Most realistic train crash
Michael Jennings
Classified <db...@ecs.soton.ac.uk> wrote:
>
>Having seen the latest Steven Segal (sp?) flop IMHO as he starred in
>Under Seige two, I wonder what peoples opinions are on the most realistic
>train crash in a movie - or to that matter the most realistic train movie.
>
The train crash in _The Fugitive_ was very realistic: hardly
surprising given that they filmed it by crashing a real train.
It isn't a 'railway movie' in any other sense, however.
Michael.
--
Michael Jennings
Department of Applied Mathematics and Theoretical Physics
The University of Cambridge.
http://www.damtp.cam.ac.uk/user/mjj12 mj...@amtp.cam.ac.uk
Disclaimer: the opinions presented here are mine alone,
but they should be yours too because they're right.
Marc Dufour
==============================================================
db...@ecs.soton.ac.uk (Classified)
écrivit le - wrote on 5 Dec 95 18:29:08 GMT:
--------------------------------------------------------------
...
>Two of the best train crash movies IMHO are 'The Silver Streak' .. How
>exactly did they get the train to crash through the station like that??
Ahhh... Silver Streak.
Oddly enough, when it first came out, I wasn't much interested in
trains, but I recognized as a CP train when I heard the whistle on a TV
ad... My hunch was confirmed when I first saw the movie almost 10 years
later.
Silver Streak was filmed on CP, using a Canadian trainset (Budd
1956). Apparently, Amtrak would not touch it because it featured a scene
where Gene Wilder accidentally got into a woman's bedroom while she was
in her undies. (But, I personally think that the *REAL* reason was that
AMTRAK could not spare enough equipment for the movie at the time).
>(Okay never mind the fact it would have derailed through the station
>approaches anyway if it was travelling at such high speed ;-), and the
Silver Streaks travels from Toronto to... Toronto. The departure
scene is filmed east of Toronto, and it comes back "crashing" into
Toronto Union Station. However, TUS is a run-through
terminal^h^h^h^h^hstation, and the crash location means that the train
would have to be running some 45 degrees away from the tracks axis...
During the panic sequences, we can clearly see "TURBO" signs... And
in the yard scenes, there are Canadian Pacific script-lettered
switchers^h^h^h^h^hshunt engines.
It was all done in miniatures and matte paintings. The miniature was
excellently done, as the smashing F-7a numberboards display the insides
as they really are. The only discrepancy is the left-side control stand
(perhaps CP was reluctant to film a tool box on top of the real deadman
pedal)... Of course, we won'T talk how unpractical it would be to
disconnect emergency valves from every car in the train...
And if you care to ride behind/in front of the engine who "crashed"
through Toronto Union Station, you're welcome anytime in Montréal to
ride on a STCUM commuter train, for CP 4070 is now STCUM 1310 and
running daily on the Montréal_Rigaud line, even though it is 43 years
old...
* * *
Now, the most realistic train crash must be in one of those movies
where they actually crash a train.
"La bataille du rail" (depicting the story of the French Rail
Résistance, where they actually send a *WHOLE* train down an embankment
*) comes first to mind, but isn't there also the movie with Buster
Keaton?
(* Actualy, sabotagewise, it is not *WISE* to send a train down an
embankment. You want to derail it in a cut, or better in a tunnel, where
cleaning-up the mess will be harder... If you sent it off an embankment,
all you have to do is relay the rail, and trains can go, leaving the
mess off the track)...
-------------------Pour la République Française du Québec------------------
Ask yourself: What is social progress?
Is it when individuals can accumulate as much wealth/power as possible no
matter how, or is it when the little guys are protected from the big guys?
--- Marc Dufour -- [\] ACUC 6 31874 & TDI -- http://www.accent.net/emdx ---
Classified
Having seen the latest Steven Segal (sp?) flop IMHO as he starred in
Under Seige two, I wonder what peoples opinions are on the most realistic
train crash in a movie - or to that matter the most realistic train movie.
There are a few that spring quickly to mind. The first which doesn't have
much to do with a train in it was (arrgh forgot the name of the film) -
when two old and formerly glorious stars crashed a steam locomotive in
order to get across the border. This was a sort of spoof movie. Anyone
know the title?
I thought Under Seige 2 was absolutely ridiculous - with Segal running
from carriage to carriage as the train careers into the water - never
mind the fact that I thought the way the crash happened was unrealistic
in the first place (I am sure the driver of the oncoming train would have
seen something and at least stopped!)
