BREAKING: NJ TRANSIT as of 2:00 PM |
|
|
Posted by The Silence on Fri Sep 30 09:25:38 2016, in response to Re: [PHOTOS] Re: BREAKING: NJ TRANSIT as of 2:00 PM, posted by WillD on Fri Sep 30 04:13:12 2016. And then the people on the train would have died instead... |
|
|
| (1410765) | |
Re: BREAKING: NJ TRANSIT Train Collides With Wall At Station In Hoboken |
|
|
Posted by Steamdriven on Fri Sep 30 09:33:21 2016, in response to Re: BREAKING: NJ TRANSIT Train Collides With Wall At Station In Hoboken, posted by Jersey Mike on Fri Sep 30 07:49:17 2016. I'm with Jersey Mike here. Make an over-run absorber out of a shipping container (there's 20 and 40 foot standard sizes) filled with non-combustible energy absorbing material. This can be done in-house and CHEAP. You could cut the container's height and panel the sides for appearance. To get fancy, you could make a gravel pit under the container.That dumb box can do more than you'd think. You can stop your rubber-tire car from 30mph within 30 feet, not including your reaction time. About half that rate of decel would halt a train from 20 mph in 20 feet. Standing px won't like it, but it beats hitting a rigid idiot-barrier. A full car-length absorber is easily made but excessive, imho. |
|
|
| (1410767) | |
Re: [PHOTOS] Re: BREAKING: NJ TRANSIT as of 2:00 PM |
|
|
Posted by terRAPIN station on Fri Sep 30 09:38:18 2016, in response to Re: [PHOTOS] Re: BREAKING: NJ TRANSIT as of 2:00 PM, posted by The Silence on Fri Sep 30 09:25:38 2016. No, not necessarily. |
|
|
| (1410770) | |
Re: BREAKING: NJ TRANSIT Train Collides With Wall At Station In Hoboken |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Fri Sep 30 10:32:19 2016, in response to Re: BREAKING: NJ TRANSIT Train Collides With Wall At Station In Hoboken, posted by Fulton Frank on Thu Sep 29 22:19:14 2016. Governors are people too, and they mangle facts just as well as any reporter, maybe even worse so, because for them facts are fungible. they be what they want them to be.ROAR |
|
|
| (1410774) | |
Re: BREAKING: NJ TRANSIT Train Collides With Wall At Station In Hoboken |
|
|
Posted by Fine, Howard, and Fine on Fri Sep 30 10:44:42 2016, in response to Re: BREAKING: NJ TRANSIT Train Collides With Wall At Station In Hoboken, posted by Jersey Mike on Fri Sep 30 00:08:44 2016. Passengers are saying the train didn't slow down at all. Which may be an exaggeration. I'm sure if they took those switches at 25MPH it might've felt like a lot faster.10MPH would've damaged the bumping post and coupler at least some, but not have caused the mayhem seen in the pictures. In the famous CTA incident where the train ran up over the bumping post at the airport station, and then up the escalator, the NTSB quotes the speed at bumping post known to be 23MPH from event recorders. I think the speed in Hoboken's incident yesterday could've been similar or higher. If all the homeland security money spent on video surveillence didn't result in this incident being recorded on video, boy, I sure really hope somebody got fired for that blunder. |
|
|
| (1410776) | |
Re: BREAKING: NJ TRANSIT Train Collides With Wall At Station In Hoboken |
|
|
Posted by IRTRedbirdR33 on Fri Sep 30 10:47:42 2016, in response to Re: BREAKING: NJ TRANSIT Train Collides With Wall At Station In Hoboken, posted by Fine, Howard, and Fine on Fri Sep 30 10:44:42 2016. Passengers are saying the train didn't slow down at all. Which may be an exaggeration. I'm sure if they took those switches at 25MPH it might've felt like a lot faster. This raises the question of what the conductor was doing. He of all people should have been aware of the speed and could have pulled the emergency brake. The engineer wasn't the only employee on that train. Larry, RedbirdR33 |
|
|
| (1410777) | |
Re: BREAKING: NJ TRANSIT Train Collides With Wall At Station In Hoboken |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Fri Sep 30 10:47:50 2016, in response to Re: BREAKING: NJ TRANSIT Train Collides With Wall At Station In Hoboken, posted by terRAPIN station on Fri Sep 30 08:51:32 2016. The recorder in the locomotive was readily accessible. The recorder in the cab car was not due to the danger of the collapsed building, and the fact that there is asbestos in that part of the building. They will get it when it is safe. Which is to say, they may have it by now.ROAR |
|
|
| (1410778) | |
Re: BREAKING: NJ TRANSIT Train Collides With Wall At Station In Hoboken |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Fri Sep 30 10:50:20 2016, in response to Re: BREAKING: NJ TRANSIT Train Collides With Wall At Station In Hoboken, posted by IRTRedbirdR33 on Fri Sep 30 10:47:42 2016. LION was under the impression that a new Federal Regulation required a second crewman to be present in the cab when the train was approaching a snarky curve or a terminal.Is so or not? If so where was the conductor? Probably got lax and was somewhere else in the cab car. ROAR |
|
|
| (1410783) | |
Re: BREAKING: NJ TRANSIT Train Collides With Wall At Station In Hoboken |
|
|
Posted by Henry R32 #3730 on Fri Sep 30 12:13:43 2016, in response to Re: BREAKING: NJ TRANSIT Train Collides With Wall At Station In Hoboken, posted by WillD on Fri Sep 30 04:06:58 2016. You raise good points but I wasn't talking about the bumping block at all, just the railcar. You may want to thoroughly read a post before dismissing it with statements like:Absolutely not. How can you possibly make that argument when we've just seen a train depart the track area resulting in a fatality? Regardless of why the train did not stop, it cannot be debated that the bumping block was inadequate to the task of protecting the structure from the train. The car struck and travelled past past the bumping block before striking the structure. Wasn't talking about the bumping block. You suspect wrongly. At most terminal stations in Europe the bumping blocks are equipped to dissipate energy when they're struck by a train. Again wasn't talking about a bumping block, I was talking about a euro specced car with the exact bumping block that was there. It would have shredded the car killing half the people in it while saving the one passenger on the platform - bad trade. |
|
|
| (1410786) | |
Re: BREAKING: NJ TRANSIT Train Collides With Wall At Station In Hoboken |
|
|
Posted by terRAPIN station on Fri Sep 30 12:23:50 2016, in response to Re: BREAKING: NJ TRANSIT Train Collides With Wall At Station In Hoboken, posted by Broadway Lion on Fri Sep 30 10:47:50 2016. It wasn't a collapsed building! It appears to be simple weather-protection covering the gap between the train shed and the terminal building. Unless there is more damage that I missed. |
|
|
| (1410787) | |
Re: BREAKING: NJ TRANSIT Train Collides With Wall At Station In Hoboken |
|
|
Posted by Dutchrailnut on Fri Sep 30 12:38:41 2016, in response to Re: BREAKING: NJ TRANSIT Train Collides With Wall At Station In Hoboken, posted by Fine, Howard, and Fine on Fri Sep 30 10:44:42 2016. lets all wait for official word on speed and not go by eyewitness info. |
|
|
| (1410788) | |
Re: BREAKING: NJ TRANSIT Train Collides With Wall At Station In Hoboken |
|
|
Posted by Dutchrailnut on Fri Sep 30 12:40:25 2016, in response to Re: BREAKING: NJ TRANSIT Train Collides With Wall At Station In Hoboken, posted by Broadway Lion on Fri Sep 30 10:50:20 2016. comming into platform, I would guess the Conductor to be positioned by a door to let passenger off train , so again a lot of speculation. |
|
|
| (1410789) | |
