Perhaps adding crews and making up shorter trains in the interest of public safety would cost less than costly derailments and negative publicity.  But even if it cost a bit more wouldn't it be worth it?  

https://www.propublica.org/article/train-derailment-long-trains

 

Noel

20 minutes ago, birdguy said:

Perhaps adding crews and making up shorter trains in the interest of public safety would cost less than costly derailments and negative publicity.  But even if it cost a bit more wouldn't it be worth it?

It's scary that the engineer has no idea what's going on at the rear of the train and has to walk for almost an hour just to find out. 

2 hours ago, birdguy said:

Perhaps adding crews and making up shorter trains in the interest of public safety would cost less than costly derailments and negative publicity.  But even if it cost a bit more wouldn't it be worth it?  

https://www.propublica.org/article/train-derailment-long-trains

 

Noel

These super long freight trains are also a big reason that Amtrak's long distance trains are often delayed by multiple hours - even though the freight trains must legally give way to passenger trains, often they are longer than the passing sidings meaning that they can't actually do so. Bringing freight trains back down to more manageable lengths would solve this problem as well.

2 hours ago, dmwalker said:

It's scary that the engineer has no idea what's going on at the rear of the train and has to walk for almost an hour just to find out. 

They are not walking back there, in this case they are the captain and send the conductor back🤪.

3 hours ago, birdguy said:

Perhaps adding crews and making up shorter trains in the interest of public safety would cost less than costly derailments and negative publicity.  But even if it cost a bit more wouldn't it be worth it?  

Great point Noel. I had a strong yearning to drive trains, but followed the path of the aviator. It's amazing how train brakes works. The air supply is sort of like connected balloons. The more cars you add, the bigger the balloons get. In the same sense, it means that brake applications and releases take more time to happen the longer the train. Once you dump equalizing pressure, the brakes start applying car by car until they all apply. Same happens when you release the brakes. Just imagine the skill required to know your routes and anticipate brake applications and releases under that setup. Shorter trains and more inspections/Mx crews would help as it does in our aviation world. The electronic controlled pneumatic brakes requirement could actually help as well. I'd rather have all the brakes apply at the same time along the train instead of one at a time as the brake pipe pressure builds. 

A buddy of mine worked for the horse head company and he said it was cut throat. His train derailed going into a siding to drop off empty cars to an industry on the line. He said those companies who own their own sidings don't upkeep their tracks as well as they should. He said that you would have light derails on the areas, though easier to get the train back on the track. There is just so much that goes on with rail to keep operations safe. Temperature, rain, snow, land slides, falling boulders and lack of attention to detail leads to accidents easily. It's past time that engineers have warning and information systems in the train just as we do in the cockpit.   

Edited April 7, 20233 yr by G550flyer

7 minutes ago, G550flyer said:

It's past time that engineers have warning and information systems in the train just as we do in the cockpit.

What happened to End-of-Train Devices? The "smart" ones seem pretty smart and could probably be made even smarter.

3 minutes ago, dmwalker said:

What happened to End-of-Train Devices? The "smart" ones seem pretty smart and could probably be made even smarter.

They still have them and give an idea what the back of the train is doing. A lot of the smart devices are on the tracks, such as defect detectors. As they roll over them, the detector will look at temperatures to try to identify hot axles/brakes. They will report this information to dispatch and some warnings back to the engineer. As they pass the detector, the detector identifies itself and gives the mile post. After the last car passes, the detector will identify, pass on axles counted and any defects. Usually you will hear "no defects detected" over the radio in the cab. But, some detectors only send information back to dispatch. If the engineer had that information at their finger tips, they could make decisions like we do in the air. The engineer in Ohio never knew a brake was dragging until the third detector passed gave a warning and emergency stop. The other two detectors sent the temps back to dispatch, but no one seemed to notice. You would hope that if the engineer knew the first two temps, he would have saw the temp rise and initiated the stop ahead of time. They said that the company also raised the temp threshold for warnings to minimize unnecessary stops if the temp wasn't going to cause an issue😬. 

At least with the gauges and instruments in the jet, you can tell when something is trending and take a precautionary action. 

