Posted on 05/15/2015 4:20:44 PM PDT by MeshugeMikey
If an object hit the train, it would have to be pretty heavy to damage the windshield (or fast), and would likely be dropped or thrown from some higher access point like an overpass or pedestrian overpass. While that may not be absolutely necessary, it would provide a miscreant a better opportunity to escape the environs on foot or by vehicle.
Knowing if such structures were the launch points would tie in the M.O. of the person or persons throwing projectiles, and whether or not they were likely involved in any alleged incident with the Amtrack train.
That said, I have retained control of vehicles with a windshield rendered opaque with a variety of substances, including deer intestines and contents, while coping with the airbag the critter set off while destroying my radiator at 65 MPH, at night, winding the window down and not leaving my lane while slowing the vehicle and coming to a safe stop despite a poorly graded shoulder and opposing truck traffic (two lane road).
I would think the engineer would have had ample time to correct any error in throttle position, and should have at least noticed the train was accelerating.
Something here does, indeed, stink.
My hunch is that there are those who figure if the accident can be blamed on unknown persons throwing objects at the train, the mantle of liability will ride a lot lighter on the rail line versus a situation in which negligence or an overt act by the crew caused the derailment.
Money money money money....follow it.
Would that tear loose insulators or cable couplings which might have damaged the windshield?
Just doing the math on that, would leave 16 seconds (.267 minutes) at 100 MPH, 15 seconds at 95 MPH (.25 minutes), 12 seconds at 85 MPH (.20 minutes), and 22 seconds at 75 MPH (.367 minutes), for respective distances of 1349 ft., 2090 ft., 1496 ft., and 2422 ft., which would put the start of acceleration roughly 8,357 ft. up the track from the point of derailment (plus a little farther for exceeding 100). --Just under 1.6 miles back from the point of derailment.
Now, the question arises of whether that falls within the area where the other trains were hit by objects, or whether it just doesn't fit.
I shall endeavor to “follow the money” yes.
It was struck on stupid! (The engineer going 106 mph into a 50 mph curve...)
the best wrap up....I have read!!
The FCC issue was for electronic safety systems that could help prevent accidents (going too fast, wrong track, etc...). Not cameras.
Thank you.
We still haven’t heard the outcome of the investigation as per Operator Error have we....
.
It was struck by a missile traveling at 1000 MPH, and it was all the engineer could do stomp on the brakes.
.
.
He wasn’t distracted, his full attention was on his tool!
.
I doubt we'd hear of it if it turned out to be the case.
I still think it was an attempt to make headlines like the Germanwings co-pilot, but point the finger at safety issues while committing murder/suicide because he was nuts. Only the suicide didn't work out properly.
Failed suicides are not often fodder for headlines,..nope.
whoppeeee.....
somewhat like Bernie Sanders I guess...
“Im not sayin it was aliens...but “it was aliens”
Random in no way implies even, nor does even imply random. They are not interchangeable. Would you use "randomly spaced" if poles were placed at 100' intervals along a path, or "evenly spaced"? Would you use "evenly spaced" if poles were spaced at anything between 1' and 100' intervals along a path, or would you use "randomly spaced"?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.