M8 Collision in Bridgeport

Discussion relating to the operations of MTA MetroNorth Railroad including west of Hudson operations and discussion of CtDOT sponsored rail operations such as Shore Line East and the Springfield to New Haven Hartford Line

Moderators: GirlOnTheTrain, nomis, Jeff Smith, FL9AC

NH2060
Posts: 1518
Joined: Thu Feb 25, 2010 4:44 pm

Re: M8 Collision in Bridgeport

Post by NH2060 » Sun May 26, 2013 4:26 pm

http://newyork.newsday.com/news/nation/ ... -1.5342438
Towards the bottom of the article this caught my eye:
The 2006 contract with Kawasaki Rail Car was for $713 million but could grow as high as $883 million, according to Kawasaki.
That's a difference of $170M and divided by 68 that works out to $2.5M, the price of a single car. So unless those increased costs are due to inflation/cost of materials/bug fixes, etc. (which does sound like a lot for factors such as those) it sounds as if MNR/ConnDOT has been in some kind of talk with Kawasaki about buying even more cars.

Clean Cab
Posts: 2893
Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2005 4:18 pm
Location: South Dennis Massachusetts

Re: M8 Collision in Bridgeport

Post by Clean Cab » Sun May 26, 2013 10:20 pm

There have been a few rumors of CDOT buying more M8's than the 405 already planned for. The number of additional cars to be ordered range from 30 to 60, but I've not heard or read of any official number of cars, if any. I guess the feeling is strike while the iron is hot. Keep cranking them out as long as the money's available.
I'm stuck on a sandbar on Cape Cod, and I couldn't be happier!!!

CComMack
Posts: 458
Joined: Mon Mar 15, 2004 1:09 am
Location: Francisville, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

Re: M8 Collision in Bridgeport

Post by CComMack » Mon May 27, 2013 3:48 am

Kawasaki has every reason to play ball on an add-on order; other than the R188 order for the NYCT Flushing Line, they don't have anything else on their plate, nor are they expected to in the immediate term. (Is there a major rolling stock order expected in the next five years that hasn't been awarded yet, other than the M9s?) As long as CDOT has money to buy more M8s and riders to fill them, Kawasaki has no reason not to keep making them.

DutchRailnut
Posts: 22266
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 8:02 pm
Location: released from Stalag 13

Re: M8 Collision in Bridgeport

Post by DutchRailnut » Mon May 27, 2013 5:08 am

With the MTA looking into east Bronx service, it should be MTA looking into buying more M-8's
Currently the split is 30% MTA and 70% CDOT due to added SLE Mileage, but with MTA adding about 18 miles of service it is MTA that needs to step up to plate.
The split is based on total Mileage in each state
If Conductors are in charge, why are they promoted to be Engineer???

Retired Triebfahrzeugführer. I am not a moderator.

Terminal Proceed
Posts: 738
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 8:36 pm
Location: New York

Re: M8 Collision in Bridgeport

Post by Terminal Proceed » Mon May 27, 2013 8:33 am

This is not a topic about buying more M8s - Make a new thread if you want to discuss that - lets get back on course here

Terminal Proceed
Posts: 738
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 8:36 pm
Location: New York

Re: M8 Collision in Bridgeport

Post by Terminal Proceed » Tue May 28, 2013 11:06 am

I'm not kidding - either start a new thread or drop it already. I WILL delete the next off topic post as well as the last one i just did.

Clean Cab
Posts: 2893
Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2005 4:18 pm
Location: South Dennis Massachusetts

Re: M8 Collision in Bridgeport

Post by Clean Cab » Wed May 29, 2013 6:16 am

I think one fact has been missing in all the talk about this incident being caused by a "borken rail". There could have been no broken rail as most people would comprehend. If that were the case, the cab signal system would not have given the engineer of the eastbound train an aspect that would let him do more than 15 MPH. Cab signal codes travel within the rails and any break in the rail would caused a circuit problem that not only would have limited the speed of the train, but the RTC would have been aware of it as well. When the investigators say this incident was caused by a broken rail, they are referring to a hairline crack that was most likely not visible to the naked eye.
I'm stuck on a sandbar on Cape Cod, and I couldn't be happier!!!

lirr42
Posts: 2726
Joined: Thu Dec 29, 2011 6:16 pm
Location: Montauk, NY (MP 115.8)

Re: M8 Collision in Bridgeport

Post by lirr42 » Wed May 29, 2013 9:27 am

Clean Cab wrote:I think one fact has been missing in all the talk about this incident being caused by a "borken rail". There could have been no broken rail as most people would comprehend. If that were the case, the cab signal system would not have given the engineer of the eastbound train an aspect that would let him do more than 15 MPH. Cab signal codes travel within the rails and any break in the rail would caused a circuit problem that not only would have limited the speed of the train, but the RTC would have been aware of it as well. When the investigators say this incident was caused by a broken rail, they are referring to a hairline crack that was most likely not visible to the naked eye.
Mr. CleanCab, could the break in the rail have happened at an insulator joint in the rail? (just like the LIRR train that derailed in March). In that regard, the cab signal system wouldn't detect the break because it happened at an insulator joint and cab signals don't transmit through those anyways.

Freddy
Posts: 473
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2011 11:48 pm
Location: Walker Co. Alabama

Re: M8 Collision in Bridgeport

Post by Freddy » Wed May 29, 2013 9:35 am

Broke rails may or may not throw a track indication. If both halves of the break sits on a tie plate, track current can continue to move thru. Break to plate to break. Seen it. I thought
they were looking hard at a broke joint bar as the initial cause and the reason for all the joint bar inspections.

Clean Cab
Posts: 2893
Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2005 4:18 pm
Location: South Dennis Massachusetts

Re: M8 Collision in Bridgeport

Post by Clean Cab » Wed May 29, 2013 10:34 am

My experience running trains on MN is that even a small crack in a rail can cause a cab signal circuit to go down. This is one of what may be hundreds of factors that will be investigated. I was not there in Bridgeport inspecting the rail either before or after the derailment, and neither was anyone on this forum. Let's heed the moderator's warning and not speculate on the cause. Let the NTSB and FRA do their research into this incident. My previous post was an attempt to clarify terminology, not afix blame or pinpoint the exact cause.
I'm stuck on a sandbar on Cape Cod, and I couldn't be happier!!!

Freddy
Posts: 473
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2011 11:48 pm
Location: Walker Co. Alabama

Re: M8 Collision in Bridgeport

Post by Freddy » Wed May 29, 2013 1:42 pm

I ain't speculating. NTSB told them the other day to do an inspection and inventory of all their joint bars. It was in a press release. Now with my limited brain power that tells me a broke
joint bar/bars was involved in some way. There was even the picture of them standing and looking at a center broke joint bar.

User avatar
Tommy Meehan
Posts: 3345
Joined: Tue May 11, 2004 7:00 am
Location: Yonkers

Re: M8 Collision in Bridgeport

Post by Tommy Meehan » Wed May 29, 2013 1:58 pm

They found a cracked rail joint at the scene. They don't know yet if it was a cause of the derailment or a result of the derailment.

Previously Metro-North found and fixed a cracked rail joint in the same area.
[NTSB Earl Weener] was quick to add that he would not speculate on what role the fractured rail joint may or may not have played in the accident.
Link

Clean Cab
Posts: 2893
Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2005 4:18 pm
Location: South Dennis Massachusetts

Re: M8 Collision in Bridgeport

Post by Clean Cab » Wed May 29, 2013 2:08 pm

Tommy Meehan wrote:They found a cracked rail joint at the scene. They don't know yet if it was a cause of the derailment or a result of the derailment.

Previously Metro-North found and fixed a cracked rail joint in the same area.
[NTSB Earl Weener] was quick to add that he would not speculate on what role the fractured rail joint may or may not have played in the accident.
Link

Thanks Tommy!! :)
I'm stuck on a sandbar on Cape Cod, and I couldn't be happier!!!

User avatar
Tommy Meehan
Posts: 3345
Joined: Tue May 11, 2004 7:00 am
Location: Yonkers

Re: M8 Collision in Bridgeport

Post by Tommy Meehan » Wed May 29, 2013 2:26 pm

Clean Cab wrote:Thanks Tommy!! :)
See how rumors get started?

No problem! :-)

NH2060
Posts: 1518
Joined: Thu Feb 25, 2010 4:44 pm

Re: M8 Collision in Bridgeport

Post by NH2060 » Wed May 29, 2013 3:13 pm

Sen. Blumenthal and Sen. Murphy call for a railroad trust fund to help prevent future infrastructure-related accidents (if this is deemed off-topic I'll move it elsewhere)
[EDIT: Moved to a separate thread]
http://online.wsj.com/article/APf5bab49 ... lenews_wsj" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Last edited by NH2060 on Wed May 29, 2013 7:25 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Return to “MTA Metro-North Railroad and CtDOT Passenger Rail”