Re: "Huck" bolts?----CEM?--RE Oxnard?
Author: BOB2
Date: 02-24-2015 - 16:13

There appeared to be no vehicle debris under the lead Rotem. And, the condition of the tracks from the point of impact to the locomotive (lead truck RR west appeared even to be still on the rails, though the rear truck was definitely off), from the helicopter seemed to show no sign of dragging or rolling marks, or significant track damage.

If there is a clip that shows that damage, then the train could have ridden up there, but would have likely done a lot of track damage from that point on, where there didn't appear to be any, nor any visible "plowing" that would occur if the lead cab car came off at the street and exited the tracks. Remember that at Glendale the vehicle was pushed initially down the track, but became wedged on an impediment that pushed it under the train. There appear to be no such impediments, except maybe the concrete base of the crossing signal mid street.

The lead cab car and flipped and turned almost 180 degrees, and it was clearly the lead car that came off first, and whatever lifted that 70 ton plus car and flipped it, in that short of distance, also caused enough force to lift and telescope out the others. There appeared to be no visible vehicle debris trail from the point of impact on the tracks, and it appeared that most of what was left of the vehicle was pushed off to the side, well before the lead car derailed.

The vehicle was clearly the cause of the accident, but was the vehicle the real reason the train derailed, or did something else happen?

Maybe it did ride up, but I still want to find out where the draft gear went on the lead car, and how that system works. I've dragged around my share of car crash debris under a locomotive and never even came close to derailing, but I can't say that for dropping a drawbar into the ballast under the trucks of a moving train........



Subject Written By Date/Time (PST)
  "Huck" bolts?----CEM?--RE Oxnard? BOB2 02-24-2015 - 14:56
  Re: "Huck" bolts?----CEM?--RE Oxnard? [ET] That Genset Foamer 02-24-2015 - 15:33
  Re: "Huck" bolts?----CEM?--RE Oxnard? BOB2 02-24-2015 - 16:13
  Re: "Huck" bolts?----CEM?--RE Oxnard? Physics 02-24-2015 - 16:16
  Vehicle Weight Espee99 02-24-2015 - 16:22
  Re: Vehicle Weight mook 02-24-2015 - 16:57
  Re: Vehicle Weight SP5103 02-24-2015 - 17:04
  Re: "Huck" bolts?----CEM?--RE Oxnard? Matt Farnsworth 02-24-2015 - 16:42
  Re: "Huck" bolts?----CEM?--RE Oxnard? Dr Zarkoff 02-24-2015 - 16:46
  Re: "Huck" bolts?----CEM?--RE Oxnard? SP5103 02-24-2015 - 17:24
  Re: Genset's photo is interesting BOB2 02-24-2015 - 18:28
  Re: Genset's photo is interesting mook 02-24-2015 - 20:14
  Re: Genset's photo is interesting SP5103 02-24-2015 - 20:52
  Re: "Huck" bolts?----CEM?--RE Oxnard? Jim Quigg 02-24-2015 - 19:57
  Re: "Huck" bolts?----CEM?--RE Oxnard? Ed Workman 02-25-2015 - 07:53
  Re: "Huck" bolts?----CEM?--RE Oxnard? Dr Zarkoff 02-25-2015 - 10:38
  Cabcar photo Mark 02-24-2015 - 19:26
  Re: Cabcar photo Dr Zarkoff 02-24-2015 - 20:26
  Caltrain seems to not have these problems HUTCH 7.62 02-24-2015 - 21:53
  Re: Caltrain seems to not have these problems, really? BOB2 02-25-2015 - 01:11
  Re: Caltrain seems to not have these problems, really? jdm 02-25-2015 - 07:16


Go to: Message ListSearch
Subject: 
Your Name: 
Spam prevention:
Please, enter the code that you see below in the input field. This is for blocking bots that try to post this form automatically.
 **    **  ********   ********   **      **        ** 
 **   **   **     **  **     **  **  **  **        ** 
 **  **    **     **  **     **  **  **  **        ** 
 *****     ********   **     **  **  **  **        ** 
 **  **    **     **  **     **  **  **  **  **    ** 
 **   **   **     **  **     **  **  **  **  **    ** 
 **    **  ********   ********    ***  ***    ******  
This message board is maintained by:Altamont Press
You can send us an email at altamontpress1@gmail.com