 |
Re: New video about the 1939 "City of San Francisco" derailment near Harney, NV
Author: OPRRMS
Date: 08-22-2019 - 18:49
George Andrews Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I have the book Tragic Train, and have read it
> many times. One thing that doesn't make sense,
> from a physical standpoint :
> If the rail was indeed jacked over to the inside
> of where it had been, why didn't the engines
> derail immediately, at that point, BEFORE the
> bridge ??? How were the top heavy engines able to
> make it through the bridge while the lighter
> passenger cars derailed into the through truss
> bridge ??? The book states : " The unit had been
> supported upon the rails and was prevented from
> overturning by the motor housings and spring
> planks. " ( pg.81 ) The book also quotes the
> engineer that the train was going " no more than
> sixty miles an hour." ( pg.79 )
> I also question the amount of " evidence " that
> Espee came up with to support their claim that the
> rail had been tampered with; even photographs
> taken ( presumably by Espee ) of a roadmaster
> lying under the train, still at the derailment
> scene, pointing out the tampered rail.
> Me thinkest Espee dost protest too much ...
> Perhaps to cover up for excessive speed through
> the area??? " The City of San Francisco, Southern
> Pacific's train # 101, drew to a stop at Harney to
> pick up a lone passenger. " ( pg.42 ) WHAT??? This
> train only made limited stops, fewer than other
> passenger trains on the same line. Harney, Nevada
> was a speck on the map. Why stop The Streamliner
> at Harney for ONE PASSENGER ??? After leaving
> Harney, the engineer is quoted as saying to the
> fireman : " Twenty - eight minutes behind
> schedule." ( pg. 42 ). Was the engineer trying to
> make up time ???
My suggestion is that you read the ICC Accident Investigation Report.
-------------------------------------------------------
> I have the book Tragic Train, and have read it
> many times. One thing that doesn't make sense,
> from a physical standpoint :
> If the rail was indeed jacked over to the inside
> of where it had been, why didn't the engines
> derail immediately, at that point, BEFORE the
> bridge ??? How were the top heavy engines able to
> make it through the bridge while the lighter
> passenger cars derailed into the through truss
> bridge ??? The book states : " The unit had been
> supported upon the rails and was prevented from
> overturning by the motor housings and spring
> planks. " ( pg.81 ) The book also quotes the
> engineer that the train was going " no more than
> sixty miles an hour." ( pg.79 )
> I also question the amount of " evidence " that
> Espee came up with to support their claim that the
> rail had been tampered with; even photographs
> taken ( presumably by Espee ) of a roadmaster
> lying under the train, still at the derailment
> scene, pointing out the tampered rail.
> Me thinkest Espee dost protest too much ...
> Perhaps to cover up for excessive speed through
> the area??? " The City of San Francisco, Southern
> Pacific's train # 101, drew to a stop at Harney to
> pick up a lone passenger. " ( pg.42 ) WHAT??? This
> train only made limited stops, fewer than other
> passenger trains on the same line. Harney, Nevada
> was a speck on the map. Why stop The Streamliner
> at Harney for ONE PASSENGER ??? After leaving
> Harney, the engineer is quoted as saying to the
> fireman : " Twenty - eight minutes behind
> schedule." ( pg. 42 ). Was the engineer trying to
> make up time ???
My suggestion is that you read the ICC Accident Investigation Report.