Another I have seen is the Cassandra Crossing. Well for starters, I do
not know of any screw coupling systems which are automated in anyway such
that they can be detached from a remote point without human physical
assistance. And as in Under Seige 2, the carriages would simply not
seperate as they came off the rails. That just doesn't happen.
Two of the best train crash movies IMHO are 'The Silver Streak' .. How
exactly did they get the train to crash through the station like that??
(Okay never mind the fact it would have derailed through the station
approaches anyway if it was travelling at such high speed ;-), and the
other is (again forgot the title) - where two prisoners find themselves
on a runaway train. That the combined engine power could burn off the
brakes of the locomotives I found realistic... and again, the crash which
smashed to pieces the rear of a freight train slowly getting onto a
siding was again unprecendented.
Any opinions anyone?
--
Regards, World Wide Web
David http://whirligig.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~db93/david.html
db...@ecs.soton.ac.uk
Marc Dufour
==============================================================
db...@ecs.soton.ac.uk (Classified)
écrivit le - wrote on 5 Dec 95 18:29:08 GMT:
--------------------------------------------------------------
...
>exactly did they get the train to crash through the station like that??
Ahhh... Silver Streak.
Oddly enough, when it first came out, I wasn't much interested in
trains, but I recognized as a CP train when I heard the whistle on a TV
ad... My hunch was confirmed when I first saw the movie almost 10 years
later.
Silver Streak was filmed on CP, using a Canadian trainset (Budd
1956). Apparently, Amtrak would not touch it because it featured a scene
where Gene Wilder accidentally got into a woman's bedroom while she was
in her undies. (But, I personally think that the *REAL* reason was that
AMTRAK could not spare enough equipment for the movie at the time).
>(Okay never mind the fact it would have derailed through the station
>approaches anyway if it was travelling at such high speed ;-), and the
Silver Streaks travels from Toronto to... Toronto. The departure
scene is filmed east of Toronto, and it comes back "crashing" into
Toronto Union Station. However, TUS is a run-through
terminal^h^h^h^h^hstation, and the crash location means that the train
would have to be running some 45 degrees away from the tracks axis...
During the panic sequences, we can clearly see "TURBO" signs... And
in the yard scenes, there are Canadian Pacific script-lettered
switchers^h^h^h^h^hshunt engines.
It was all done in miniatures and matte paintings. The miniature was
excellently done, as the smashing F-7a numberboards display the insides
as they really are. The only discrepancy is the left-side control stand
(perhaps CP was reluctant to film a tool box on top of the real deadman
pedal)... Of course, we won'T talk how unpractical it would be to
disconnect emergency valves from every car in the train...
And if you care to ride behind/in front of the engine who "crashed"
through Toronto Union Station, you're welcome anytime in Montréal to
ride on a STCUM commuter train, for CP 4070 is now STCUM 1310 and
running daily on the Montréal_Rigaud line, even though it is 43 years
old...
-------------------Pour la République Française du Québec------------------
Calvin Henry-Cotnam
: Two of the best train crash movies IMHO are 'The Silver Streak' .. How
: exactly did they get the train to crash through the station like that??
: (Okay never mind the fact it would have derailed through the station
: approaches anyway if it was travelling at such high speed
Also never mind the fact that the station used in the filming of
the movie was Toronto Union station which is a through-station and
not a stub-end station!
--
Calvin Henry-Cotnam, CATE | "If my Sheridan were here,
Ryerson Polytechnic University | he would be appalled."
Toronto, Ontario, Canada | - Hyacinth Bucket
was: c...@ee.ryerson.ca is: c...@cate.ryerson.ca
Tom A. Michalski
The only reason I taped it was because of the trains!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Adam T. Michalski "I don't know, I don't care, and it doesn't make
mic...@omnifest.uwm.edu any difference."
MiSTie #39553 Jack Kerouac (1922-1969)
St. Francis, Wisconsin
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lewis Mezirka, iii
train is called "Runaway Train", and hands down that was a fabulous crash,
and the way the locomotive looked, that would have taken a lot of time
and money to model, (or was it real???)
Just an opinion
-
LEWIS MEZIRKA, III CKV...@prodigy.com
carlson brian lee
: There are a few that spring quickly to mind. The first which doesn't have
: when two old and formerly glorious stars crashed a steam locomotive in
: order to get across the border. This was a sort of spoof movie. Anyone
: know the title?
Tough Guys. They used Southern Pacific Daylight 4449 in the movie.
They didn't really crash it, though. ;-)
: I thought Under Seige 2 was absolutely ridiculous - with Segal running
: from carriage to carriage as the train careers into the water - never
: mind the fact that I thought the way the crash happened was unrealistic
: in the first place (I am sure the driver of the oncoming train would have
: seen something and at least stopped!)
I thought so, too, but the crash was pretty good!
: approaches anyway if it was travelling at such high speed ;-), and the
: other is (again forgot the title) - where two prisoners find themselves
: on a runaway train. That the combined engine power could burn off the
: brakes of the locomotives I found realistic... and again, the crash which
: smashed to pieces the rear of a freight train slowly getting onto a
: siding was again unprecendented.
That title should be easy to remember--Runaway Train! It's amazing how
the locos could have crashed through two cars and a caboose and the lead
loco still have its nose contours intact underneath the wreckage <g>.
--Brian--
--
Benefits of Working at MRM #4: Eating pizza in the machine shop!
Brian Carlson Ham Radio:N9JUQ
blca...@students.uiuc.edu
blca...@coewl.cen.uiuc.edu
By Week:Electrical Engineering Student
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
By Weekend:Student Locomotive Engineer (among other things)
Monticello Railway Museum
Check out MRM on the Web at http://www.prairienet.org/mrm/
.
Timothy Bowser
>Having seen the latest Steven Segal (sp?) flop IMHO as he starred in
>Under Seige two, I wonder what peoples opinions are on the most realistic
>train crash in a movie - or to that matter the most realistic train movie.
>There are a few that spring quickly to mind. The first which doesn't have
>much to do with a train in it was (arrgh forgot the name of the film) -
>when two old and formerly glorious stars crashed a steam locomotive in
>order to get across the border. This was a sort of spoof movie. Anyone
>know the title?
Tough Guys, with Kirk Douglas and Burt Lancaster.
>Two of the best train crash movies IMHO are 'The Silver Streak' .. How
>exactly did they get the train to crash through the station like that??
>(Okay never mind the fact it would have derailed through the station
>approaches anyway if it was travelling at such high speed ;-), and the
>other is (again forgot the title) - where two prisoners find themselves
>on a runaway train. That the combined engine power could burn off the
>brakes of the locomotives I found realistic... and again, the crash which
>smashed to pieces the rear of a freight train slowly getting onto a
>siding was again unprecendented.
I think that one was actually called "Runaway Train". The setup for the
runaway was, as I recall, impossible for motive power that conforms to FRA
standards. Is there still a "deadman's pedal", or some other way to keep a
locomotive from continuing to run at settings over idle if the engineer/
hostler doesn't respond at intervals?
>Any opinions anyone?
Best filmed crash for dramatic effect had to be in "The Fugitive", with
Harrison Ford.
>--
>Regards, World Wide Web
>David http://whirligig.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~db93/david.html
>db...@ecs.soton.ac.uk
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tim "Strikemaster" Bowser, | RTFM: It's not just an acronym, it's the law |
BUD owner, SVHS/Hi-8 user, |-----------------------------------------------
will mid-air refuel for food | str...@steam.wichita.ks.us | 21-yr USAF vet |
Michael Powell
Lancaster as a french resistance fighter who is employed as an engineer,
and Paul Schofield as a Nazi trying to take a train load of looted French
art back to Germany. The crash involves running an ancient 0-6-0
switcher through incorrectly set turnouts, directly in the path of a the
freight train. It's realistic for the simple reason that the crash was
real. The actors and director all got to play trains for a few weeks,
Burt Lancaster particulalry enjoyed playing the part of the engineer and
insisted on being properly trained in driving the engine so that he would
be convincing in the role - I suspect he just enjoyed driving the train.
They also staged the bombing of a marshalling yard and engine depot,
although the explosions aren't BIG enough to convince us that they're
from an aircraft bomb. It's a great film - in my opinion the BEST movie
featuring railroads.
regards,
Michael
Kevin L. Wagner
realistic crashes.