Re: BREAKING: NJ TRANSIT Train Collides With Wall At Station In Hoboken |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Fri Sep 30 12:53:24 2016, in response to Re: BREAKING: NJ TRANSIT Train Collides With Wall At Station In Hoboken, posted by SelkirkTMO on Thu Sep 29 20:50:01 2016. While a reported doesn’t necessarily have to now the titles and duties of every last employee of every trade or business, getting an engineer/train operator and a conductor confused is tantamount to mixing up an airline pilot with a flight attendant! |
|
|
| (1410794) | |
Re: BREAKING: NJ TRANSIT Train Collides With Wall At Station In Hoboken |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Fri Sep 30 13:04:43 2016, in response to Re: BREAKING: NJ TRANSIT Train Collides With Wall At Station In Hoboken, posted by randyo on Fri Sep 30 12:53:24 2016. No worries, Randy. You don't have to sell me on that concept. The same reporter who mixed that up would be just as likely to have a next story on how the Russkies broke into a bank's computer system with just as much technical detail to work with, and not get right. :)Like Dutch and others point out, media is only good for a brief "something happened" and those who actually care are on their own to fish for more details. Headline writers aren't a good source for that, that's why we have to wait for the FRA. |
|
|
| (1410796) | |
Re: BREAKING: NJ TRANSIT Train Collides With Wall At Station In Hoboken |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Fri Sep 30 13:10:02 2016, in response to Re: BREAKING: NJ TRANSIT Train Collides With Wall At Station In Hoboken, posted by Dave on Fri Sep 30 06:55:48 2016. While the throttle on the cab car would have been in forward, since the loco was at the rear of the train, the loco’s throttle would likely have been in reverse. |
|
|
| (1410799) | |
Re: BREAKING: NJ TRANSIT Train Collides With Wall At Station In Hoboken |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Fri Sep 30 13:18:48 2016, in response to Re: BREAKING: NJ TRANSIT Train Collides With Wall At Station In Hoboken, posted by Dave on Fri Sep 30 06:58:49 2016. Exactly! |
|
|
| (1410800) | |
Re: BREAKING: NJ TRANSIT Train Collides With Wall At Station In Hoboken |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Fri Sep 30 13:19:25 2016, in response to Re: BREAKING: NJ TRANSIT Train Collides With Wall At Station In Hoboken, posted by merrick1 on Fri Sep 30 07:16:52 2016. Or “points’ When referring to switches. |
|
|
| (1410801) | |
Re: BREAKING: NJ TRANSIT Train Collides With Wall At Station In Hoboken |
|
|
Posted by WillD on Fri Sep 30 13:22:40 2016, in response to Re: BREAKING: NJ TRANSIT Train Collides With Wall At Station In Hoboken, posted by Henry R32 #3730 on Fri Sep 30 12:13:43 2016. I read your post, but you cannot consider the railcar in isolation from the bumping block. Your speculation about how the occupants of a European railcar would have fared requires you to accept that the bumping block would be changed out for one which is able to share the task of deforming to absorb energy with the railcar.It would have shredded the car killing half the people in it while saving the one passenger on the platform - bad trade. Really?  No fatalities on the train or on the platform. The lightweight EMU is hardly "shredded". Again, your attempts to use speculation to bolster the case for the FRA's foolish rigidity requirements is without merit. In Hoboken's case even with the inadequate bumping block the victim might have survived and the structure could have remained intact had the train incorporated crash energy management systems to keep it from jumping the block. And no, nobody on the train would have died. It isn't a trade-off and it's foolish to try to make that specious argument. |
|
|
| (1410802) | |
Re: [PHOTOS] Re: BREAKING: NJ TRANSIT as of 2:00 PM |
|
|
