DOCSLIB.ORG

Technical Criteria and Procedures for Evaluating the Crashworthiness

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Technical Criteria and Procedures for Evaluating U.S. Department of Transportation the Crashworthiness and Occupant Protection Federal Railroad Performance of Alternatively Designed Passenger Administration Rail Equipment for Use in Tier I Service Office of Railroad Policy and Development Office of Safety Washington, DC 20005 DRAFT DOT/FRA/ORD-11/22 Final Report October 2011 Notice This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the Department of Transportation in the interest of information exchange. The United States Government assumes no liability for its contents or use thereof. Any opinions, findings and conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this material do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the United States Government, nor does mention of trade names, commercial products, or organizations imply endorsement by the United States Government. The United States Government assumes no liability for the content or use of the material contained in this document. Notice The United States Government does not endorse products or manufacturers. Trade or manufacturers’ names appear herein solely because they are considered essential to the objective of this report. REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE Form approved OMB No. 0704-0188 Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden to Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports, 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302, and to the Office of Management and Budget, Paperwork Reduction Project (0702-0288), Washington, D.C. 20503 1. AGENCY USE ONLY (Leave blank) 2. REPORT DATE 3. REPORT TYPE AND DATES COVERED October 2011 Technical Report 4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE 5. FUNDING NUMBERS Technical Criteria and Procedures for Evaluating the Crashworthiness and Occupant Protection Performance of Alternatively Designed Passenger Rail Equipment for Use in Tier I Service 6. AUTHOR(S) Compiled by Michael Carolan, Karina Jacobsen, Patricia Llana, Kristine Severson, Benjamin Perlman, and David Tyrell 7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NUMBERS U.S. Department of Transportation Research and Innovative Technology Administration John A. Volpe National Transportation Systems Center 55 Broadway Cambridge, MA 02142-1093 U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration Office of Railroad Policy and Development Office of Safety 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE Washington, DC 20590 10. SPONSORING/MONITORING AGENCY 9. SPONSORING/MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) REPORT NUMBER U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration Office of Railroad Policy and Development DOT/FRA/ORD-11/22 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE Washington, DC 20590 11. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES Program Manager: Melissa Shurland 12a. DISTRIBUTION/AVAILABILITY STATEMENT 12b. DISTRIBUTION CODE This document is available to the public on the FRA Web site at http://www.fra.dot.gov. 13. ABSTRACT Criteria and procedures have been developed for assessing crashworthiness and occupant protection performance of alternatively designed trainsets to be used in Tier I (not exceeding 125 mph) passenger service. These criteria and procedures take advantage of the latest technology in rail equipment crashworthiness and include aspects that are fundamentally different from current regulations, such as the scenario-based train-level requirements, which have no counterpart in FRA‘s current Tier I regulations. Numerical values of the pass/fail criteria have been selected to provide an equivalent level of crashworthiness as the current Tier I regulations. For example, while the occupied volume integrity requirements have been relaxed from the current regulations, the criteria for preservation of the occupied volume for a collision with a locomotive-led train have been added to compensate. In other cases, such as roof integrity, the existing regulations can be applied to alternative equipment. 14. SUBJECT TERMS 15. NUMBER OF PAGES RSAC, crashworthiness, waiver application, Tier I, standards, passenger equipment 177 16. PRICE CODE 17. SECURITY 18. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION 19. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION 20. LIMITATION OF CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PAGE OF ABSTRACT ABSTRACT Unclassified Unclassified Unclassified Unlimited NSN 7540-01-280-5500 Standard Form 298 (Rec. 2-89) Prescribed by ANSI/NISO Std. 239.18 298-102 i METRIC/ENGLISH CONVERSION FACTORS ENGLISH TO METRIC METRIC TO ENGLISH LENGTH (APPROXIMATE) LENGTH (APPROXIMATE) 1 inch (in) = 2.5 centimeters (cm) 1 millimeter (mm) = 0.04 inch (in) 1 foot (ft) = 30 centimeters (cm) 1 centimeter (cm) = 0.4 inch (in) 1 yard (yd) = 0.9 meter (m) 1 meter (m) = 3.3 feet (ft) 1 mile (mi) = 1.6 kilometers (km) 1 meter (m) = 1.1 yards (yd) 1 kilometer (km) = 0.6 mile (mi) AREA (APPROXIMATE) AREA (APPROXIMATE) 1 square inch (sq in, in2) = 6.5 square centimeters (cm2) 1 square centimeter (cm2) = 0.16 square inch (sq in, in2) 1 square foot (sq ft, ft2) = 0.09 square meter (m2) 1 square meter (m2) = 1.2 square yards (sq yd, yd2) 1 square yard (sq yd, yd2) = 0.8 square meter (m2) 1 square kilometer (km2) = 0.4 square mile (sq mi, mi2) 1 square mile (sq mi, mi2) = 2.6 square kilometers (km2) 10,000 square meters (m2) = 1 hectare (ha) = 2.5 acres 1 acre = 0.4 hectare (he) = 4,000 square meters (m2) MASS - WEIGHT (APPROXIMATE) MASS - WEIGHT (APPROXIMATE) 1 ounce (oz) = 28 grams (gm) 1 gram (gm) = 0.036 ounce (oz) 1 pound (lb) = 0.45 kilogram (kg) 1 kilogram (kg) = 2.2 pounds (lb) 1 short ton = 2,000 pounds = 0.9 tonne (t) 1 tonne (t) = 1,000 kilograms (kg) (lb) = 1.1 short tons VOLUME (APPROXIMATE) VOLUME (APPROXIMATE) 1 teaspoon (tsp) = 5 milliliters (ml) 1 milliliter (ml) = 0.03 fluid ounce (fl oz) 1 tablespoon (tbsp) = 15 milliliters (ml) 1 liter (l) = 2.1 pints (pt) 1 fluid ounce (fl oz) = 30 milliliters (ml) 1 liter (l) = 1.06 quarts (qt) 1 cup (c) = 0.24 liter (l) 1 liter (l) = 0.26 gallon (gal) 1 pint (pt) = 0.47 liter (l) 1 quart (qt) = 0.96 liter (l) 1 gallon (gal) = 3.8 liters (l) 1 cubic foot (cu ft, ft3) = 0.03 cubic meter (m3) 1 cubic meter (m3) = 36 cubic feet (cu ft, ft3) 1 cubic yard (cu yd, yd3) = 0.76 cubic meter (m3) 1 cubic meter (m3) = 1.3 cubic yards (cu yd, yd3) TEMPERATURE (EXACT) TEMPERATURE (EXACT) [(x-32)(5/9)] F = y C [(9/5) y + 32] C = x F QUICK INCH - CENTIMETER LENGTH CONVERSION 0 1 2 3 4 5 Inches Centimeters 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 QUICK FAHRENHEIT - CELSIUS TEMPERATURE CONVERSION °F -40° -22° -4° 14° 32° 50° 68° 86° 104° 122° 140° 158° 176° 194° 212° °C -40° -30° -20° -10° 0° 10° 20° 30° 40° 50° 60° 70° 80° 90° 100° For more exact and or other conversion factors, see NIST Miscellaneous Publication 286, Units of Weights and Measures. Price $2.50 SD Catalog No. C13 10286 Updated 6/17/98 ii Preface Engineering Task Force Organization The Engineering Task Force (ETF) reports to the Passenger Safety Working Group of the Railroad Safety Advisory Committee (RSAC). Mission The mission of the task force was to produce a set of technical criteria and procedures for evaluating passenger rail trainsets built to alternative designs. The technical evaluation criteria and procedures would provide a means of establishing whether equipment of an alternative design would result in at least equivalent performance to that of equipment designed in accordance with the structural standards in the Passenger Equipment Safety Standards (49 CFR Part 238). The criteria and procedures described in this document are specifically intended to apply to trainsets operated at speeds up to 125 mph that may need a waiver from (or, as appropriate under § 238.201(b), approval of alternative compliance with) one or more of the Passenger Equipment Safety Standards. The initial focus of this effort was on Tier I crashworthiness and occupant protection standards. This report is the product of this effort. The criteria and procedures contained within this report provide a technical framework for presenting evidence to the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) in support of a request for waiver of the Tier I crashworthiness and occupant protection standards, including the compressive (buff) strength requirements set forth in 49 CFR § 238.203. See, Rules of Practice (49 CFR Part 211) for rules on waiver petitions. In addition, these guidelines form a technical basis for making determinations concerning alternative compliance with the Tier I crashworthiness and occupant protection standards, as set forth in §238.201(b). The criteria and procedures contained in this report may be incorporated into the Passenger Equipment Safety Standards at a later date, after notice and opportunity for public comment. Approach In evaluating requests for waivers and other approvals for the use of passenger equipment not compliant with FRA‘s structural standards, FRA, with support from the John A. Volpe National Transportation Systems Center, has been reviewing and comparing the performance of domestic, conventional equipment with equipment designed to international standards. Based in part on knowledge gained from these reviews and similar evaluations conducted for more than a decade since Part 238 was promulgated, FRA presented
Recommended publications
  • MODULMAX Power Your Projects Version 06.2016 Version

    MODULMAX Power Your Projects Version 06.2016 Version

    EN MODULMAX Power your projects Version 06.2016 Version www.faymonville.com 2 MODULMAX - POWER YOUR PROJECTS BÜLLINGEN (BE) - since 1988 With an experience of over 50 years, Faymonville is one of 30.000 m² the biggest manufacturers of semi-trailers for special and heavy haulage. Faymonville provides their customers with optimal so- lutions and systems for any transport need outside the usual norms. Quality, flexibility, productivity, creativity and service are the company’s keywords. The range of products and ser- vices is constantly enlarged in tight collaboration with our customers. GOLENIOW (PL) - since 2006 21.000 m² The high level of innovation and the excellent manufac- turing quality of the products are secured by optimized production processes and own modern production plants in Büllingen (Belgium), Lentzweiler (Luxembourg) and Goleniow (Poland). A service station has been opened in Noginsk (near Moscow, Russia) and Poland (next to the factory in Goleniow). NOGINSK (RU) - since 2014 LENTZWEILER I (LU) - since 2003 3.120 m² 20.250 m² LENTZWEILER II (LU) - since 2015 16.000 m² MODULMAX - POWER YOUR PROJECTS 3 The Faymonville ModulMAX is a series of combinable road-going transport modules (with 2-6 axle lines) and accessories that can achieve a total payload of up to 5000 t. The ModulMAX offers seamless interoperability with identical vehicles from other manufacturers (S-ST, G-SL). This variety of combination options as well as the user-friendly operating concept makes the ModulMAX a guarantor of flexibility and economy for the most complex of heavy-duty transport jobs. Main characteristics ■ Axle loads of up to 45 t per axle line ■ Hydraulic axle compensation with a stroke of up to 650 mm ■ Pivot-mounted bogie with 60° steering angle ■ Strengthened loading area outer fields with point loads of up to 50 t 4 MODULMAX - POWER YOUR PROJECTS 1.
  • High-Strength, Lightweight Car Bodies for High-Speed Rail Vehicles

    High-Strength, Lightweight Car Bodies for High-Speed Rail Vehicles

    High-Speed Rail IDEA Program High-Strength, Lightweight Car Bodies for High-Speed Rail Vehicles Final Report for High-Speed Rail IDEA Project 32 Prepared by: Timothy Langan and W. Mark Buchta Surface Treatment Technologies Baltimore, MD October 2003 INNOVATIONS DESERVING EXPLORATORY ANALYSIS (IDEA) PROGRAMS MANAGED BY THE TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH BOARD This investigation was performed as part of the High-Speed Rail IDEA program supports innovative methods and technology in support of the Federal Railroad Administration’s (FRA) next-generation high-speed rail technology development program. The High-Speed Rail IDEA program is one of four IDEA programs managed by TRB. The other IDEA programs are listed below. • NCHRP Highway IDEA focuses on advances in the design, construction, safety, and maintenance of highway systems, is part of the National Cooperative Highway Research Program. • Transit IDEA focuses on development and testing of innovative concepts and methods for improving transit practice. The Transit IDEA Program is part of the Transit Cooperative Research Program, a cooperative effort of the Federal Transit Administration (FTA), the Transportation Research Board (TRB) and the Transit Development Corporation, a nonprofit educational and research organization of the American Public Transportation Association. The program is funded by the FTA and is managed by TRB. • Safety IDEA focuses on innovative approaches to improving motor carrier, railroad, and highway safety. The program is supported by the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration
  • New Principle Schemes of Freight Cars Bogies

    New Principle Schemes of Freight Cars Bogies

    April 2018, Vol. 18, No. 2 MANUFACTURING TECHNOLOGY ISSN 1213–2489 New Principle Schemes of Freight Cars Bogies Mykola Gorbunov1, Juraj Gerlici2, Sergey Kara1, Olena Nozhenko2, Ganna Chernyak1, Kateryna Kravchenko2, Tomas Lack2 1Institute transport and logistics, Volodymyr Dahl East Ukrainian National University, 03406 Tscentralny av., 59a, Se- werodonetsk, Ukraine. E-mail: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] 2Faculty Mechanical Engineering, University of Zilina, 01026 Univerzitna 8215/1, Zilina, Slovakia. E-mail: juraj.ger- [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] In the article the issue of perspective running parts for freight cars of new generation is considered and additions to the outdated existing classification of bogie are developed, namely introduction of such types of suspension is suggested.The results of theoretical studies are presented by means of modeling the movement of the car in the software "Universal Mechanism" to determine the influence of the first stage of spring suspension in Barber type bogie (type 18-100 and analogues) on energy efficiency (resistance to movement) and the estimated value of the decrease in resistance to movement.A concept for a fundamentally new design of a freight car bogie for high-speed traffic has been prepared, based on fundamentally new technical solutions with elastic-dissipative bearing ele- ments, as well as a concept for the modernization of the Barber-type bogie (type 18-100 and
  • WU Advertorials

    WU Advertorials

    volume three, number three a supplement to walthers ho, n&z and big trains reference books Bachmann Unveils New E-Z Command® System Digital Command Control (DCC) is features one-button, main track opening new frontiers for model programming and plug-in wiring to railroaders, providing more realistic make getting started quick and easy. operations on any layout. For many And, it’s compatible with all DC and modelers however, choosing a starter DCC systems. system can be the most difficult part of The basic starter set (#160-44902) getting started. includes a Control Center, Wall Answering the need for a system that’s Transformer and Plug-In Wire. easy to use, affordable and incorporates Modelers who are just getting started the latest technology, Bachmann has can choose three complete sets (#160- teamed with Lenz to produce the new 44904 - ATSF, #160-44905 – Chessie EZ-Command System for HO scale. or #160-44906 - NS) that include a decoder-equipped GP40 diesel. Designed for modelers of any skill level, the system provides 128-step speed control for smooth A new series of decoder-equipped, ready-to-run FT-A and B performance, with independent control of lighting and direction unit diesels will also be available separately to expand for multiple locos. Unlike some starter systems, EZ-Command operations. Nuremberg Toy Fair Showcases Exciting New Models Highlights for HO modelers this year include new American GMC “Fishbowl” city buses from Busch. These models are typical of those used in most major American cities and will be offered in two colors, and decorated for a Los Angeles city bus.
  • Bilevel Rail Car - Wikipedia

    Bilevel Rail Car - Wikipedia

    Bilevel rail car - Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bilevel_rail_car Bilevel rail car The bilevel car (American English) or double-decker train (British English and Canadian English) is a type of rail car that has two levels of passenger accommodation, as opposed to one, increasing passenger capacity (in example cases of up to 57% per car).[1] In some countries such vehicles are commonly referred to as dostos, derived from the German Doppelstockwagen. The use of double-decker carriages, where feasible, can resolve capacity problems on a railway, avoiding other options which have an associated infrastructure cost such as longer trains (which require longer station Double-deck rail car operated by Agence métropolitaine de transport platforms), more trains per hour (which the signalling or safety in Montreal, Quebec, Canada. The requirements may not allow) or adding extra tracks besides the existing Lucien-L'Allier station is in the back line. ground. Bilevel trains are claimed to be more energy efficient,[2] and may have a lower operating cost per passenger.[3] A bilevel car may carry about twice as many as a normal car, without requiring double the weight to pull or material to build. However, a bilevel train may take longer to exchange passengers at each station, since more people will enter and exit from each car. The increased dwell time makes them most popular on long-distance routes which make fewer stops (and may be popular with passengers for offering a better view).[1] Bilevel cars may not be usable in countries or older railway systems with Bombardier double-deck rail cars in low loading gauges.
  • A Synthesis of Modern Rail Transportation Engineering Practices Donald D

    A Synthesis of Modern Rail Transportation Engineering Practices Donald D

    University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln Open-Access* Master's Theses from the University Libraries at University of Nebraska-Lincoln of Nebraska-Lincoln 9-1977 A Synthesis of Modern Rail Transportation Engineering Practices Donald D. Cook University of Nebraska-Lincoln Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/opentheses Part of the Civil Engineering Commons Cook, Donald D., "A Synthesis of Modern Rail Transportation Engineering Practices" (1977). Open-Access* Master's Theses from the University of Nebraska-Lincoln. 37. http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/opentheses/37 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Libraries at University of Nebraska-Lincoln at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in Open-Access* Master's Theses from the University of Nebraska-Lincoln by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. A SYNTHESIS OF MODERN RAIL TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING PRACTICES by Donald D. Cook A THESIS Presented to the Faculty of The Graduate College in the University of Nebraska In Partial Fulfillment of Requirements For the Degree of Master of Science Department of Civil Engineering Under the Supervision of Dr. Edward R. Post Dr. Patrick J. McCoy Dr. Edward N. Wilson Lincoln, Nebraska September, 1977 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I wish to thank Dr. E. R. Post, Dr. P. T. M~Coy, and Dr. E. N. Wilson, my thesis advisory corrmittee for their assistance. Thanks are also due Sharon Nichols and Kim Seip whose typing skills saved me a great amount of anguish and Gary Steffans who assisted with the chapter on signaling.
  • Post Office Department Records MORE DESCRIPTIONS ADDED

    Post Office Department Records MORE DESCRIPTIONS ADDED

    National Archives Across the Nation Post Office Department Records MORE DESCRIPTIONS ADDED by Claire Prechtel-Kluskens AS A PART OF THE NATIONAL ARCHIVES AND RECORDS ADMINISTRATION’S (NARA) ongoing mission to provide greater access to the records in its custody, staff at the National Archives Building in Washington, DC, continue to add descriptions for record series in Record Group 28, Records of the Post Office Department, to the online National Archives Catalog at http://www.archives.gov/research/catalog/. Listed below are 133 newly described re- • Construction and Engineering Project Lists, 6/16/1958–2/11/1959. NAID cord series from this record group (RG). Re- Files, 1965–1968. NAID 12021476. 12021601. searchers can learn more information about • Copies of Letters Sent Regarding • General Orders and Pay Summary these records by searching for the title or Closed Railway Mail Service Cases, Forms for Boston, Massachusetts, 1882– the National Archives Identifier (NAID). 1924–1929. NAID 16411671. 1887. NAID 16608021. Researchers interested in postal history, lo- • Correspondence Files Relating to • General Research Project 10 Regional cal history, governmental operations, and International Postal Matters, 1917–1961. Final Reports, 1/1956–4/1956. NAID genealogy may find these records useful. NAID 16562999. 12021534. • Administrative Manual and Related • Correspondence of Winton M. Blount, • Highway Post Office Discontinuance Records, 1950–1955. NAID 12021493. 1969–1970. NAID 12012278. Case Files, 1961–1967. NAID 12021640. • Advertisements and Proposals for Mail • Correspondence Regarding the • Indexes and Lists Concerning Mail Contracts, 1808–1961. NAID 12023189. Bituminous Coal Conservation Act of Depredations, 1845–1848. NAID 12019914. • Agreements with Railroad Companies, 1935, 1935–1937.
  • Transportation: Emerging Realities Les Transports

    Transportation: Emerging Realities Les Transports

    CTRF Transportation: Emerging Realities Les Transports: realites en puissance• VOLUME 2 ess-nrch rurn rh 1:2./Jd -*/ Y p1j iu Actes J 21 er1iJ confer si 111111 Torconit),JJ1IJfiJ 25 cats Inf./I, I 717l7 418 WHAT IF? / WHY NOT? A Railway Tridea F.H.Howard P Eng Richmond B C 1. RUBBER AND RAIL The ability of a locomotive to exert tractive effort or drawbar pull - the measure of what it could lift vertically, say over the edge of a cliff - and so, once the train's resistance has been determined, what tonnage of train it can start, is restricted by its wheen adhesion to the rails, normally about /14 of its weight. wheel slip control (replacing sanding) has now raised this to about 1/3. Too much power, and its wheels will slip. Starting a train is adhesion-limited; running it is horsepower-limited. When inverted, this fraction becomes "Factor of Adhesion" and refers to steel wheels gripping - or slipping - on steel rails. Some locomotives are ballasted to achieve adhesion, which affects braking too.. Heavier trailing tonnages can be moved if a much lower Factor of Adhesion can be developed. Such a low factor is indeed developed by rubber on paving. Assuming the road is dry and the tires sound, a rubber-tired highway tractor can lift half its own weight, with the corresponding capacity to pull a heavy trailing load, usually a semi-trailer, also on rubber tires. 1 Howard 419 A number of rail vehicles use a Hi-Rail device,. hydraulically-lowered sets of rail wheels, commonly attached to rubber-tired track inspection and maintenance equipment, especially automobiles, pickup trucks or vans; sometimes little cranes.
  • Bewhuwcii U*& Osilt

    Bewhuwcii U*& Osilt

    BEWHUWCIi U*& OSiLt REPORT NO. FRA/0R&D-76/275.I % „ LOCOMOTIVE CAB DESIGN DEVELOPMENT Volume I: Analysis of Locomotive Cab Environment & Development of Cab Design Alternatives Jl J. Robinson D. Piccione G. Lamers Boeing Vertol Company P.O. Box 16858 Philadelphia PA 19142 ^A .ususa&j S'A1H O* OCTOBER 1976 INTERIM REPORT DOCUMENT IS AVAILABLE TO THE U.S. PUBLIC THROUGH THE NATIONAL TECHNICAL INFORMATION SERVICE. SPRiNOFIELO, VIRGINIA 22161 Prepared for U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FEDERAL RAILROAD ADMINISTRATION J Office of Research and Development Washington DC 20590 A NOTICE This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the Department of Transportation in the interest of information exchange. The United States Govern ment assumes no liability for its contents or use thereof. 'C NOTICE The United States Government does not endorse pro ducts or manufacturers. Trade or manufacturers' names appear herein solely because they are con sidered essential to the object of this report. Technical Report Documentation Page 1. Report No. 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient** Cafolog No. FRA/ORSD-76/275.I 4. Title and Subtitle S. Report Dole LOCOMOTIVE CAB DESIGN DEVELOPMENT October 1976 Volume I: Analysis of Locomotive Cab 6. Performing Orgonnotien Code Environment § Development of Cab Design Alternatives 8. Performing Orgonisotton Report No. Author's) Robinson, D. Piccione, G. Lamers DOT-TSC-FRA-76-22,I 9. Performing Orgcniiotion Nome and Address 10. Work Unit No. (TRAIS) Boeing Vertol Company* RR628T/R7341 11. Contract or Grant No. P.O. Box 16858 Philadelphia PA 19142 DOT-TSC-913-1 13. Type of Report ond Period Covered 12.
  • Data Sheet Data Sheet

