[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Implications of ICE crash

To: ausrail@railpage.org.au
Subject: Re: Implications of ICE crash
From: mccallum@melbpc.org.au (John McCallum)
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 08:54:39 GMT
Newsgroups: aus.rail
Organization: Melbourne PC User Group
References: <6l7t79$p3d$1@gruvel.une.edu.au> <357784F4.2EF6@iprolink.co.nz> <6l83bg$5jl$4@gruvel.une.edu.au> <357bc689.13242692@news.enternet.com.au>

In article <357bc689.13242692@news.enternet.com.au>, steam4me@enternet.com.au wrote:

>>The normal length of a first generation ICE set is 410m. The rear portion
>>was reduced to 50m.

>The aerial photo I pulled off "The Age Online" shows the last 5-6 cars
>and the trailing power unit jack-knifed on and beside the bridge, so I
>don't think this sentence is correct.

I think the distance of 50m refers to the distance between the leading edge of 
the first car to the trailing edge of the last car as they came to rest, not 
the sum length of the cars in normal straight line.

>Regards

>Yuri

John McCallum

References:
- Implications of ICE crash
  - From: dbromage@metz.une.edu.au (David Bromage)
- Re: Implications of ICE crash
  - From: David McLoughlin <davemcl@iprolink.co.nz>
- Re: Implications of ICE crash
  - From: dbromage@metz.une.edu.au (David Bromage)
- Re: Implications of ICE crash
  - From: steam4me@enternet.com.au (Yuri J Sos/Melbourne AUS)

Prev by Date: Re: I think I'll go and have a cry in the corner
Next by Date: Re: 42106 & Northern Rivers Railroad
Prev by thread: Re: Implications of ICE crash
Next by thread: Re: Implications of ICE crash
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread