New LIRR Firsts...

We all know the LIRR invented the hooded rr spike, 1st aluminium car etc.

But now some not so famous 1sts to be proud of.

1. 1st railroad to "kill" a stainless steel railcar (m1& m3)
2. " to ruin concrete ties

And the list goes on and on!

Don't forget that the "piggyback" concept of carting farm wagons into the city on flatcars was a LIRR invention as well!

Too bad they didn't own a patent on it!

Dave Keller

I believe Metro North had to replace the first batch of concrete ties they placed on the Hudson Line a few years back.

Jay

first batch of concrete ties on MNCR went bad in Bronx in 1989 and had to be replaced , the ties were only put in in 1985.
And with nearly entire heritage fleet gone on Amtrak , LIRR won't even get close to being first to scrap stainless steel.
as far as aluminium cars ?? believe ANF was first on New Haven with original TALGO.

#200, a T-62 class double decker trailer was built in 1932 with an aluminum body. The first Talgo trainset on the New Haven arrived in the early 50's.

DutchRailnut wrote:.
And with nearly entire heritage fleet gone on Amtrak , LIRR won't even get close to being first to scrap stainless steel.

I think it fair to say that the Amtrak Heritage cars would still be running because they were not abused, but rather it was not economical (cost effective) to rebuild them to be ecologically "friendly", aka retention toilets for example. It was more cost effective to scap some (not all were I believe, some are in private hands) and use the money to fix other, newer SS equipment like wrecked Amfleets I & II + Stuperliners as well.

The LIRR just beat the tar out of their equipment and rather than do mid life overhauls or SMS.. they just expected to get new.. Can't wait till I tell my kids what the M7's were like when they were new... I guess I'm beating a dead horse here.. Its just that while I was waiting for my train y'day I saw an M7 heading east on the express track at Woodside with a few square wheels on it, pounding the crap out of the rail. Should of seen the pumping action on the ties...

Its just that while I was waiting for my train y'day I saw an M7 heading east on the express track at Woodside with a few square wheels on it...

Wait, it gets better! Wheel slide season is just beginning. Leaves falling and rainy days = "clunk, clunk, clunk".

There is also the not-so-minor issue of whether wheel slide protection is enabled in an emergency brake application. I don't want to get into this too much, except to say that some of our EMU cars have it enabled, and others don't. Some use a mixed bag of tricks.
FRA apparently leaves it up to the individual railroads and equipment manufacturers, as long as stopping distance parameters can be demonstrated to be met. No wheel slide protection in a railcar in an emergency brake application from MAS can have a profound effect on the size of flat spots.

Tom

Here are some other firsts

<i>FRA apparently leaves it up to the individual railroads and equipment manufacturers, as long as stopping distance parameters can be demonstrated to be met.</i>

I always loved how an agency that's supposedly parnoid about safety doesn't even care about something as basic as how well a piece of equipment can stop in various situations. Even Tier II doesn't mandate much in the way of braking rates or distances (last time I looked at it, I didn't see ANY listed...)

Phil you don't think that the FRA is being realistic in leaving it up to the railroads regarding stopping distances? Didn't the post say "FRA apparently leaves it up to the individual railroads and equipment manufacturers, as long as stopping distance parameters can be demonstrated to be met"...

Each railroad has it's own traffic density and MAS requiring different stopping distances..so how could they legislate stopping distances when every railroad is different?

On the LIRR, they determined that with their signalling block distances, traffic density and MAS of 80mph, any train that was to run at a top speed of 80mph needed a stopping distance design of approx. 1.7fps with maximum brake applied. On the diesels, they had to program the ASC to apply maximum brake (Permanent Suppression) immediatly when the train was exceeding the speed code in order for them to be allowed by the FRA to travel 80mph. Unlike the older diesels which had a stopping distance of 3.4fps but were not allowed to operate above 65mph. And the ASC on them allowed for Temporary Suppresion.

Apparently they are concerned with safety. How many LIRR trains are rear ending each other?

Wait a minute now...

The FRA was organized to insure that railroads compiled standards and rules and to insure that they complied with those rules.

What's this now, you think they should be like a mama or something??? They generally do not have the authority nor the Constitutional right to make their own rules and inforce them on private industry, except in very carefully defined emergency situations.

Clem

Not to take a stand on the particular issue at hand, but I think that the comment was more on the fact that the FRA get involved with making rules for all kinds of things that aren't directly related to "standards" and such, like the various crashworthiness rules and maximum speeds, in the name of safety, but don't include stopping distances. I don't see it as a call for the FRA to become "mama" to the railroads, but more as a confused reaction to the things that the FRA chooses to require/not require.