Page 2 of 2
| Amtrak (US) crash 15/05/2015 at 18:06 #72266 | |
kbarber
1712 posts |
" said:" said:Not so Mike. At Santiago, the 'technical car' (AKA diesel power car, added to the formation immediately behind the leading electric power car to provide electro-diesel capability, and with a centre of gravity rather higher than the Talgo stock forming the remainder of the train) was the first vehicle to derail and led the following vehicles into derailment. As at Philadelphia there appeared to be some vehicles that retained their structural integrity; I don't know the exact distribution of casualties but would speculate the majority occurred in those vehicles that either lost structural integrity or overturned in running up and off the cutting side. Notably one vehicle came to rest on the top of the retaining wall, some 30 - 40 feet (very rough estimate from memory of the pictures) above track level; we must include the possibility that one or more vehicles, having run up to the top of that wall, then fell back on to the track. Had something similar happened to the vehicles at Philadelphia there is no doubt in my mind we'd be looking at a death toll similar to Santiago.I'd suggest, like others, the difference between Santiago and this is what the train hit. Had there been a concrete retaining wall and bridge piers at the Philadelphia site I would expect a similar casualty toll to Santiago. Had there been a nice open space for the train to run in to at Santiago I'd expect a death toll similar to Philadelphia.In the Spanish wreck the train first broke apart in the middle sending crashing up an embankment. Here the ruggedized locomotive jumped the tracks first and acted as a ram to clear the way. I think the first coach, where all the fatalities were, got wrapped around one of the 1930's H-beam catenary supports, but the other coaches were intact and two didn't even leave the tracks. It's not a perfect comparison, but I'm impressed by the performance. A corrugated stainless steel body does make a difference. The Eschede derailment of 1998 resulted in a death toll of 101. In that case the derailed vehicle brought down a bridge and the remaining vehicles ran into it, with results similar - and even more deadly - to Santiago. At Hatfield (2000) the train ran largely across open ground, similar to Philadelphia, after a rail broke beneath it at a speed of 115mph, with all 4 fatalities occurring in the vehicle that collided with a catenary support upright. I think the long and the short of it is that, when there is a high-energy collision of the kind we saw at Santiago, Eschede and Ladbroke Grove (1999), a high death toll is almost inevitable. In the event of derailment without other obstacles to compromise the structural integrity of the vehicles, casualities tend to be relatively light. Broadly speaking, there seems little real difference in vehicle body performance between European and US stock; both offer substantial protection in all but very high energy incidents. (Incidentally, Ladbroke Grove - with a death toll of 31 in spite of the closing speed reckoned around 130mph, confirms the excellent structural performance of the old - mid-1970s - British Rail MkIII coach body.) Log in to reply The following users said thank you: RainbowNines, postal, flabberdacks, TimTamToe |
| Amtrak (US) crash 16/05/2015 at 08:36 #72280 | |
|
03piggs
68 posts |
Noticed on the BBC report for this that they now saying that the train hit an object. Also other trains in the area report a similar incident. Still doesn't explain the over speed though.
Log in to reply |
| Amtrak (US) crash 16/05/2015 at 10:01 #72285 | |
|
RainbowNines
272 posts |
" said:Noticed on the BBC report for this that they now saying that the train hit an object. Also other trains in the area report a similar incident. Still doesn't explain the over speed though.I was under the impression that the report said struck by something. Speculation never wise of course but dealing with rocks being hurled at you could easily cause a loss of concentration and a consequent loss of your bearings. Log in to reply |