The first movie is "Silver Streak". Aside from the engineer sitting on
the left side of the cab and the train not derailing on the approach to
the station, it looked very realistic. It was also an exciting scene to
watch as they're trying to uncouple the engines and first three cars
from the rest of the train and it keeps getting closer and closer to the
station. Also, somebody said that there were signs for the Turbo trains
at the station. Right after they've successfully uncoupled the train,
as the film shows it rushing towards the station while outside on the
open platforms, you can see a Turbo train just inside the "shed" on the
right side of the screen.
Another good movie that I have on video is "Disaster on the Coastliner".
While it's made for TV, it's still an entertaining movie to watch. From
something I read in an old Model Railroader, they actually crashed the
Amtrak locomotive at the end of the film by running it off the end of
the track at full throttle.
"Runaway Train" is another great movie. As for why the train didn't
stop, the engineer might have put something on the deadman's pedal to
keep the train running so that he only had to run the throttle and
brakes. Also, I'm not surprised that the brake shoes got burned off.
If you play the movie in slow motion as the engineer opens the throttle,
you can see that it opens it wide open to notch 8. The crashes were
realistic too. The crash where the runaway plows through the caboose
and a flatcar on eastbound 12 was very exciting.
Leon Reed
>
>I wonder what peoples opinions are on the most realistic
>train crash in a movie - or to that matter the most realistic train movie.
I don't think anyone mentioned "The Train," an excellent B&W action movie starring Burt Lancaster, I think, as a French RR engineer =
in Nazi occupation. The train crash is great, with a wheel of the train winding up inches from one of the cameras. Saw an intervie=
w with the director who said that was just a spare camera that they planted there just cuz they couldn't think of anywhere better to=
put it, and it wound up giving him the best shot he ever made in his life.
William E. Hope
The Fugitive - starring Harrison Ford
---
|| Bill Hope || All Opinions are personal and have not ||
|| DS&E Software Automation || been approved by Upper Management. ||
|| Texas Instruments, Inc. || ||
|| email: weh...@ti.com || Any Facts are Facts as I know them; ||
|| voice: 214.995.5618 || Others may have more accurate Facts. ||
Charles L Rapport
>Classified (db...@ecs.soton.ac.uk) wrote:
>: Two of the best train crash movies IMHO are 'The Silver Streak' .. How
>: exactly did they get the train to crash through the station like that??
>: (Okay never mind the fact it would have derailed through the station
>: approaches anyway if it was travelling at such high speed
>Also never mind the fact that the station used in the filming of
>the movie was Toronto Union station which is a through-station and
>not a stub-end station!
The very end of the "Silver Streak" crash, as the "Amroad" locomotive
came to a stop looked rather like a model to me....
A more glaring error in that film was the placement of the later deceased
engineer on the left side of the cab -- obviously because a real engineer
must have been running the show at the throttle on the right.
Haven't seen this film for nearly 20 years, when a former girlfriend who
knew I was a railfan took me to see it, but I remember generally enjoying
it, even though it is not the sort of flick that encourages holding hands
in the dark theatre!
Christopher M. Byrnes
>I wonder what peoples opinions are on the most realistic
>train crash in a movie - or to that matter the most realistic train movie.
which starred Burt Lancaster and Paul Scofield and was released (in
black & white) in the 1960s.
--
Christopher Byrnes
The MITRE Corporation
202 Burlington Road
M/S B155
Bedford, Mass. 01730-1420
c...@Mitre.org
...!linus!mbunix!cb (UUCP)
Drew R. McGhee
Orriginally from David with some stuff edited.
>There are a few that spring quickly to mind. The first which doesn't have
>much to do with a train in it was (arrgh forgot the name of the film) -
>when two old and formerly glorious stars crashed a steam locomotive in
>order to get across the border. This was a sort of spoof movie. Anyone
>know the title?
"Tough Guys" with Burt Lancaster and Kirk Douglas.
>Two of the best train crash movies IMHO are 'The Silver Streak' .. How
>exactly did they get the train to crash through the station like that??
>(Okay never mind the fact it would have derailed through the station
>approaches anyway if it was travelling at such high speed ;-),
As I remember, they used a mock up of a diesel attached to a flat bed truck
trailer and ran it through the set with many cameras running. It was done in
one take, again as I remember. You'll notice you never see the running gear
throughout the scene.
and the
>other is (again forgot the title) - where two prisoners find themselves
>on a runaway train. That the combined engine power could burn off the
>brakes of the locomotives I found realistic... and again, the crash which
>smashed to pieces the rear of a freight train slowly getting onto a
>siding was again unprecendented.
I think you are discribing "The Train" with Kurt Voight.
>Any opinions anyone?
"The Fugitive" with Harrison Ford will be hard to beat in my oppinion.
Drew R. McGhee
Altoona, PA
dr...@psu.edu
Colin R. Leech
> Classified (db...@ecs.soton.ac.uk) wrote:
>
> : Two of the best train crash movies IMHO are 'The Silver Streak' .. How
> : (Okay never mind the fact it would have derailed through the station
> : approaches anyway if it was travelling at such high speed
>
> the movie was Toronto Union station which is a through-station and
> not a stub-end station!
The loco comes crashing into the main passenger concourse in Union Station
at what would be a 90 degree angle to the actual tracks (supposedly it
rammed straight into the end wall of the stub ended station).
--
##### |\^/| Colin R. Leech || Civil engineer by training
##### _|\| |/|_ ag...@freenet.carleton.ca || Transport planner by choice
##### > < Opinions are my own. Consider them shareware if you want.
##### >_./|\._< misc.transport.[misc|road|marine] are here! Ask for them.
JEFF SUMBERG
Earth" where the 2nd section of the circus train crashes into the rear
of the stopped first section. It also crashes head on into a car on the
tracks that is trying to get the engineers attention as to the stopped
first section. Obviously done with scale models, but done very well.
Good steam running sound effects and model night shots too.
--
Email: jeff.s...@sailboard.com
* 1st 2.00 #32s * .
Trey McDowell
>Three movies that I have on video I consider having the best and most
>realistic crashes.
>
>The first movie is "Silver Streak".
-description of impending doom removed to conserve space-
>
>Another good movie that I have on video is "Disaster on the Coastliner".
>While it's made for TV, it's still an entertaining movie to watch. From
>something I read in an old Model Railroader, they actually crashed the
>Amtrak locomotive at the end of the film by running it off the end of
>the track at full throttle.
This is a histerically funny movie. I guess it was the best 1970's "disaster" movie they could come up with involving a train (in t=
he genre as the other great 1970s disaster movies: "Poseidon Adventure," "Towering Inferno," all the "Airport" movies, "Earthquake,=
" etc.).
There are a number of things that make "Coastliner" so funny. One of the first is William Shatner (Capt. Kirk of "Star Trek") playi=
ng a con man. The second is that if these trains are supposedly San Francisco- Los Angeles non-stops, then they change their consis=
ts as they roar along the CA coast. For instance, the trains gain engines, add coaches, add a baggage car, lose the baggage car a s=
cene later, lose some coaches, the second engine disappears, etc., etc. What a neat trick! Both the SF-LA stations look identical =
(scenes were obviously shot at the LA station). Oh, how about the fact that the scenes of the moving trains were for the most part =
shot in New England, probably Conneticut. There were one or two scenes with trains that looked like San Diegans operating in the me=
dian of a freeway.
As for the accident bit, the locomotive was actually a model. Amtrak would never have consented to allowing a studio to trash one o=
f their new F40PHs (the first F40s were delivered in 1976, "Coastliner" was released in 1977). I remember that Model Railroader Kev=
in mentioned and I'm sure they said that the entire scene of the storage yard was a model.
>"Runaway Train" is another great movie. As for why the train didn't
>stop, the engineer might have put something on the deadman's pedal to
>keep the train running so that he only had to run the throttle and
>brakes. Also, I'm not surprised that the brake shoes got burned off.
>If you play the movie in slow motion as the engineer opens the throttle,
>you can see that it opens it wide open to notch 8. The crashes were
>realistic too. The crash where the runaway plows through the caboose
>and a flatcar on eastbound 12 was very exciting.
>
Am I mistaken? I was under the impression that locomotives delivered starting in the 1960s or so (which would include the lead unit=
of the consist in "Runaway Train") didn't have dead-man pedals. Perhaps I need to finagle my way into the cab of a locomotive some=
time to check.
Trey McDowell
Charles.W...@den.mmc.com
Erik Hjelme
db...@ecs.soton.ac.uk (Classified) wrote:
>Another I have seen is the Cassandra Crossing. Well for starters, I do
>not know of any screw coupling systems which are automated in anyway such
>that they can be detached from a remote point without human physical
>assistance. And as in Under Seige 2, the carriages would simply not
>seperate as they came off the rails. That just doesn't happen.
Let me point out I haven't seen the actual movie.....however...:
the European screw coupler will break at something like 100 tons
of pulling force, thus it is just might break in an accident.
This is a point where the american or britich buck-eye coupler is
much safer, the coaches will stay in line even after a derailment.
Someone else wrote:
>>The first movie is "Silver Streak". [...] It was also an exciting
>>scene to watch as they're trying to uncouple the engines and first
>>three cars from the rest of the train and it keeps getting closer
>>and closer to the station.
When the locomotive is pulling hard - notch 8 remember ? - it is
downrignt impossible to move the handle of that coupler, the coupler
is actually held together by the pulling force of the locomotive.
To uncouple a moving train you must put the loco back to idle and
perhaps even apply the locomotive_only brake sightly, to have the
carriages move forward by their momentum. Then you pull the handle.
and yet someone else wrote:
I think that one was actually called "Runaway Train". The setup for the
runaway was, as I recall, impossible for motive power that conforms to FRA
standards. Is there still a "deadman's pedal", or some other way to keep a
locomotive from continuing to run at settings over idle if the engineer/
hostler doesn't respond at intervals?
Yes there is.
In most modern engines it does require to be operated at intervals
expressly preventing anybody to weigh it down by a toolbox or
anything to that effect.
Also a feature build into every engine I know of is an automatic
switch that will prevent power from beeing applied, unless the
trains brake pipe is charged to its standard pressure of 5 or 8 bar,
it will also cut off power if there is a sudden drop in pressure.
There is no such thing as an isolation switch for an emergency handle
on an engine (we'll leave the Eurostar at rest), when you pull the
handle you ventilate the brakepipe into free air and the pressure
drops to nil wich both put the consist into emergency and at the
same time cut off power on all the engines no matter where in the
train the handle was operated.
>on a runaway train. That the combined engine power could burn off the
>brakes of the locomotives I found realistic...
The automatic cutoff should also prevent the mentioned burning of
brakepads from the tractive effort of the locomotive.
Brakepads on carriages might be burnt though, if slowly leaking on
without a sudden pressure drop, or if a reckless driver attempted
to coast down a mountain controlling speed by friction brakes
rather than using the dynamic brake on the locomotive(s) who are
designed to dispose off the vast amount of energy released - or to
feed it into the catenary for certain electric locomotive classes.
Erik Hjelme Phone & fax FidoNet BBS E-mail
Denmark +45 36461003 MCUG 2:235/15 hje...@login.dknet.dk
Don Mitchell
train would have derailed on the approach tracks, remember the crash of the
GG-1 and train into Washington (DC) Terminal. It did happen, and there are
enough parallels to make a case that the real crash was what inspired the
director of Silver Streak.
Don Mitchell donm...@cts.com
David Long
> Silver Streak was filmed on CP, using a Canadian trainset (Budd
>1956). Apparently, Amtrak would not touch it because it featured a scene
>where Gene Wilder accidentally got into a woman's bedroom while she was
>in her undies. (But, I personally think that the *REAL* reason was that
>AMTRAK could not spare enough equipment for the movie at the time).
I hear Amtrak didn't want to support a film where the train crashes.
------------------------------------
dj
Opinions are those of myself and (usually) not my employer. So there.
------------------------------------
Dave Perkins
some guy that has an Amtrak engine and he's gonna do a head on with
another Amtrak train.,It seemed like an older movie, late 70's early 80's
but I remember the crew made a quick switch track and the guy on the one
engine jumps off into the water...I dont really remember much but it was
a neat movie...Is that the one you have on tape...???
Dave in San Diego
da...@cts.com
Charles L Rapport
>Calvin Henry-Cotnam (cal@doppler) writes:
>> Classified (db...@ecs.soton.ac.uk) wrote:
>>
>> : Two of the best train crash movies IMHO are 'The Silver Streak' .. How
>> : exactly did they get the train to crash through the station like that??
>> : (Okay never mind the fact it would have derailed through the station
>> : approaches anyway if it was travelling at such high speed
>>
>> Also never mind the fact that the station used in the filming of
>> the movie was Toronto Union station which is a through-station and
>> not a stub-end station!
>The loco comes crashing into the main passenger concourse in Union Station
>at what would be a 90 degree angle to the actual tracks (supposedly it
>rammed straight into the end wall of the stub ended station).
