Re: Concord West Derailment

[Tony Gatt <tgatt@eisa.net.au>]

This I cannot believe...

David Johnson wrote:

> Paul Jones wrote:
>
> > 118km/h?!?!?    Ouch! that's gota hurt. it's bad enough going over a 25km/h
> > turnout at 47km/h but 118km/h ?!?!?!
>
> I looked at the track at the site, and I feel that the train may have got
> through the turnout OK.  Just after the turnout on the outside rail I noticed a
> fractured rail.  If the extreme force of the train on the light rail caused it
> to fracture, that could have caused the derailment.
>

At which point did you inspect the rail?
Was it before or after the derailment?
Which carriage caused a fracture of the rail?
Was it a fracture or was it a break?
If it was a fracture, it must be still there... so..
Is its position relative to the derailing point of the train?

What qualifications do you have to assume that a train travelling at 118km/h would
make it through a set of points rated for 25km/h anyway?

For those of you out there that remember Laverton in the 70's, a train travelling
some 30km's per hour less trying to negotiate a set of 25km/h points in the reverse
position, did not only derail the train, but forcibly removed the points, a signal
gantry and the life of a passenger.

I do believe that ill informed assumptions degrade the level of information that
can be provided in this newsgroup.

One day the results may be made public, only then will we really know the outcome..

Over to you David...

> --
> David Johnson
> CityRail Guard
> trainman@ozemail.com.au
> http://www.ozemail.com.au/~trainman/

--
Thanks, Tony.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
"There is no rest for the wicked.  They are having too much fun."

Visit my Homepage: http://www.eisa.net.au/~tgatt/

** Updated: 0:53 AM 02-12-98 **

It's here: Railpix - Australian Railway Photography.
            http://railpix.freeservers.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------