Rail roads and their tracks.

   / Rail roads and their tracks. #1,662  
It looked to me like the empty cars were just pushed off the rails by the cars behind them. It's a known bad practice to put empty, light weight cars anywhere but at the rear of a consist for that exact reason.
Down hill and on a curve was too much to keep them on the rails.
 
   / Rail roads and their tracks. #1,663  
100% on that. (y) And as I often say if there's any more than one possibility for something it's too often that more than one is a cause/contributor. Yeah, those tankers had plenty of KE, and it wouldn't take many if full.

btw, By opening the link in a browser (post #661) I was easily able to zoom in enough to see the tracks leading to buildings, apparently intact if not in use. Everything around it looks well-kept, if the layout is odd. It's not unthinkable that mat'ls could be moved within the operation by legacy rail infrastructure.

Bruce, thanks for the eye candy. :)
 
Last edited:
   / Rail roads and their tracks. #1,664  
   / Rail roads and their tracks. #1,666  
Near the end of the short video you can see wind blowing snow in front of the camera. It appears the center-beam cars caught more wind than their empty weight could keep on the rails.
Looking at the trees in the background, the snow falling off the center-beam the snow blowing past the camera, and steam in the background on the camera on the engines, the wind couldn't have been blowing much more than 15 mph. Since the empty car weighs something north of 50'000#, I doubt the wind had any effect at all.
 
   / Rail roads and their tracks. #1,667  
3HR, one plus one equals two and two plus one equals three etc, so IMO good point! (y)

WIMI is also that what I suggested is at best a guess, as much based on 'modeling' as reality, and may have been a lesser of possible contributors. Also glad to hear of more of them and never too proud to think mine is tops. :coffee:
 
   / Rail roads and their tracks. #1,668  
3HR, one plus one equals two and two plus one equals three etc, so IMO good point! (y)

WIMI is also that what I suggested is at best a guess, as much based on 'modeling' as reality, and may have been a lesser of possible contributors. Also glad to hear of more of them and never too proud to think mine is tops. :coffee:
I am wondering what the loud bang was a few seconds before the derailment started at about 11 seconds in the first video. It was about as loud as two cars slamming together. Failure of something? Speculation since we are unlikely to see the RR incident report
 
   / Rail roads and their tracks.
  • Thread Starter
#1,669  
I am wondering what the loud bang was a few seconds before the derailment started at about 11 seconds in the first video. It was about as loud as two cars slamming together. Failure of something? Speculation since we are unlikely to see the RR incident report
When the brakes hoses get released for whatever reason, then the entire trains brakes would then be "dynamited" which throws them on 100%. This is a safety feature of trains. Even if that didn't happen, the cars derailing in the front would slow, compressing the train and we'd hear the smacking of couplers. Wind rarely blows trains off the tracks. I'm not a modeler but I'd guess its 150% different than real ones.
 
   / Rail roads and their tracks. #1,670  
hahahaha yeah he does! Wonder if he even noticed it? :ROFLMAO:
Hahahahahahaha :ROFLMAO:
It’s not everyday a train crashes 200’ away and you just ignore it! :ROFLMAO:
 
 
Top