Posted by WillD on Fri Sep 30 13:28:05 2016, in response to Re: [PHOTOS] Re: BREAKING: NJ TRANSIT as of 2:00 PM, posted by Jersey Mike on Fri Sep 30 08:06:00 2016. So wait, now we DO have to make the right of way to suit our trains? I thought that's why we had to have the heaviest, most inefficient trains possible. After all, it's FAR too expensive to design the ROW for crash avoidance. But now that you have us hauling around an extra ten to twenty tons in the foolish quest to maintain a rigid structure in a crash at anything over 20mph, we STILL have to design our ROW to cater to the rolling stock? Shit, you may as well just go UIC and be done with it if that's going to be your attitude. |
|
|
| (1410803) | |
Re: BREAKING: NJ TRANSIT Train Collides With Wall At Station In Hoboken |
|
|
Posted by WillD on Fri Sep 30 13:34:30 2016, in response to Re: BREAKING: NJ TRANSIT Train Collides With Wall At Station In Hoboken, posted by Dave on Fri Sep 30 06:55:48 2016. I think it's safe to say SteamDriven was referring to forward as being the direction running along the longitudinal axis from the cab car, regardless of how the traction motor control relays in the locomotive might have been set. But if the locomotive had been at full throttle while approaching the buffer as he speculates then the passengers likely would have reported that, rather than simply stating the train did not slow down. |
|
|
| (1410805) | |
Re: BREAKING: NJ TRANSIT Train Collides With Wall At Station In Hoboken |
|
|
Posted by WillD on Fri Sep 30 13:39:51 2016, in response to Re: BREAKING: NJ TRANSIT Train Collides With Wall At Station In Hoboken, posted by Steamdriven on Fri Sep 30 09:33:21 2016. Yeah, you definitely do agree with Jersey Mike. Especially that bit about us having to shell out the big bucks for tank-like railcars, the money to keep those behemoths running, and then pay even more money to crash-proof the ROW when we discover our standards based on crash survival are without the slightest grounding in reality.What makes you think a shipping container is going to be any more effective than existing deformable buffers? It's certainly going to consume a lot more material, all of which will have to go somewhere in the event of a collision. Are you prepared to have a passenger be struck by a piece of metal flying away from your jury-rigged deformable barrier? |
|
|
| (1410808) | |
Re: BREAKING: NJ TRANSIT Train Collides With Wall At Station In Hoboken |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Fri Sep 30 13:46:11 2016, in response to Re: BREAKING: NJ TRANSIT Train Collides With Wall At Station In Hoboken, posted by Bill Newkirk on Fri Sep 30 06:00:18 2016. Ahem ... euroloco. :)
|
|
|
| (1410809) | |
Re: BREAKING: NJ TRANSIT Train Collides With Wall At Station In Hoboken |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Fri Sep 30 13:51:58 2016, in response to Re: BREAKING: NJ TRANSIT Train Collides With Wall At Station In Hoboken, posted by Dave on Fri Sep 30 06:58:49 2016. Yeah. Driver is a lot more understandable than conductor. |
|
|
| (1410810) | |
Re: BREAKING: NJ TRANSIT Train Collides With Wall At Station In Hoboken |
|
|
Posted by Dutchrailnut on Fri Sep 30 14:02:50 2016, in response to Re: BREAKING: NJ TRANSIT Train Collides With Wall At Station In Hoboken, posted by randyo on Fri Sep 30 13:10:02 2016. the throttle only goes 0 - 8 in notches.direction is selected and reverser sets direction. |
|
|
| (1410816) | |
Re: BREAKING: NJ TRANSIT Train Collides With Wall At Station In Hoboken |
|
|
Posted by Steamdriven on Fri Sep 30 14:43:34 2016, in response to Re: BREAKING: NJ TRANSIT Train Collides With Wall At Station In Hoboken, posted by WillD on Fri Sep 30 13:34:30 2016. "I think it's safe to say SteamDriven was referring to forward as being the direction running along the longitudinal axis from the cab car"Yes, that's what I meant. Forward motion in terms of the direction the train was operating in. |
|
|
| (1410818) | |
Re: BREAKING: NJ TRANSIT Train Collides With Wall At Station In Hoboken |
|
|
Posted by Steamdriven on Fri Sep 30 15:02:03 2016, in response to Re: BREAKING: NJ TRANSIT Train Collides With Wall At Station In Hoboken, posted by WillD on Fri Sep 30 13:39:51 2016. " Especially that bit about us having to shell out the big bucks for tank-like railcars, the money to keep those behemoths running..."Not that part, not in entirety anyway. What I meant was that the simple bumping block should be replaced by something that can absorb energy. For the trains, you have to look at the whole operating condition. Is it sharing track with freight trains? Are there public grade crossings? etc, etc. Bank vault vs beer can leaves out too much to be a useful argument, though beer can won't work here. In the US a train has to be at least stout enough to deal with a piece of heavy equipment on a low trailer stuck on a crossing. That's predictable issue, you know such crashes will happen. Off the cuff, p'haps a stout railcar with a short crush zone and each end can provide both some weight savings and as good as practical safety. As it stands, trains seem to find any excuse to flop on their sides, which always results in injuries, often in fatals. That Amtrak that got confused/whatever about an unprotected curve blew out some windows during its off-road expedition, resulting in people being macerated between the train and the gravel. Same thing at Spuyten Duyvil. |
|
|
| (1410819) | |
Re: BREAKING: NJ TRANSIT Train Collides With Wall At Station In Hoboken |
|
|
Posted by Joe on Fri Sep 30 15:08:23 2016, in response to Re: BREAKING: NJ TRANSIT Train Collides With Wall At Station In Hoboken, posted by WillD on Fri Sep 30 13:22:40 2016. Which German terminal did that Track 15 photo come from?Danke. |
|
|
| (1410820) | |
Re: BREAKING: NJ TRANSIT Train Collides With Wall At Station In Hoboken |
|
|
Posted by Steamdriven on Fri Sep 30 15:10:00 2016, in response to Re: BREAKING: NJ TRANSIT Train Collides With Wall At Station In Hoboken, posted by WillD on Fri Sep 30 13:39:51 2016. "What makes you think a shipping container is going to be any more effective than existing deformable buffers?"Obviously I don't mean 'just plonk down a shipping container'. I wrote of engineering such a container with a collapsible filling (which doesn't 'go anywhere', it crushes like foam). That would include testing including containment of 'metal flying away'. Such as item is pretty well foolproof; it works regardless of what shape equipment hits it and can't be ridden over. A railroad specific buffer also works, but may carry a steep $$$ markup. My point was to illustrate how simple and inexpensive a crushable buffer can be. |
|
|
| (1410826) | |
Re: BREAKING: NJ TRANSIT Train Collides With Wall At Station In Hoboken |
|
|
Posted by Dave on Fri Sep 30 15:42:17 2016, in response to Re: BREAKING: NJ TRANSIT Train Collides With Wall At Station In Hoboken, posted by Steamdriven on Fri Sep 30 15:02:03 2016. Macerated? Do you know the definition of the word? I don't think so. |
|
|
| (1410829) | |
Re: BREAKING: NJ TRANSIT Train Collides With Wall At Station In Hoboken |
|
|
Posted by Bill from Maspeth on Fri Sep 30 15:53:45 2016, in response to Re: BREAKING: NJ TRANSIT Train Collides With Wall At Station In Hoboken, posted by Dutchrailnut on Fri Sep 30 12:38:41 2016. Thank you. |
|
|
| (1410830) | |
Re: BREAKING: NJ TRANSIT Train Collides With Wall At Station In Hoboken |
|
|
Posted by Steamdriven on Fri Sep 30 16:16:12 2016, in response to Re: BREAKING: NJ TRANSIT Train Collides With Wall At Station In Hoboken, posted by Dave on Fri Sep 30 15:42:17 2016. Well, now that I've looked it up ... shouldda been masticated.When you're between a skidding train and the roadbed, both words sound about the same. |
|
|
| (1410831) | |
