Re: "lost" trains

[keithm@commslab.gov.au (Dave Malcolm)]

In article <3863048e@pink.one.net.au> "nobody" <dweebken@NOSPAM.yahoo.com> writes:
>From: "nobody" <dweebken@NOSPAM.yahoo.com>
>Subject: Re: "lost" trains
>Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 16:32:02 +1100

>Okay so sand has insulated 110 ton locos, but were they pulling a train?
>3801 is 201 tons and was pulling a train of about 300 tons (i think!). I
>find it hard to believe an entire train could be insulated from the signal
>by sand- you would expect it to be crushed to an insignificant size or fall
>off the rails after the first few cars.
>The legal liabilities to state rail would be similar to those that they
>faced when the coroner found the wheels to be at fault in the Granville
>disaster. State Rail had to keep quiet about its problems because it had not
>enough money to fix them.

Your not the only one who finds it hard to believe a train of about 500t and 
about 40 axles can be isolated entirely from the track circuit.

Dave Malcolm

>Brendan


>"David Johnson" <trainman@ozemail.com.au> wrote in message
>38621202.B85D5466@ozemail.com.au">news:38621202.B85D5466@ozemail.com.au...
>> Roy the Boy wrote:
>>
>> > Sand on the rail had absolutely nothing to do with the accident between
>3801
>> > and an intercity. A 200 tonne loco does NOT  loose contact with the
>rails.
>> > The findings of the investigation were a white wash. Any admission of
>signal
>> > problems would have opened the SRA to huge legal liabilities.
>>
>> You do not know what you are talking about.  Sand has been proven to
>insulate
>> trains from the track circuits, including 110 tonne locomotives.  Yes,
>sand was
>> the reason that 3801 was isolated from the track circuits.
>>
>> --
>> David Johnson
>> trainman@ozemail.com.au
>> http://www.ozemail.com.au/~trainman/
>>
>>