Green Maned Lion
Engineer
That thing isn't modern. It's a Bombardier bi-level, whose robust construction (or lack thereof) was responsible for the bulk of deaths at Chatsworth.
Not according to the NTSB.That thing isn't modern. It's a Bombardier bi-level, whose robust construction (or lack thereof) was responsible for the bulk of deaths at Chatsworth.
So you're saying the NTSB can be bribed? Glad you have such inside information. Perhaps you should report this to the proper authorities.I wonder how much Bombardier paid for that?
It's the FRA regulations to which it was built that are the problem, not the manufacturer.That thing isn't modern. It's a Bombardier bi-level, whose robust construction (or lack thereof) was responsible for the bulk of deaths at Chatsworth.
There is complaint by many that the US safety standards are too high. I am not believing that, particularly after seeing what happens during and post accident.with some of these cars built to these wonderful EN safety standards. Generally I consider the NTSB if anything demanding too much. Read some of their reports and you should see that. However, you can't protect everything from everything.Nonsense. Car mabufacturers are not required to do no more than minimum safety.
Designing to FRA requirements can result in a less safe design. But, if you believe the problem is with Bombardier in particular, do please post your evidence of how and why Bombardier designs are less safe.Nonsense. Car mabufacturers are not required to do no more than minimum safety.
Cite?Bribe? Bribe? Who said anything about bribes? The phrase is "Campaign Contribution" as you should well know.
The NTSB isn't an elected position you know.Cite what precisely? That bribery and campaign controbutions are the se?
I would strongly suggest that you go through some of these reports in detail end to end before making these boderline if not past borderline libelious statements. At the least you should be able to cite examples to support your claims. If there is any bias in their railroad accident reports that I have noticed it is somewhat of a pro-labor tilt, and I have been reading these things for years. They tend to make recommendations concerning equipment requirements and sometimes in other areas as well that go beyond what I would consider practical limits in strength and passenger survivability.Nope. But they do what their bosses tell them to.
How about listing some of these references? The US regulations may have first been put in place in the 1920's but they have been updated considerably since. If you think the european equipment result in such crashworthy vehicles I would suggest that you watch the videos of the Spanish derailment when overspeed on the curve, and then find some of the pictures of the eqipment post crash at Eschede. That one is particularly frightening. You can see cars in the picture where the roof to sides and sides to floor welds unzipped, eliminating all encapsulization of the passengers. When you can find some regulations that will prevent reoccurance of these sorts of accident results, call me.FRA regs are based on theories of crash physics which were decades out of date when the regs were made in the 20s and 40s. They have been *shown* in *tests* to make railcars less safe in crashes than standard European designs.
Just for reference.
At the risk of being accused of over feeding the troll, I suspect the rather unprofessional engineer busy texting his railfan chums might be more to blame than any perceived design flaw of railroad car. But you knew that anyway didn't you?That thing isn't modern. It's a Bombardier bi-level, whose robust construction (or lack thereof) was responsible for the bulk of deaths at Chatsworth.
Don't let your anti European blinkers blind you to fact that it's generally better to not have a head on collision with an oncoming freight train, George.How about listing some of these references? The US regulations may have first been put in place in the 1920's but they have been updated considerably since. If you think the european equipment result in such crashworthy vehicles I would suggest that you watch the videos of the Spanish derailment when overspeed on the curve, and then find some of the pictures of the eqipment post crash at Eschede. That one is particularly frightening. You can see cars in the picture where the roof to sides and sides to floor welds unzipped, eliminating all encapsulization of the passengers. When you can find some regulations that will prevent reoccurance of these sorts of accident results, call me.FRA regs are based on theories of crash physics which were decades out of date when the regs were made in the 20s and 40s. They have been *shown* in *tests* to make railcars less safe in crashes than standard European designs.
Just for reference.
Sounds like the old debate of whether it is more effective to put emphasis on crash prevention, or crash survivability....in the automotive world, both have come a long way with new technology. Sadly, (or perhaps wisely), they have not put much into improving driver skills, but rather have let technology take driver skills out of the equation.Don't let your anti European blinkers blind you to fact that it's generally better to not have a head on collision with an oncoming freight train, George.How about listing some of these references? The US regulations may have first been put in place in the 1920's but they have been updated considerably since. If you think the european equipment result in such crashworthy vehicles I would suggest that you watch the videos of the Spanish derailment when overspeed on the curve, and then find some of the pictures of the eqipment post crash at Eschede. That one is particularly frightening. You can see cars in the picture where the roof to sides and sides to floor welds unzipped, eliminating all encapsulization of the passengers. When you can find some regulations that will prevent reoccurance of these sorts of accident results, call me.FRA regs are based on theories of crash physics which were decades out of date when the regs were made in the 20s and 40s. They have been *shown* in *tests* to make railcars less safe in crashes than standard European designs.
Just for reference.
Enter your email address to join: