Rocksolid Light

Welcome to novaBBS (click a section below)

mail  files  register  newsreader  groups  login

Message-ID:  

Timing must be perfect now. Two-timing must be better than perfect.


aus+uk / uk.railway / Re: 755331 nearly derailed

SubjectAuthor
* 755331 nearly derailedRecliner
`* 755331 nearly derailedRoland Perry
 `* 755331 nearly derailedRecliner
  +* 755331 nearly derailedRoland Perry
  |+- 755331 nearly derailedRecliner
  |`* 755331 nearly derailedAnna Noyd-Dryver
  | `* 755331 nearly derailedRoland Perry
  |  `* 755331 nearly derailedRecliner
  |   `* 755331 nearly derailedRoland Perry
  |    +- 755331 nearly derailedAnna Noyd-Dryver
  |    `* 755331 nearly derailedSam Wilson
  |     +- 755331 nearly derailedRecliner
  |     `* 755331 nearly derailedRoland Perry
  |      +* 755331 nearly derailedRecliner
  |      |+* 755331 nearly derailedSam Wilson
  |      ||+* 755331 nearly derailedRecliner
  |      |||`* 755331 nearly derailedSam Wilson
  |      ||| `- 755331 nearly derailedRoland Perry
  |      ||`* 755331 nearly derailedRoland Perry
  |      || `* 755331 nearly derailedAnna Noyd-Dryver
  |      ||  `- 755331 nearly derailedRoland Perry
  |      |`* 755331 nearly derailedRoland Perry
  |      | +* 755331 nearly derailedSam Wilson
  |      | |`- 755331 nearly derailedRoland Perry
  |      | `* 755331 nearly derailedAnna Noyd-Dryver
  |      |  +* 755331 nearly derailedCertes
  |      |  |+* 755331 nearly derailedColinR
  |      |  ||`* 755331 nearly derailedSam Wilson
  |      |  || `* 755331 nearly derailedRoland Perry
  |      |  ||  `* 755331 nearly derailedColinR
  |      |  ||   `* 755331 nearly derailedRecliner
  |      |  ||    `- 755331 nearly derailedRoland Perry
  |      |  |`- 755331 nearly derailedMarland
  |      |  +- 755331 nearly derailedRecliner
  |      |  `* 755331 nearly derailedRoland Perry
  |      |   `* 755331 nearly derailedSam Wilson
  |      |    `* 755331 nearly derailedRoland Perry
  |      |     `* 755331 nearly derailedAnna Noyd-Dryver
  |      |      `- 755331 nearly derailedRoland Perry
  |      `* 755331 nearly derailedAnna Noyd-Dryver
  |       +* 755331 nearly derailedColinR
  |       |+* 755331 nearly derailedGraeme Wall
  |       ||`- 755331 nearly derailedSam Wilson
  |       |`* 755331 nearly derailedRoland Perry
  |       | `* 755331 nearly derailedAnna Noyd-Dryver
  |       |  `* 755331 nearly derailedRoland Perry
  |       |   `- 755331 nearly derailedAnna Noyd-Dryver
  |       `* 755331 nearly derailedRoland Perry
  |        `* 755331 nearly derailedAnna Noyd-Dryver
  |         `* 755331 nearly derailedTweed
  |          `* 755331 nearly derailedRoland Perry
  |           `* 755331 nearly derailedAnna Noyd-Dryver
  |            `* 755331 nearly derailedRoland Perry
  |             `* 755331 nearly derailedRecliner
  |              `* 755331 nearly derailedRoland Perry
  |               `* 755331 nearly derailedRecliner
  |                +* 755331 nearly derailedRoland Perry
  |                |+* 755331 nearly derailedRecliner
  |                ||`* 755331 nearly derailedRoland Perry
  |                || `* 755331 nearly derailedRecliner
  |                ||  `* 755331 nearly derailedRoland Perry
  |                ||   `* 755331 nearly derailedRecliner
  |                ||    `* 755331 nearly derailedRoland Perry
  |                ||     `* 755331 nearly derailedRecliner
  |                ||      `* 755331 nearly derailedRoland Perry
  |                ||       `* 755331 nearly derailedRecliner
  |                ||        `* 755331 nearly derailedRoland Perry
  |                ||         +* 755331 nearly derailedAnna Noyd-Dryver
  |                ||         |`* 755331 nearly derailedRoland Perry
  |                ||         | `* 755331 nearly derailedAnna Noyd-Dryver
  |                ||         |  `* 755331 nearly derailedRoland Perry
  |                ||         |   `* 755331 nearly derailedColinR
  |                ||         |    +* 755331 nearly derailedSam Wilson
  |                ||         |    |`* 755331 nearly derailedSam Wilson
  |                ||         |    | `- 755331 nearly derailedGraeme Wall
  |                ||         |    `* 755331 nearly derailedRoland Perry
  |                ||         |     `* 755331 nearly derailedmartin.coffee
  |                ||         |      `* 755331 nearly derailedRoland Perry
  |                ||         |       `* 755331 nearly derailedSam Wilson
  |                ||         |        +* 755331 nearly derailedTweed
  |                ||         |        |+- 755331 nearly derailedSam Wilson
  |                ||         |        |`* 755331 nearly derailedRoland Perry
  |                ||         |        | `* 755331 nearly derailedRecliner
  |                ||         |        |  `- 755331 nearly derailedRoland Perry
  |                ||         |        `* 755331 nearly derailedRoland Perry
  |                ||         |         `* 755331 nearly derailedSam Wilson
  |                ||         |          `* 755331 nearly derailedRoland Perry
  |                ||         |           `* 755331 nearly derailedAnna Noyd-Dryver
  |                ||         |            +* 755331 nearly derailedRecliner
  |                ||         |            |`* 755331 nearly derailedAnna Noyd-Dryver
  |                ||         |            | `- 755331 nearly derailedianb
  |                ||         |            `* 755331 nearly derailedRoland Perry
  |                ||         |             `* 755331 nearly derailedAnna Noyd-Dryver
  |                ||         |              `* 755331 nearly derailedRoland Perry
  |                ||         |               `* 755331 nearly derailedAnna Noyd-Dryver
  |                ||         |                +* 755331 nearly derailedMarland
  |                ||         |                |`- 755331 nearly derailedSam Wilson
  |                ||         |                `- 755331 nearly derailedRoland Perry
  |                ||         `* 755331 nearly derailedRecliner
  |                ||          `* 755331 nearly derailedRoland Perry
  |                ||           `* 755331 nearly derailedTweed
  |                |`* 755331 nearly derailedAnna Noyd-Dryver
  |                `- 755331 nearly derailedAnna Noyd-Dryver
  `* 755331 nearly derailedGB

Pages:1234567
Re: 755331 nearly derailed

<svgjj1$2th$1@dont-email.me>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/aus+uk/article-flat.php?id=24718&group=uk.railway#24718

 copy link   Newsgroups: uk.railway
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: ukr...@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk (Sam Wilson)
Newsgroups: uk.railway
Subject: Re: 755331 nearly derailed
Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2022 19:31:45 -0000 (UTC)
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 49
Message-ID: <svgjj1$2th$1@dont-email.me>
References: <74udvgd927qf2f992997ua7aa9ef86sd8n@4ax.com>
<st8l2g$8md$1@dont-email.me>
<I3Il+5SfS+9hFAE8@perry.uk>
<bopfvgt9rqcdhovh9aiti9vq6thiirkaj3@4ax.com>
<st8rff$ib3$1@dont-email.me>
<stbfjn$8q7$2@dont-email.me>
<sv2gnq$eu9$1@dont-email.me>
<sv2ncj$uh7$1@dont-email.me>
<4rqb8Y+tnQFiFAO0@perry.uk>
<svdjpv$e1j$1@dont-email.me>
<XnSQ$iWCGmGiFASW@perry.uk>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2022 19:31:45 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="08194f9aeb4be90e314db12783601d9d";
logging-data="2993"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+KpoUImaHsbpXGjPhwe7vu"
User-Agent: NewsTap/5.5 (iPad)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:M5oFYh2o5lA4SOBC8hMmH8oOhL8=
sha1:SmuaoqQWmwsnIqlXrYQV79DXO3g=
 by: Sam Wilson - Sun, 27 Feb 2022 19:31 UTC

Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
> In message <svdjpv$e1j$1@dont-email.me>, at 16:17:03 on Sat, 26 Feb
> 2022, Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> remarked:
>
>>> I'm glad it's all sorted now, and that the most strident notions about
>>> the track sliding down some sort of slope under its own weight, have
>>> been well and truly debunked.
>>
>> Yes, it turns out we were all wrong. Your most strident assertion, that
>> the track must have remained straight because it was under tension, has
>> also been completely debunked in a different subthread because the jointed
>> track was not under tension. A little humility would make life here much
>> more pleasant.
>
> You are misdirecting yourself. While I agree that whoever implied it was
> continuously-welded rail under tension (an assertion upon which much
> later speculation was based) was mistaken, even classic jointed rail has
> very limited "stretch" built into it.

You mean you were misdirected. OK.

> But even *that* turns out to be a red herring because the track didn't
> slide sideways "down a slope", because the driver is now known to have
> just seen a dip.

You’ve removed the link, so I’ll replace it:

<https://www.gov.uk/government/news/train-running-onto-a-washed-out-section-of-line-near-haddiscoe>

And it says: “the driver of the train noticed what appeared to be standing
water on the line ahead”. It does not say the driver saw a dip, so you
can’t even hang onto that shred.

> And all the photos purporting to show otherwise are now known to be
> hours later *after* the ground had eroded even more.
>
> The prior zig-zag is a hoax, and that's all I was trying to say.

It was a conclusion based on incomplete information about the course of
events. It was not in any sense a hoax - perhaps you might look up the
word in a dictionary. Now we have better information so we change our
minds and move on. We don’t keep trying to pretend we were right the
whole time.

Sam

--
The entity formerly known as Sam.Wilson@ed.ac.uk
Spit the dummy to reply

Re: 755331 nearly derailed

<svh0k0$coc$1@dont-email.me>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/aus+uk/article-flat.php?id=24729&group=uk.railway#24729

 copy link   Newsgroups: uk.railway
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: recliner...@gmail.com (Recliner)
Newsgroups: uk.railway
Subject: Re: 755331 nearly derailed
Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2022 23:14:08 -0000 (UTC)
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 159
Message-ID: <svh0k0$coc$1@dont-email.me>
References: <74udvgd927qf2f992997ua7aa9ef86sd8n@4ax.com>
<st8l2g$8md$1@dont-email.me>
<I3Il+5SfS+9hFAE8@perry.uk>
<bopfvgt9rqcdhovh9aiti9vq6thiirkaj3@4ax.com>
<st8rff$ib3$1@dont-email.me>
<stbfjn$8q7$2@dont-email.me>
<sv2gnq$eu9$1@dont-email.me>
<sv2ncj$uh7$1@dont-email.me>
<4rqb8Y+tnQFiFAO0@perry.uk>
<svdjpv$e1j$1@dont-email.me>
<XnSQ$iWCGmGiFASW@perry.uk>
<sve0ia$7mn$1@dont-email.me>
<svg8gp$3r1$1@dont-email.me>
<fFcyXRt5y6GiFARq@perry.uk>
<svgcmb$72m$1@dont-email.me>
<svgdtm$h0s$1@dont-email.me>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2022 23:14:08 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="9098197e739dfb03ba46fafa320d9fea";
logging-data="13068"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1825sBTjPGV0YGVbi4oSKJq7h4iLg4Dqnw="
User-Agent: NewsTap/5.5 (iPad)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:K7kosdoYhoOtFfm7juUCfus+vgE=
sha1:EGHdjbuTkfnmz9t32N0NBHMbwnw=
 by: Recliner - Sun, 27 Feb 2022 23:14 UTC

Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:
> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>> In message <svg8gp$3r1$1@dont-email.me>, at 16:22:49 on Sun, 27 Feb
>>> 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>> ColinR <rail@greystane.shetland.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>> On 26/02/2022 17:21, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>> In message <svdjpv$e1j$1@dont-email.me>, at 16:17:03 on Sat, 26 Feb
>>>>>> 2022, Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I'm glad it's all sorted now, and that the most strident notions about
>>>>>>>> the track sliding down some sort of slope under its own weight, have
>>>>>>>> been well and truly debunked.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Yes, it turns out we were all wrong.  Your most strident assertion, that
>>>>>>> the track must have remained straight because it was under tension, has
>>>>>>> also been completely debunked in a different subthread because the
>>>>>>> jointed
>>>>>>> track was not under tension.  A little humility would make life here much
>>>>>>> more pleasant.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You are misdirecting yourself. While I agree that whoever implied it was
>>>>>> continuously-welded rail under tension (an assertion upon which much
>>>>>> later speculation was based) was mistaken, even classic jointed rail has
>>>>>> very limited "stretch" built into it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But even *that* turns out to be a red herring because the track didn't
>>>>>> slide sideways "down a slope", because the driver is now known to have
>>>>>> just seen a dip.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And all the photos purporting to show otherwise are now known to be
>>>>>> hours later *after* the ground had eroded even more.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The prior zig-zag is a hoax, and that's all I was trying to say.
>>>>>
>>>>> And that folks, is called "humility".....
>>>>
>>>> Indeed. As Roland has never been wrong about anything, ever, he has nothing
>>>> to be humble about.
>>>
>>> That playbook comes out again.
>>>
>>> Yes, there are several things I've not got right, but this episode with
>>> the sideways sliding track isn't one of them. Modulo I was probably
>>> wrong to assume the person who originally mentioned continuous welded
>>> rail tension at that site was correct.
>>>
>>> Oh, that was you! (I wasn't going to mention it, but you've forced my
>>> hand).
>>
>> You were delighted to assume, just as I did, that it was CWR when you
>> thought it supported your theory (which turned out to be no more correct
>> than any others that were proposed):
>>
>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>> In message <stoe9d$fkg$1@dont-email.me>, at 12:17:49 on Sun, 6 Feb 2022,
>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>> In message <sto9hd$g9t$1@dont-email.me>, at 10:56:45 on Sun, 6 Feb 2022,
>>>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>> In message <sto7bj$5cb$2@dont-email.me>, at 10:19:31 on Sun, 6 Feb 2022,
>>>>>>> Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> In message <sth7uq$f0i$1@dont-email.me>, at 18:46:50 on Thu, 3 Feb 2022,
>>>>>>>>> Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>> Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> In message <stgal4$t5h$1@dont-email.me>, at 10:26:45 on Thu, 3
>>>>>>>>>>>> Feb 2022,
>>>>>>>>>>>> Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If you watch a stream of water cutting a channel, it’s
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> upstream end of the channel that gets the most energetic erosion.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, but why does that cause lateral slewing (upstream), rather than
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> more droop?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Because the upstream side of the track gets eroded-under first,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> before the other side of the track. So the track is unsupported
>>>>>>>>>>>>> under one side only; has non-zero weight and is not a rigid
>>>>>>>>>>>>> structure. Why do you think it *wouldn't* slew to one side?
>>>>>>>>>>>>> It's not Hornby "long straight" rigid track which can be used
>>>>>>>>>>>>> as a bridge without any further support!
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Slewing requires a horizontal force perpendicular to the
>>>>>>>>>>>> track, and what
>>>>>>>>>>>> is providing that force. Drooping requires gravity acting
>>>>>>>>>>>> downwards, and
>>>>>>>>>>>> that's in plentiful supply.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> The imbalance of force is provided by the erosion being initially
>>>>>>>>>>> predominantly under one side only of the track.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> If you put a marble on a slope the only force according to
>>>>>>>>>> Roland is just downwards gravity. Yet as the marble rolls down
>>>>>>>>>> the hill it moves both vertically and horizontally.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The eroded track length is effectively rolling down hill (well
>>>>>>>>>> not rolling but you know what I mean).
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> If the ground under the track has eroded by more than about six inches,
>>>>>>>>> there isn't a slope for the track to slide down. It's just hanging in
>>>>>>>>> mid air.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> But at that point it had only eroded under *one side of the track*.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Sure about that?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> <https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2022/01/30/18/53556263-10457643-image-m-
>>>>>>> 23_1643568862268.jpg>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That was taken later.
>>>>>
>>>>> What we need (and there won't be one, unless GA released some cab
>>>>> footage) is a picture of the tracks before the train arrived.
>>>>>
>>>>> The one linked above doesn't show anything like as much of a kink as
>>>>> <https://twitter.com/ianhardie9018/status/1487783395660869633?s=21>
>>>>> which suggests it was moving left and right quite a bit.
>>>>>
>>>>> I still think the ianhardie kink is a result of the track buckling from
>>>>> the braking force of the train, not sliding sideways downhill.
>>>>
>>>> Why would braking cause a track to buckle sideways? CWR is under tension.
>>>
>>> If it's under tension [and yes, I agree it is, and underpins my own
>>> theory], how can it do a crazy zig-zag buckle in the way that's being
>>> claimed, when the only force on it is gravity downwards - and what that
>>> would cause is just a small droop.
>>
>>
>>
> From the RAIB report
>
> As the train approached the section of track concerned, the driver of the
> train noticed what appeared to be standing water on the line ahead and
> started braking. The train, which was formed of three passenger vehicles
> and a power car, stopped with its front carriage above the flowing water.
> Over the next twenty minutes the flowing water caused all support for the
> track to be lost and the track sank significantly, causing the front
> carriage to tilt forwards and sideways. The driver attempted to move the
> train back clear of the damaged section of track, but this proved
> impossible because of the angle of the front carriage.
>
> Note the use of the word sideways. Roland’s original assertion that there
> was only a downwards force and this could not cause a lateral motion.
> Clearly there was a slope and the weight of the train provided the force
> that was converted to some extent into a sideways force. Had the ballast
> been completely washed out, ie under both rails, the weight of the train
> would only cause a vertical dip.
>


Click here to read the complete article
Re: 755331 nearly derailed

<svh146$g2s$1@dont-email.me>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/aus+uk/article-flat.php?id=24730&group=uk.railway#24730

 copy link   Newsgroups: uk.railway
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: recliner...@gmail.com (Recliner)
Newsgroups: uk.railway
Subject: Re: 755331 nearly derailed
Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2022 23:22:46 -0000 (UTC)
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 165
Message-ID: <svh146$g2s$1@dont-email.me>
References: <74udvgd927qf2f992997ua7aa9ef86sd8n@4ax.com>
<st8l2g$8md$1@dont-email.me>
<I3Il+5SfS+9hFAE8@perry.uk>
<bopfvgt9rqcdhovh9aiti9vq6thiirkaj3@4ax.com>
<st8rff$ib3$1@dont-email.me>
<stbfjn$8q7$2@dont-email.me>
<sv2gnq$eu9$1@dont-email.me>
<sv2ncj$uh7$1@dont-email.me>
<4rqb8Y+tnQFiFAO0@perry.uk>
<svdjpv$e1j$1@dont-email.me>
<XnSQ$iWCGmGiFASW@perry.uk>
<sve0ia$7mn$1@dont-email.me>
<svg8gp$3r1$1@dont-email.me>
<fFcyXRt5y6GiFARq@perry.uk>
<svgcmb$72m$1@dont-email.me>
<svgdtm$h0s$1@dont-email.me>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2022 23:22:46 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="9098197e739dfb03ba46fafa320d9fea";
logging-data="16476"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/Em14yVcBwTQd+t7a9/JR2by+0mxiEbdU="
User-Agent: NewsTap/5.5 (iPad)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:q3DUUbvqI3Y8vFosAHZEeWw4lC8=
sha1:xrqgZqncEijFnZrFN7p82TtpH/c=
 by: Recliner - Sun, 27 Feb 2022 23:22 UTC

Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:
> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>> In message <svg8gp$3r1$1@dont-email.me>, at 16:22:49 on Sun, 27 Feb
>>> 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>> ColinR <rail@greystane.shetland.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>> On 26/02/2022 17:21, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>> In message <svdjpv$e1j$1@dont-email.me>, at 16:17:03 on Sat, 26 Feb
>>>>>> 2022, Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I'm glad it's all sorted now, and that the most strident notions about
>>>>>>>> the track sliding down some sort of slope under its own weight, have
>>>>>>>> been well and truly debunked.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Yes, it turns out we were all wrong.  Your most strident assertion, that
>>>>>>> the track must have remained straight because it was under tension, has
>>>>>>> also been completely debunked in a different subthread because the
>>>>>>> jointed
>>>>>>> track was not under tension.  A little humility would make life here much
>>>>>>> more pleasant.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You are misdirecting yourself. While I agree that whoever implied it was
>>>>>> continuously-welded rail under tension (an assertion upon which much
>>>>>> later speculation was based) was mistaken, even classic jointed rail has
>>>>>> very limited "stretch" built into it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But even *that* turns out to be a red herring because the track didn't
>>>>>> slide sideways "down a slope", because the driver is now known to have
>>>>>> just seen a dip.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And all the photos purporting to show otherwise are now known to be
>>>>>> hours later *after* the ground had eroded even more.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The prior zig-zag is a hoax, and that's all I was trying to say.
>>>>>
>>>>> And that folks, is called "humility".....
>>>>
>>>> Indeed. As Roland has never been wrong about anything, ever, he has nothing
>>>> to be humble about.
>>>
>>> That playbook comes out again.
>>>
>>> Yes, there are several things I've not got right, but this episode with
>>> the sideways sliding track isn't one of them. Modulo I was probably
>>> wrong to assume the person who originally mentioned continuous welded
>>> rail tension at that site was correct.
>>>
>>> Oh, that was you! (I wasn't going to mention it, but you've forced my
>>> hand).
>>
>> You were delighted to assume, just as I did, that it was CWR when you
>> thought it supported your theory (which turned out to be no more correct
>> than any others that were proposed):
>>
>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>> In message <stoe9d$fkg$1@dont-email.me>, at 12:17:49 on Sun, 6 Feb 2022,
>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>> In message <sto9hd$g9t$1@dont-email.me>, at 10:56:45 on Sun, 6 Feb 2022,
>>>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>> In message <sto7bj$5cb$2@dont-email.me>, at 10:19:31 on Sun, 6 Feb 2022,
>>>>>>> Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> In message <sth7uq$f0i$1@dont-email.me>, at 18:46:50 on Thu, 3 Feb 2022,
>>>>>>>>> Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>> Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> In message <stgal4$t5h$1@dont-email.me>, at 10:26:45 on Thu, 3
>>>>>>>>>>>> Feb 2022,
>>>>>>>>>>>> Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If you watch a stream of water cutting a channel, it’s
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> upstream end of the channel that gets the most energetic erosion.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, but why does that cause lateral slewing (upstream), rather than
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> more droop?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Because the upstream side of the track gets eroded-under first,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> before the other side of the track. So the track is unsupported
>>>>>>>>>>>>> under one side only; has non-zero weight and is not a rigid
>>>>>>>>>>>>> structure. Why do you think it *wouldn't* slew to one side?
>>>>>>>>>>>>> It's not Hornby "long straight" rigid track which can be used
>>>>>>>>>>>>> as a bridge without any further support!
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Slewing requires a horizontal force perpendicular to the
>>>>>>>>>>>> track, and what
>>>>>>>>>>>> is providing that force. Drooping requires gravity acting
>>>>>>>>>>>> downwards, and
>>>>>>>>>>>> that's in plentiful supply.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> The imbalance of force is provided by the erosion being initially
>>>>>>>>>>> predominantly under one side only of the track.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> If you put a marble on a slope the only force according to
>>>>>>>>>> Roland is just downwards gravity. Yet as the marble rolls down
>>>>>>>>>> the hill it moves both vertically and horizontally.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The eroded track length is effectively rolling down hill (well
>>>>>>>>>> not rolling but you know what I mean).
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> If the ground under the track has eroded by more than about six inches,
>>>>>>>>> there isn't a slope for the track to slide down. It's just hanging in
>>>>>>>>> mid air.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> But at that point it had only eroded under *one side of the track*.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Sure about that?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> <https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2022/01/30/18/53556263-10457643-image-m-
>>>>>>> 23_1643568862268.jpg>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That was taken later.
>>>>>
>>>>> What we need (and there won't be one, unless GA released some cab
>>>>> footage) is a picture of the tracks before the train arrived.
>>>>>
>>>>> The one linked above doesn't show anything like as much of a kink as
>>>>> <https://twitter.com/ianhardie9018/status/1487783395660869633?s=21>
>>>>> which suggests it was moving left and right quite a bit.
>>>>>
>>>>> I still think the ianhardie kink is a result of the track buckling from
>>>>> the braking force of the train, not sliding sideways downhill.
>>>>
>>>> Why would braking cause a track to buckle sideways? CWR is under tension.
>>>
>>> If it's under tension [and yes, I agree it is, and underpins my own
>>> theory], how can it do a crazy zig-zag buckle in the way that's being
>>> claimed, when the only force on it is gravity downwards - and what that
>>> would cause is just a small droop.
>>
>>
>>
> From the RAIB report
>
> As the train approached the section of track concerned, the driver of the
> train noticed what appeared to be standing water on the line ahead and
> started braking. The train, which was formed of three passenger vehicles
> and a power car, stopped with its front carriage above the flowing water.
> Over the next twenty minutes the flowing water caused all support for the
> track to be lost and the track sank significantly, causing the front
> carriage to tilt forwards and sideways. The driver attempted to move the
> train back clear of the damaged section of track, but this proved
> impossible because of the angle of the front carriage.
>
> Note the use of the word sideways. Roland’s original assertion that there
> was only a downwards force and this could not cause a lateral motion.
> Clearly there was a slope and the weight of the train provided the force
> that was converted to some extent into a sideways force.


Click here to read the complete article
Re: 755331 nearly derailed

<U3qQ7ocVnELiFA6E@perry.uk>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/aus+uk/article-flat.php?id=25186&group=uk.railway#25186

 copy link   Newsgroups: uk.railway
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!news.szaf.org!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: rol...@perry.co.uk (Roland Perry)
Newsgroups: uk.railway
Subject: Re: 755331 nearly derailed
Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2022 07:20:53 +0000
Organization: Roland Perry
Lines: 39
Message-ID: <U3qQ7ocVnELiFA6E@perry.uk>
References: <74udvgd927qf2f992997ua7aa9ef86sd8n@4ax.com>
<st8l2g$8md$1@dont-email.me> <I3Il+5SfS+9hFAE8@perry.uk>
<bopfvgt9rqcdhovh9aiti9vq6thiirkaj3@4ax.com> <st8rff$ib3$1@dont-email.me>
<stbfjn$8q7$2@dont-email.me> <sv2gnq$eu9$1@dont-email.me>
<sv2ncj$uh7$1@dont-email.me> <4rqb8Y+tnQFiFAO0@perry.uk>
<svdjpv$e1j$1@dont-email.me> <XnSQ$iWCGmGiFASW@perry.uk>
<sve0ia$7mn$1@dont-email.me> <svg8gp$3r1$1@dont-email.me>
<fFcyXRt5y6GiFARq@perry.uk> <svgcmb$72m$1@dont-email.me>
<svgdtm$h0s$1@dont-email.me>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;charset=utf-8;format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: individual.net hn0XNAS2QwKy1wrOTtOJRAkxbVezsStOpzFPaP4E888wtJ+uJg
X-Orig-Path: perry.co.uk!roland
Cancel-Lock: sha1:drXcISZhNvD74+VsvcAuw6BqVao=
User-Agent: Turnpike/6.07-M (<5Ru5fF71$jxzR1U9dxU62mV70X>)
 by: Roland Perry - Sat, 12 Mar 2022 07:20 UTC

In message <svgdtm$h0s$1@dont-email.me>, at 17:55:02 on Sun, 27 Feb
2022, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:

>>
>From the RAIB report
>
>As the train approached the section of track concerned, the driver of the
>train noticed what appeared to be standing water on the line ahead and
>started braking. The train, which was formed of three passenger vehicles
>and a power car, stopped with its front carriage above the flowing water.
>Over the next twenty minutes the flowing water caused all support for the
>track to be lost and the track sank significantly, causing the front
>carriage to tilt forwards and sideways. The driver attempted to move the
>train back clear of the damaged section of track, but this proved
>impossible because of the angle of the front carriage.
>
>Note the use of the word sideways. Roland’s original assertion that there
>was only a downwards force and this could not cause a lateral motion.

Thanks for posting the RAIB quote because it completely supports the
comments I made earlier.

The dip and the sideways movement was *after* the train had arrived. It
was *not* something which had happened to the track *before* the train
arrived, *thus* alerting the approaching driver.

He was alerted by something rather different.

>Clearly there was a slope and the weight of the train provided the force
>that was converted to some extent into a sideways force. Had the ballast
>been completely washed out, ie under both rails, the weight of the train
>would only cause a vertical dip.

The assumption I was challenging was that *before the train arrived* the
track was in the state pictured *after* the train had stopped, *after*
continued erosion and the weight of the train, and of course after* the
delay before the arrival of the photographers.
--
Roland Perry

Re: 755331 nearly derailed

<C3HVrLdhpELiFA5J@perry.uk>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/aus+uk/article-flat.php?id=25187&group=uk.railway#25187

 copy link   Newsgroups: uk.railway
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!news.szaf.org!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: rol...@perry.co.uk (Roland Perry)
Newsgroups: uk.railway
Subject: Re: 755331 nearly derailed
Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2022 07:23:13 +0000
Organization: Roland Perry
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <C3HVrLdhpELiFA5J@perry.uk>
References: <74udvgd927qf2f992997ua7aa9ef86sd8n@4ax.com>
<st8l2g$8md$1@dont-email.me> <I3Il+5SfS+9hFAE8@perry.uk>
<bopfvgt9rqcdhovh9aiti9vq6thiirkaj3@4ax.com> <st8rff$ib3$1@dont-email.me>
<stbfjn$8q7$2@dont-email.me> <sv2gnq$eu9$1@dont-email.me>
<sv2ncj$uh7$1@dont-email.me> <4rqb8Y+tnQFiFAO0@perry.uk>
<svdjpv$e1j$1@dont-email.me> <XnSQ$iWCGmGiFASW@perry.uk>
<svgjj1$2th$1@dont-email.me>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;charset=utf-8;format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: individual.net TsiTwl3WnQkIDcvCfyH45Q5MF8MrtDODDoMDBGzL+0zqPfvDvh
X-Orig-Path: perry.co.uk!roland
Cancel-Lock: sha1:TkSJi/JvZysqV603Z0yp/1w2cS0=
User-Agent: Turnpike/6.07-M (<52l5fZdV$jhVf1U93hT62mJV+y>)
 by: Roland Perry - Sat, 12 Mar 2022 07:23 UTC

In message <svgjj1$2th$1@dont-email.me>, at 19:31:45 on Sun, 27 Feb
2022, Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> remarked:

>> The prior zig-zag is a hoax, and that's all I was trying to say.
>
>It was a conclusion based on incomplete information about the course of
>events. It was not in any sense a hoax - perhaps you might look up the
>word in a dictionary. Now we have better information so we change our
>minds and move on. We don’t keep trying to pretend we were right the
>whole time.

See my posting to Tweed. And yes, we have better (ie verified)
information now, but it was always clear to me that the zig-zag
theory was impossible.
--
Roland Perry

Re: 755331 nearly derailed

<J39XL1dJtELiFA57@perry.uk>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/aus+uk/article-flat.php?id=25188&group=uk.railway#25188

 copy link   Newsgroups: uk.railway
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!news.szaf.org!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: rol...@perry.co.uk (Roland Perry)
Newsgroups: uk.railway
Subject: Re: 755331 nearly derailed
Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2022 07:27:05 +0000
Organization: Roland Perry
Lines: 17
Message-ID: <J39XL1dJtELiFA57@perry.uk>
References: <74udvgd927qf2f992997ua7aa9ef86sd8n@4ax.com>
<st8l2g$8md$1@dont-email.me> <I3Il+5SfS+9hFAE8@perry.uk>
<bopfvgt9rqcdhovh9aiti9vq6thiirkaj3@4ax.com> <st8rff$ib3$1@dont-email.me>
<stbfjn$8q7$2@dont-email.me> <sv2gnq$eu9$1@dont-email.me>
<sv2ncj$uh7$1@dont-email.me> <4rqb8Y+tnQFiFAO0@perry.uk>
<svdjpv$e1j$1@dont-email.me> <XnSQ$iWCGmGiFASW@perry.uk>
<sve0ia$7mn$1@dont-email.me> <svg8gp$3r1$1@dont-email.me>
<fFcyXRt5y6GiFARq@perry.uk> <svgcmb$72m$1@dont-email.me>
<svgdtm$h0s$1@dont-email.me> <svh146$g2s$1@dont-email.me>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;charset=us-ascii;format=flowed
X-Trace: individual.net NjXgxy65tA7qrD1jndxbEA2h0hL14ggjGs59oLfK3tBds/i+JW
X-Orig-Path: perry.co.uk!roland
Cancel-Lock: sha1:a9EB2SKb09IR2soKemYCD0Thq+U=
User-Agent: Turnpike/6.07-M (<5xj5fFN1$jhQR1U9PhW62mVNOF>)
 by: Roland Perry - Sat, 12 Mar 2022 07:27 UTC

In message <svh146$g2s$1@dont-email.me>, at 23:22:46 on Sun, 27 Feb
2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:

>Yes, it seems most of us were wrong to think that the track had slipped to
>the left, down the slope, before the train arrived. It did slip left down
>the slope, but slightly later, after the train had safely stopped.

Thanks for the wrap-up, it summarises what I'd been saying all along. So
no need for me to "argue" anything different, because we are in fierce
agreement eventually.

>So we got the events right, but in the wrong order.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ETSmbNTXQAMVlTl?format=jpg&name=small

--
Roland Perry

Re: 755331 nearly derailed

<t0ieuv$otg$3@dont-email.me>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/aus+uk/article-flat.php?id=25238&group=uk.railway#25238

 copy link   Newsgroups: uk.railway
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: recliner...@gmail.com (Recliner)
Newsgroups: uk.railway
Subject: Re: 755331 nearly derailed
Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2022 15:41:19 -0000 (UTC)
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <t0ieuv$otg$3@dont-email.me>
References: <74udvgd927qf2f992997ua7aa9ef86sd8n@4ax.com>
<st8l2g$8md$1@dont-email.me>
<I3Il+5SfS+9hFAE8@perry.uk>
<bopfvgt9rqcdhovh9aiti9vq6thiirkaj3@4ax.com>
<st8rff$ib3$1@dont-email.me>
<stbfjn$8q7$2@dont-email.me>
<sv2gnq$eu9$1@dont-email.me>
<sv2ncj$uh7$1@dont-email.me>
<4rqb8Y+tnQFiFAO0@perry.uk>
<svdjpv$e1j$1@dont-email.me>
<XnSQ$iWCGmGiFASW@perry.uk>
<sve0ia$7mn$1@dont-email.me>
<svg8gp$3r1$1@dont-email.me>
<fFcyXRt5y6GiFARq@perry.uk>
<svgcmb$72m$1@dont-email.me>
<svgdtm$h0s$1@dont-email.me>
<svh146$g2s$1@dont-email.me>
<J39XL1dJtELiFA57@perry.uk>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2022 15:41:19 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="f5e5162e44643bfbae7a5615baf4626d";
logging-data="25520"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19kOFvElwBmQ4IxVgYN48qz6ypmkGtzxbk="
User-Agent: NewsTap/5.5 (iPad)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:Lb+BB/WxOU6zctZ5tAwlzyo3Ogc=
sha1:nhH47GbypyyK7+7zTeMzBffofyM=
 by: Recliner - Sat, 12 Mar 2022 15:41 UTC

Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
> In message <svh146$g2s$1@dont-email.me>, at 23:22:46 on Sun, 27 Feb
> 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>
>> Yes, it seems most of us were wrong to think that the track had slipped to
>> the left, down the slope, before the train arrived. It did slip left down
>> the slope, but slightly later, after the train had safely stopped.
>
> Thanks for the wrap-up, it summarises what I'd been saying all along.

No, not quite. *All* of our theories, including yours, were wrong.

> So no need for me to "argue" anything different, because we are in fierce
> agreement eventually.

There's certainly no need to argue about it!

Re: 755331 nearly derailed

<8UpqDw2FptMiFAVt@perry.uk>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/aus+uk/article-flat.php?id=25443&group=uk.railway#25443

 copy link   Newsgroups: uk.railway
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!news.szaf.org!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: rol...@perry.co.uk (Roland Perry)
Newsgroups: uk.railway
Subject: Re: 755331 nearly derailed
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2022 06:50:45 +0000
Organization: Roland Perry
Lines: 31
Message-ID: <8UpqDw2FptMiFAVt@perry.uk>
References: <74udvgd927qf2f992997ua7aa9ef86sd8n@4ax.com>
<st8l2g$8md$1@dont-email.me> <I3Il+5SfS+9hFAE8@perry.uk>
<bopfvgt9rqcdhovh9aiti9vq6thiirkaj3@4ax.com> <st8rff$ib3$1@dont-email.me>
<stbfjn$8q7$2@dont-email.me> <sv2gnq$eu9$1@dont-email.me>
<sv2ncj$uh7$1@dont-email.me> <4rqb8Y+tnQFiFAO0@perry.uk>
<svdjpv$e1j$1@dont-email.me> <XnSQ$iWCGmGiFASW@perry.uk>
<sve0ia$7mn$1@dont-email.me> <svg8gp$3r1$1@dont-email.me>
<fFcyXRt5y6GiFARq@perry.uk> <svgcmb$72m$1@dont-email.me>
<svgdtm$h0s$1@dont-email.me> <svh146$g2s$1@dont-email.me>
<J39XL1dJtELiFA57@perry.uk> <t0ieuv$otg$3@dont-email.me>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;charset=us-ascii;format=flowed
X-Trace: individual.net Xx6o2T1h4v+Cf8fLBPwPyQUr/UmjydSwfGqD5nzFL7Ua1H1qiE
X-Orig-Path: perry.co.uk!roland
Cancel-Lock: sha1:v/Uh9lwLiWwXBghAtQTZEZURniQ=
User-Agent: Turnpike/6.07-M (<5Mk5fxbR$jxl31U9Uxb62mhShZ>)
 by: Roland Perry - Thu, 17 Mar 2022 06:50 UTC

In message <t0ieuv$otg$3@dont-email.me>, at 15:41:19 on Sat, 12 Mar
2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>> In message <svh146$g2s$1@dont-email.me>, at 23:22:46 on Sun, 27 Feb
>> 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>
>>> Yes, it seems most of us were wrong to think that the track had slipped to
>>> the left, down the slope, before the train arrived. It did slip left down
>>> the slope, but slightly later, after the train had safely stopped.
>>
>> Thanks for the wrap-up, it summarises what I'd been saying all along.
>
>No, not quite. *All* of our theories, including yours, were wrong.

My theory was simply that the driver didn't see a zig-zag in the track
ahead, which therefore caused him to stop.

That theory was correct.

Everything after that was people trying to debunk my theory, by talking
about things sliding sideways, due to gravity and some soil mechanics
which simply didn't make sense to me.

>> So no need for me to "argue" anything different, because we are in fierce
>> agreement eventually.
>
>There's certainly no need to argue about it!

Indeed.
--
Roland Perry

Pages:1234567
server_pubkey.txt

rocksolid light 0.9.7
clearnet tor