Re: BREAKING: NJ TRANSIT Train Collides With Wall At Station In Hoboken |
|
|
Posted by Dave on Fri Sep 30 16:20:39 2016, in response to Re: BREAKING: NJ TRANSIT Train Collides With Wall At Station In Hoboken, posted by Steamdriven on Fri Sep 30 16:16:12 2016. Are you between a skidding train and the roadbed? |
|
|
| (1410834) | |
Re: BREAKING: NJ TRANSIT Train Collides With Wall At Station In Hoboken |
|
|
Posted by Jackson Park B Train on Fri Sep 30 16:37:24 2016, in response to Re: BREAKING: NJ TRANSIT Train Collides With Wall At Station In Hoboken, posted by Dutchrailnut on Fri Sep 30 12:38:41 2016. yes. until we have the event recorder data we are just guessing. |
|
|
| (1410837) | |
Re: BREAKING: NJ TRANSIT Train Collides With Wall At Station In Hoboken |
|
|
Posted by Lou From Middletown NY on Fri Sep 30 16:53:38 2016, in response to Re: BREAKING: NJ TRANSIT Train Collides With Wall At Station In Hoboken, posted by SelkirkTMO on Fri Sep 30 13:04:43 2016. The problem is, all these channels all do the 'wall to wall' coverage, like the internet doesn't exist! Yesterday, only ch 4 tried to get someone with some kind of expertise ( a guy from Railway Age) on the phone or something. The others just kept blabbing the same (usually incorrect) things over and over, showing the same pieces of footage. It shouldn't take TOO much effort - especially considering the importance of rail transit in the area - to have sources to call when something like this happens. |
|
|
| (1410838) | |
Re: BREAKING: NJ TRANSIT Train Collides With Wall At Station In Hoboken |
|
|
Posted by Lou From Middletown NY on Fri Sep 30 16:54:44 2016, in response to Re: BREAKING: NJ TRANSIT Train Collides With Wall At Station In Hoboken, posted by Dave on Fri Sep 30 06:58:49 2016. Ivor? |
|
|
| (1410842) | |
Re: [PHOTOS] Re: BREAKING: NJ TRANSIT as of 2:00 PM |
|
|
Posted by Jersey Mike on Fri Sep 30 17:04:25 2016, in response to Re: [PHOTOS] Re: BREAKING: NJ TRANSIT as of 2:00 PM, posted by WillD on Fri Sep 30 13:28:05 2016. The RoW suited the train just fine since nobody ON THE TRAIN was killed. The station might want to make some upgrades to protect itself from the trains. Or, it could see this as a cost of doing business. This isn't a very common event and its sort of stupid making policy based on rare events. |
|
|
| (1410844) | |
Re: BREAKING: NJ TRANSIT Train Collides With Wall At Station In Hoboken |
|
|
Posted by 3-9 on Fri Sep 30 17:11:58 2016, in response to Re: BREAKING: NJ TRANSIT Train Collides With Wall At Station In Hoboken, posted by Jackson Park B Train on Fri Sep 30 16:37:24 2016. Guessing is fun, let's do more wild guessing! :-) |
|
|
| (1410846) | |
Re: BREAKING: NJ TRANSIT Train Collides With Wall At Station In Hoboken |
|
|
Posted by Jackson Park B Train on Fri Sep 30 17:19:12 2016, in response to Re: BREAKING: NJ TRANSIT Train Collides With Wall At Station In Hoboken, posted by 3-9 on Fri Sep 30 17:11:58 2016. you may have my turn, I have something useful to do--shopping for food. |
|
|
| (1410847) | |
Re: BREAKING: NJ TRANSIT Train Collides With Wall At Station In Hoboken |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Fri Sep 30 17:22:30 2016, in response to Re: BREAKING: NJ TRANSIT Train Collides With Wall At Station In Hoboken, posted by Lou From Middletown NY on Fri Sep 30 16:53:38 2016. And that's what you expect a news director or editor to get on for an major story. But in the end, it all comes down to who you have (senior moment: "the old Rolodex") on your list of known good sources for the details you're just not going to have at your fingertips. I was lucky to have been doing it back in the days when I was a beat reporter on politics. Had LOTS of good contacts who could explain the nuances to me just right so I didn't make a fool of myself in print. :) |
|
|
|
Page 4 of 6 |
||
