How to improve all-weather capability of passenger trains?

Shop deals on ebay
shop deals on amazon
Advertise with us
Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum

Help Support Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Status
Not open for further replies.
B

birdy

Service Attendant
Joined
Oct 26, 2008
Messages
205
So, how would you P.E. types improve the all-weather capability of passenger rail, particularly HSR?

Seems to me that there is an inherent advantage here over airline, but the recent unpleasantness in RI and elsewhere earlier this winter, tells me there is room for improvement. But where? How?
 
Depends on what you're trying to prevent against.

Rain and snow are hard! Rain, because you can't efficiently ensure that the track is in acceptable condition once its under water. Snow, because you've got to have somewhere to put it! In both cases, the focus should be on protecting the track or making it more robust (IMO).
 
It is not only a matter of protecting the track, one must also protect the train.

I was on the EB in February and the train had freezeing problems such that it did not arrive in CHI until al the connecting trains (but the LSL??) had already left. Nothiing extraordinary, no snow delays. no flooding, no derailmeent - just the cold of Winter.

Since we know that in Winter it is cold in Minot one should protect against it. In the past I worked for an Engineering firm that designed a water treatment facility in Minot. They designed the facility to be able to function in VERY cold weather - Amtrak should do the same.
 
RRrich said:
It is not only a matter of protecting the track, one must also protect the train.
Click to expand...
That's why I said that it depended on the type of weather you were trying to protect against.
It'd be interesting to see a comparison of weather related service disruptions and their root causes (cold, flooding, snow, rock/mud slides) - that would be the first place to start making trains weather resistant. Figure out the requirements first, then engineer a solution.
 
birdy said:
So, how would you P.E. types improve the all-weather capability of passenger rail, particularly HSR?
Seems to me that there is an inherent advantage here over airline, but the recent unpleasantness in RI and elsewhere earlier this winter, tells me there is room for improvement. But where? How?
Click to expand...
IMHO, trains already have the best bad/poor weather capability of any method of travel. If anything, this is the one area that does not need any focus (funds) on improvement. None.

As long as rails and bed are there, a train will make it thru. In contrast, planes often don't fly even though their runways may still be physically intact.
 
Cho Cho Charlie said:
birdy said:
So, how would you P.E. types improve the all-weather capability of passenger rail, particularly HSR?
Seems to me that there is an inherent advantage here over airline, but the recent unpleasantness in RI and elsewhere earlier this winter, tells me there is room for improvement. But where? How?
Click to expand...
IMHO, trains already have the best bad/poor weather capability of any method of travel. If anything, this is the one area that does not need any focus (funds) on improvement. None.

As long as rails and bed are there, a train will make it thru. In contrast, planes often don't fly even though their runways may still be physically intact.
Click to expand...
Yep, I was watching the news the other day and they were interview a mayor or some govt guy from a town in RI. He said they built things for 100 year floods and the current conditions were easily besting that. There is a point where you just cant fight back against nature and have to suck it up. I mean if we made eveyrthing rated for 1000 year storms we would have no problems, but no money either.

The flooding this year is a rare problem, but every year they have problems with stuff like the cars freezing up. The things that happen every single year are the ones that need to be addressed
 
RRrich said:
Since we know that in Winter it is cold in Minot one should protect against it. In the past I worked for an Engineering firm that designed a water treatment facility in Minot. They designed the facility to be able to function in VERY cold weather - Amtrak should do the same.
Click to expand...
The problem is that trains move around the entire country and get subjected to pretty much everything, and they have to be able to move. I think that makes it a bit of challenge. I'd expect you'd design a water treatment plant differently if it was sit in the Arizona desert for example.
 
Extreme cold causes brittle and sometimes broken rails. extreme heat sometimes causes sun-kinks. I don't know if engineering can do anything to alleviate this problem. Perhaps mag-lev trains can do better?
 
If we are talking about the train cars, then you would think that when they experience temperature related issues, that when they refurbish the train cars they would address that. The same should apply with the high altitude/toilet issues.

If we are talking the rails, I know they have switch heaters, but I don't know what other methods are used to keep the rails in workable condition. Last October, there were a few popped welds on the rails just east of Grand Juction, Co, on the California Zephyr. I'm not sure if that is common, or if they were just weak welds. It really was not exceptionally cold yet, IIRC mid 30s. I actually thought it was odd that they had popped because it wasn't that cold yet!
 
Cho Cho Charlie said:
...As long as rails and bed are there, a train will make it thru. In contrast, planes often don't fly even though their runways may still be physically intact.
Click to expand...
Rail travel is dependent on lots of things other than the physical condition of the track. Notably, getting utility power for signals and grade crossing protection, maintaining communications to dispatching centers, and even getting crews to the trains. If anyone of those things is disrupted, trains stop.

Every mode has its plusses and minuses for foul weather operation. Air travel can be severely affected by even moderately bad weather at end points, but is unaffected by bad weather in between. Rail can get through some pretty nasty weather, but a severe storm anywhere along the route can disrupt the entire route. A storm in Chicago can disrupt United Airlines for a day, but not bother Amtrak. But a blizzard in the Rockies can cancel the Zephyr for several days, and not impact flights from Chicago to San Francisco. It's all the nature of the travel beast.
 
PRR 60 said:
Cho Cho Charlie said:
...As long as rails and bed are there, a train will make it thru. In contrast, planes often don't fly even though their runways may still be physically intact.
Click to expand...
Rail travel is dependent on lots of things other than the physical condition of the track. Notably, getting utility power for signals and grade crossing protection, maintaining communications to dispatching centers, and even getting crews to the trains. If anyone of those things is disrupted, trains stop.

Every mode has its plusses and minuses for foul weather operation. Air travel can be severely affected by even moderately bad weather at end points, but is unaffected by bad weather in between. Rail can get through some pretty nasty weather, but a severe storm anywhere along the route can disrupt the entire route. A storm in Chicago can disrupt United Airlines for a day, but not bother Amtrak. But a blizzard in the Rockies can cancel the Zephyr for several days, and not impact flights from Chicago to San Francisco. It's all the nature of the travel beast.
Click to expand...
Elevated and underground tracks + insulated trains. LOL
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Protecting trains, rails, and anything else that is man-made is very much like trying protect a growing child from ever getting hurt. You try to anticipate everything you can think of, but after a while you have to admit that things are going to happen that you never thought of, or could not prepare for. Face it, humans ain't perfect, no way, no how! We just tries the best we can and hope we can be forgiven.

BTW, back in the mid-50s during some very bad spring floods on the Mississippi and Missouri, Class-1 railroads were running EMD E and F units on passenger and freight trains. The flood waters were deep enough they were shorting out the traction motors on the diesels and service stopped in the upper Plains States. However, the Burlington still had a bunch of steam locos on the dead line awaiting the scrapper's torch. I remember seeing photos of many of these old steamers pulling trains through the flood waters without even breaking into a sweat...so to speak.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Trains will move through all but the most severe weather conditions. During the big snow storms in February, Amtrak was the only transportation moving at all. Trains won't be able to get through a flood but thats about it.
 
Hytec said:
BTW, back in the mid-50s during some very bad spring floods on the Mississippi and Missouri, Class-1 railroads were running EMD E and F units on passenger and freight trains. The flood waters were deep enough they were shorting out the traction motors on the diesels and service stopped in the upper Plains States. However, the Burlington still had a bunch of steam locos on the dead line awaiting the scrapper's torch. I remember seeing photos of many of these old steamers pulling trains through the flood waters without even breaking into a sweat...so to speak.
Click to expand...
Interesting. Another immune to high water would be the old Budd RDC. No traction motors, but diesel engines with hydraulic drive. They could go thru floodwaters easily. As long as their air intake was above water, they couldn't be stopped.
 
How high would the water have to be to prevent a train from proceeding?

I know some of the trains were able to still keep going during some of the bad snow we have had over the past winter.
 
Depends on how fast the water is moving. A few inches of water that's flowing are quickly going to go to work washing away the trackbed. If the water is still, then it looks like it can get up to the traction motors on the axle - maybe a foot or so above the rail?
 
dlagrua said:
Trains will move through all but the most severe weather conditions. During the big snow storms in February, Amtrak was the only transportation moving at all. Trains won't be able to get through a flood but thats about it.
Click to expand...
Don't forget the trees. One of the biggest cause of rail traffic disruption is trees that fall on the tracks during storms. This is partly fixable problem, by clearing enough space adjacent to the tracks, but that costs money and hence does not always get done.
 
Those were some wild pictures, Alan.

Any guesses on the actual water depth?

I wonder if anyone has ever taken a picture with a boat next to a train before?

That would be quite a picture!
 
railiner said:
Extreme cold causes brittle and sometimes broken rails. extreme heat sometimes causes sun-kinks. I don't know if engineering can do anything to alleviate this problem. Perhaps mag-lev trains can do better?
Click to expand...
If you think bad weather causes trouble with ordinary railroad you ain't seen nothing compared to what it would do to Maglev.

The cold - brittle and heat - sun kink sun kink problem is essentially a solved issue. when either happens it means that other issues were involved.

Brittleness in cold weather is dealt with through metallurgy and strength.

Sun kinks are dealt with by setting a high zero stress temperature such that the rail spends most of its time in tension, and when in compression the forces are relatively low. Combine this with a good stable ballast section and either wood or scalloped sided concrete ties and sun kinks are a rarity. Given a choce of one or the other, the pull-apart is the better problem to have because the signal system will tell you if you have a broken rail. It will not tell you if there is a sun kink.

Operation with water over the track is usually limited to a depth of 3 inches or less with traction motors or passenger equipment. Larger depts are normally permitted with freight cars, but that is fairly meaningless, as you have to be able to move them somehow. Oerating with running water over the track so that the top of the ballast is not visible is highly inadvisable as if you cannot see it, you do not know whether or not it is washed out.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Back
Top