    Data Sheet Data Sheet

    Sheet#: D9e.2 Title: PASSENGER DATDATAASHEESHEETT TRAINSERVICE ©NATIONALMODELRAILROADASSOCIATION Compiledby: J.CraigWebb,MMR Issued: October1999 THEMAINIDEA References: CanadianNationalRailway's PassengerCarEquipmentbinder,1967 Sincepassengerservicesaremanyandvaried,andfor Page: 1of9 every"ruleofthumb"therearelotsofexceptions,the informationpresentedherehastobelimited.Surveys suggestmostmodelrailroadersworkinthepreAmtrak/VIAera,soIhavewrittenthisinthehistoric sense,althoughthebasicideasapplytothesecorporationsaswell.Theinformationshouldhelp theaveragemodelertodesignanauthentic,ifgeneric,passengerserviceusingofftheshelfmodel equipment.Thosewhoaretryingtoduplicateaparticularprototypecandofurtherresearch throughhistoricsocieties,theKalmbachLibrary,andthemanyexcellentbooksandmagazine articlesthathavebeenwritten. TYPESOFSERVICE a)Shorthaul/commuter: Thesetrainsweregenerallycoachonly,withpossiblyabaggagecaron theh ead-end. b)Mediumdistance: Inadditiontocoachesandabaggagecar,somesortofmealservicewould beprovided.Firstclassservicewasusuallyavailable,too.Ifitwasadaytrain,thiswouldbe parlorcarservice.Iftheservicewasovernight,thefirstclassservicewouldbesleepers.Inthe UnitedStates,carriersusuallycontractedwithPullmanforparlorandsleepingcaroperation.In CanadaandMexico,thecarriersoperatedtheirownservices,althoughPullmanoftenprovided thesleepersoninternationalrunsbetweenAmericancitiesandthosenorthorsouthofthe borders.Pullmancouldprovide mealserviceaswell,butitwasmorecommonforindividual railroadstohavetheirowndiningcardepartments. c)LongDistance: Inadditiontothecarsin(b),longdistancetrainsusuallycarriedlounge
  • The Watertown Express and the 'Hog and Human': Passenger Service In

    The Watertown Express and the 'Hog and Human': Passenger Service In

    Copyright © 1973 by the South Dakota State Historical Society. All Rights Reserved. Copyright © 1973 by the South Dakota State Historical Society. All Rights Reserved. The WATERTOWN EXPRESS and the "Hog and Human": M & StL Passenger Service in South Dakota 1884-1960 DONOVAN L. HOFSOMMER In mid-July of 1960 editors of the Minneapolis Tribune found much on the regional scene that they judged to be newsworthy: Minnesotans were heavily engaged in political debate anticipating the general elections of the coming fall; the Hill Lines were rebuffed in their attempts to consummate a huge railroad merger: the speeding AFTERNOON HIAWATHA was derailed near Saint Paul, resulting in injury to several persons; Minneapolitans were enjoying the annual Aquatennial Celebration; and it was hot. One important event was overlooked by the Minneapolis journalists, however. On 21 July passenger service by the Minneapolis & Saint Louis Railway between Minneapolis and Watertown, South Dakota, ended forever. At 10:30 P. M. on 20 July train number thirteen quietly slipped out of the trainsheds at the Great Northern depot in Minneapolis for the last time; its counterpart number fourteen had made its final departure from Watertown an hour and one-half earlier. Without hoopla and almost without notice, a seventy-six year tradition of service ended when these two trains reached their respective terminals in the misty morning hours of 21 July.' 1. Minneapolis Tribune, 9-22 July 1960; Watertown Public Opinion, 21 July 1960; Minneapolis & St. Louis Railway, Time Table No. 15, 6 December 1959 pp. 1-2, 11-12. Copyright © 1973 by the South Dakota State Historical Society.
  • AS 7524 Coupler and Draw Gear

    AS 7524 Coupler and Draw Gear

    AS 7524:2018 Coupler and draw gear Rolling Stock Standard Please note this is a RISSB Standard for Public Comment Document content exists for RISSB product development purposes only and should not be relied upon or considered as final published content. Any questions in relation to this document or RISSB’s accredited development process should be referred to RISSB. Standard Development Manager: Email: Andrew Hardiman [email protected] RISSB Office Phone: Email: Web: 0429 432 095 [email protected] www.rissb.com.au AS 7524:2018 Coupler and draw gear This Australian Standard® AS 7524 Coupler and draw gear was prepared by a Rail Industry Safety and Standards Board (RISSB) Development Group consisting of representatives from the following organisations: Click here to enter the organisations represented on the Development Group. Tab between them. The Standard was approved by the Development Group and the Enter Standing Committee Standing Committee in Select SC approval date. On Select Board approval date the RISSB Board approved the Standard for release. Choose the type of review Development of the Standard was undertaken in accordance with RISSB’s accredited process. As part of the approval process, the Standing Committee verified that proper process was followed in developing the Standard. RISSB wishes to acknowledge the positive contribution of subject matter experts in the development of this Standard. Their efforts ranged from membership of the Development Group through to individuals providing comment on a draft of the Standard during the open review. I commend this Standard to the Australasian rail industry as it represents industry good practice and has been developed through a rigorous process.