What would the stopping distance be for a 2 mile long freight train travelling at, say, 40 mph?

37 minutes ago, G550flyer said:

It's past time that engineers have warning and information systems in the train just as we do in the cockpit.   

Over the last 15 years, the FRA and other safety regulators have extensively evaluated the crew size issue. They have never found any data showing two-person crews are safer than one-person crews:

• In 2009, the FRA stated there was “no factual evidence to support [a] prohibition against one-person crew operations.”
• In 2015, the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) found that “There is insufficient data to demonstrate that accidents are avoided by having a second qualified person in the cab. The NTSB has investigated numerous accidents in which both qualified individuals in a two-person crew made mistakes and failed to avoid an accident.”
• In 2016, the FRA stated that it could not “provide reliable or conclusive statistical data to suggest whether one-person crew operations are generally safer or less safe than multiple-person crew operations.”
• In 2019, the FRA concluded that “Accident/incident data does not support a train crew staffing regulation.”

 

Noel

2 minutes ago, dmwalker said:

What would the stopping distance be for a 2 mile long freight train travelling at, say, 40 mph?

That would be difficult to determine unless you knew if the train was on level terrain or climbing or descending a grade and the degree of the grade.  Also weight of the load the cars are carrying.  I would think loaded automobile carriers weight less than loaded coal cars. 

Noel

48 minutes ago, dmwalker said:

What would the stopping distance be for a 2 mile long freight train travelling at, say, 40 mph?

Hmm, so they do have certain levered brake application settings all the way to full service and emergency. They will use certain settings when certain amount of braking is needed. They may also be using dynamic braking(reverses the polarity to the traction motors making them want to turn in reverse for braking) to control speed only or a combination of dynamic and train brakes with bail off to slow or maintain a speed going down hill. Those settings along with locomotive brakes(brakes on the locomotives only) to stretch the train will be used based on scenarios. This will also impact how long it takes to stop. But, in your scenario, a 2 mile train going about 40 can take about a mile or more if they went into emergency. An Amtrak type of train, 8 car passenger at 80 mph will take about a mile. Because of this, I don't see why people try to beat a train across the tracks, it can't stop instantly.

By the time you visually see the need to stop, it's too late. They have to be signaled in the previous blocks(sections of track) for a pending stop. They may get a yellow/caution meaning half of rated track speed prior to a red where they need to stop.

Edited April 7, 20233 yr by G550flyer

13 minutes ago, G550flyer said:

I don't see why people try to beat a train across the tracks, it can't stop instantly.

I suppose it's easy to underestimate the speed of something which is coming more or less directly at you.

Trains often derail when a very long consist rounds a curve. The couplers are acting as a fulcrum whereby excessive force is applied to the inside-the-curve flanges. This happens also on model trains.

Quote

Federal investigators would later learn that Car 35 — empty, hand brakes set — had jumped the tracks on a curve, and two cars ahead of it and 30 behind it had followed.

Another common cause are flanges "splitting" the points of a switch, which another video I've viewed illustrates.

6 hours ago, dmwalker said:

It's scary that the engineer has no idea what's going on at the rear of the train

I am reminded of two unique opportunities to do just that, i.e, the Spiral Tunnels of Kicking Horse Pass. The tunnels loop round so that the train comes out above the entry point, passing over the rear of the train:

https://parks.canada.ca/pn-np/bc/yoho/culture/kickinghorse/visit/spirale-spiral

3 hours ago, dmwalker said:

I am reminded of two unique opportunities to do just that, i.e, the Spiral Tunnels of Kicking Horse Pass. The tunnels loop round so that the train comes out above the entry point, passing over the rear of the train:

https://parks.canada.ca/pn-np/bc/yoho/culture/kickinghorse/visit/spirale-spiral

Also the site of a fatal derailment a few years ago after the brakes on a freight train failed after extended exposure to temperatures below -25C.

https://tsb.gc.ca/eng/enquetes-investigations/rail/2019/r19c0015/r19c0015.html

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/field-cp-train-301-derailment-tsb-report-dockrell-paradis-waldenberger-bulmer-1.6403610