I like Trains

[juttjaw]

Nasty stuff if something goes wrong. Fairly safe as a liquid but if it leaks, vapourizes, and ignites you suddenly have a catastrophe in the making.

Well, if they start shipping down here I'm sure I'll get to know about it well. Dragging some of the shit we have through highly populated urban areas is a pretty big deal. Rolling catastrophes.

 

[Hard_Rom]

Well, if they start shipping down here I'm sure I'll get to know about it well. Dragging some of the shit we have through highly populated urban areas is a pretty big deal. Rolling catastrophes.

LNG may top them all except for the toxic shit. Explosive potential is huge.

Wikipedia says LNG ships have over 100 million miles without mishap. I'm doubting trains are as safe.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cleveland_East_Ohio_Gas_explosion

The Cleveland East Ohio Gas Explosion occurred on the afternoon of Friday, October 20, 1944. The resulting gas leak, explosion and fires killed 130 people and destroyed a one square mile area on Cleveland, Ohio's east side.

The East Ohio Gas Explosion is calculated to equal to a 2.43 kt TNT explosion or 1/6 of the Hiroshima Atomic Bomb.

 

[thør]

Explosive potential is huge.

Where's the oxidizer?

I've watched a guy put a lit ciggy out in a tub of LNG.

The old LNG tankers from the 60's used balsa wood for the tanks.

 

[Hard_Rom]

Where's the oxidizer?

I've watched a guy put a lit ciggy out in a tub of LNG.

The old LNG tankers from the 60's used balsa wood for the tanks.

It has to vapourize first. The Chicago explosion was due to a low nickel steel tank not being able to withstand the extreme cold. Then the liquid flowed out and entered sewer systems before igniting.

You can dowse a smoke in gasoline too, if your quick enough and it's not too warm out.

I suspect if balsa was used it may have been more of an insulator than containment. Wikipedia has no reference to balsa wood.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liquefied_natural_gas

In its liquid state, LNG is not explosive and can not burn. For LNG to burn, it must first vaporize, then mix with air in the proper proportions (the flammable range is 5 percent to 15 percent), and then be ignited. In the case of a leak, LNG vaporizes rapidly, turning into a gas (methane plus trace gases), and mixing with air. If this mixture is within the flammable range, there is risk of ignition which would create fire and thermal radiation hazards.

*it is far more explosive than crude oil*

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lac-Mégantic_rail_disaster

 

[thør]

It has to vapourize first. The Chicago explosion was due to a low nickel steel tank not being able to withstand the extreme cold. Then the liquid flowed out and entered sewer systems before igniting.

You can dowse a smoke in gasoline too, if your quick enough and it's not too warm out.

I suspect if balsa was used it may have been more of an insulator than containment. Wikipedia has no reference to balsa wood.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liquefied_natural_gas

In its liquid state, LNG is not explosive and can not burn. For LNG to burn, it must first vaporize, then mix with air in the proper proportions (the flammable range is 5 percent to 15 percent), and then be ignited. In the case of a leak, LNG vaporizes rapidly, turning into a gas (methane plus trace gases), and mixing with air. If this mixture is within the flammable range, there is risk of ignition which would create fire and thermal radiation hazards.

*it is far more explosive than crude oil*

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lac-Mégantic_rail_disaster

Wiki wasn't standing next to me on the LNG carrier at dock at Nikiski.

 

[Hard_Rom]

Wiki wasn't standing next to me on the LNG carrier at dock at Nikiski.

If it was it would have told you like I posted 'over 100 million miles with incident'.

You think shipping by train is as safe or safer than sea? I doubt trains can get 100 million miles without a derailment.

 

[thør]

If it was it would have told you like I posted 'over 100 million miles with incident'.

You think shipping by train is as safe or safer than sea? I doubt trains can get 100 million miles without a derailment.

I said nothing of the sort.

I'd rather have a natural gas pipeline. Not LNG, but just LG. But, for this route in Alaska, the train is quite safe environmentally. When the LNG derails, there will be very little ground contaminated. Might be spectacular in the Nenana canyon.

 

[trysail]

http://www.steamintohistory.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/train_8.jpg


​

 

[ryan8558]

http://www.waltdisney.org/blog/making-great-locomotive-chase

 

[Hard_Rom]

Port Stanley Terminal Rail. Little tourist train from St. Thomas to Port Stanley.

http://www.portstanley.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/pstr-loading.jpg

 

[Hard_Rom]

That's what I call a real snow plow!

http://www.railroadmichigan.com/stanley55367.jpg

 

[trysail]

http://www.waltdisney.org/blog/making-great-locomotive-chase

Nice link and an interesting story.

I watched a PBS ("American Experience") biography of Walt Disney. He certainly was a railroad aficionado— to the point of building an actual steam-powered garden railroad on his property.

He was (obviously) a genius but, notwithstanding the carefully cultivated public image of amiable jollity, he could be and was a very hard-nosed businessman.

​

 

[trysail]

http://www.nscorp.com/content/nscorp/en/multimedia-gallery/photos/2015-calendar-photos/_jcr_content/mainpar/twocolparsys/rightcol/image_4.img.jpg/1459255316917.jpg



​

 

[Rightguide]

A great way to move freight but still a 19th Century technology for moving people. The most efficient methods of moving people are on the highways and in the airways.

 

[trysail]

A great way to move freight but still a 19th Century technology for moving people. The most efficient methods of moving people are on the highways and in the airways.

Wrong.

I'm guessing that you've never been on a TGV or a Shinkansen ?

Flying sucks dog balls.




https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/88/Shinkansen.jpg/640px-Shinkansen.jpg


https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/fa/Cd41-0015g.png/640px-Cd41-0015g.png

​

 

[Rightguide]

Wrong.

I'm guessing that you've never been on a TGV or a Shinkansen ?

Flying sucks dog balls.




https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/88/Shinkansen.jpg/640px-Shinkansen.jpg


https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/fa/Cd41-0015g.png/640px-Cd41-0015g.png

​

Fast but not efficient. Railroads account for less than 1% of passenger-miles in the United States. Highways account for almost 87 percent of passenger miles. Air carriers almost 12%. So as we see the market has determined the cheapest most efficient methods of moving people.

 

[trysail]

Fast but not efficient. Railroads account for less than 1% of passenger-miles in the United States. Highways account for almost 87 percent of passenger miles. Air carriers almost 12%. So as we see the market has determined the cheapest most efficient methods of moving people.

Wrongamundo.

The fucking government subsidization of trucking and flying have distorted the hell out of the market.

The trucking companies are nothing but goddamned subsidy farmers.

​

 

[oggbashan]

Fast but not efficient. Railroads account for less than 1% of passenger-miles in the United States. Highways account for almost 87 percent of passenger miles. Air carriers almost 12%. So as we see the market has determined the cheapest most efficient methods of moving people.

Most European cities could not operate without rail transport of passengers. With the spread of high speed services across Europe, city centre to city centre travel is often faster (and far more comfortable) than air travel.

 

[ryan8558]

are security checkpoints for passengers at train terminals as intrusive as at airports?

take off shoes, xrays of bags, body scanners and sometimes body pat downs???

 

[Rightguide]

Wrongamundo.

The fucking government subsidization of trucking and flying have distorted the hell out of the market.

The trucking companies are nothing but goddamned subsidy farmers.

​

Actually, it's the federal takeover and subsidization of Amtrak that kills its passenger business model. It has never made a profit in it's 40 plus years of service and has sucked up 40 plus billion in federal subsidies and it only accounts for 0.1% of passenger travel in America. Amtrak currently loses $54.50 per passenger and the Sunset Line between New Orleans and L.A. loses $390 per ticket. In 2010 Amtrak had 30 million passengers but still needed $560 million to cover their deficits. In contrasts airlines move two million people a day, 24 times as much, and still makes a profit. In the Washington-Boston corridor passenger rail only accounts for 0.5% of all inner city trips.

 

[KingOrfeo]

A great way to move freight but still a 19th Century technology for moving people. The most efficient methods of moving people are on the highways and in the airways.

Trains are more energy-efficient and less polluting. What America really needs is high-speed rail -- but, far more importantly, a greatly expanded network of conventional rail, as well as local commuter rail transportation in all metropolitan areas. Getting cars off the roads should be the goal.

 

[oggbashan]

are security checkpoints for passengers at train terminals as intrusive as at airports?

take off shoes, xrays of bags, body scanners and sometimes body pat downs???

Not quite as intrusive except when an international train crosses a border from the Schengen area to beyond. The checks are far quicker and you can turn up shortly before the departure time, not hours before.

There's no weight/size limit on luggage. If you can carry it on, that's OK.

Trains inside a single country? No checks at all. If you arrive two minutes before the train leaves, you'll get on.

 

[KingOrfeo]

Fast but not efficient. Railroads account for less than 1% of passenger-miles in the United States. Highways account for almost 87 percent of passenger miles. Air carriers almost 12%. So as we see the market has determined the cheapest most efficient methods of moving people.

Popularity is not evidence of efficiency. SUVs are inefficient in that they get crappy gas mileage, but you'll still see plenty of them on the roads and not so many hybrids.

 

[KingOrfeo]

The Russians want to build a rail tunnel across the Bering Strait. I don't know why. There is so little traffic now between Siberia and Alaska -- where's the demand for a more efficient way to cross?

 

[Rightguide]

Popularity is not evidence of efficiency. SUVs are inefficient in that they get crappy gas mileage, but you'll still see plenty of them on the roads and not so many hybrids.

You're an idiot.