I have not seen mention in this discussion of the fact that a remarkably
similar scenario actually took place in Washington's Union Station in
1953, just before Eisenhower's inauguration. I recall from a "Trains"
article some years ago that engineer Harry Brower of the Federal
discovered on final approach that he had almost no air at his disposal in
his GG1. There was no time to realign switches -- only to clear the
concourse. The GG1 lead its consist right into the main concourse, where
it's weight caused it and at least the first baggage car to drop through
the floor into the baggage room.
Owing to the center cab design and the fact that those locomotives were
designed to survive extreme impact, engineer Brower was not seriously
injured, nor was any one else. With the heavy traffic engendered by the
inaugural, PRR just planked over the disaster and left it to be cleaned
up another day.
Does anyone know whether that GG1 eve ran again? My guess is that it did.
An aside -- I recall reading that another G hit a bulldozerthat had
wandered onto the tracks and suffered only a derailed front truck.
These were remarkable locomotives.
Now, back to the movies.
Howard S Wharton
>
Howard S. Wharton
Fire Safety Technician
Office of Environmental Health and Safety
State University of New York at Buffalo
Mark Brader
> 1953 GG1 grand entrance into Washington's Union Station!
Unlikely. If it had been, the filmmakers would have had the
locomotive crash through the floor, as an additional spectacle.
Note, by the way, that although Toronto's Union Station was the set
for that scene (as well as for the Kansas City station scenes), the
setting was Chicago, and it wasn't specified which of Chicago's
stations it was; so remarks about the orientation of the tracks are
really irrelevant. The train shed and rail approaches of the C&NW
station there were also used, though as noted, there are some
Toronto shots in the approach sequence as well.
Elsewhere in the thread, people talk about how realistic the crash
in the ridiculous movie "The Cassandra Crossing" was or wasn't.
Let me just point out one error in that movie: the train magically
changes from electric to diesel power, without stopping, just for one
scene where a helicopter is involved and the overhead wire would have
gotten in the way!
ObRailCrash: "The Wrong Box" (1966). Not for spectacle (you only see
"before" and "after" pictures) but for humor value.
--
Mark Brader \ "The occasional accidents had been much overemphasized,
m...@sq.com \ and later investigations ... revealed that nearly 90%
SoftQuad Inc., Toronto \ ... could have been prevented." --Wiley Post, 1931
My text in this article is in the public domain.
Mark W. Hemphill
> > "Runaway Train" is another great movie. As for why the train didn't
> > stop, the engineer might have put something on the deadman's pedal to
> > keep the train running so that he only had to run the throttle and
> > brakes. Also, I'm not surprised that the brake shoes got burned off.
> > If you play the movie in slow motion as the engineer opens the throttle,
> > you can see that it opens it wide open to notch 8. The crashes were
> > realistic too. The crash where the runaway plows through the caboose
> > and a flatcar on eastbound 12 was very exciting.
>
> As a British railfan visting Canada in 1989 I took a train across the
> Rockies and was fortunate to be able to ride in the cab out from
> Vanvouver, The first thing the driver (engineer) did was to jam
> his flags on to the dead mans pedal so that he didn't have to keep
> his foot down. I can't remember the exact loco specs, but it was
> a streamlined type just like one of the locos in the film Runaway
> Train. I seem to remember that near the beginning of the part where
> the convicts board the train there is some reference to the fact
> that the streamliner was an old type and that this was the reason why the
> loco consist would not respond to the usual safety systems.
>
I have to disagree. Railroad-wise this is a TERRIBLE movie. About the
only thing that was real in this movie was that it used real locomotives
and real people. Everything else was a complete crock, right down to the
people crawling over the nose of the F7A because, apparently, they were
too dumb to open the nose door. These units had a deadman's pedal at one
time but it had long since been disconnected. And there is no way you
can burn off the brake shoes on a light locomotive before you bring it to
a stop. Brake horsepower with on-tread braking is at least 450
pounds/wheel or, for eight wheels, 3600 lbs. And when you activate the
emergency brakes (or break the train line) this activates the PC switch
and reduces the throttle to idle.
Even in the 118-mph runaway of the 2700-ton loaded UP tie train on Cima
Hill in 1980 the locomotive involved still had effective brake shoes
after it wrecked, even though its independent brakes were the only
effective brakes on the entire train.
I could go on but it seems pointless. Runaway Train was the worst
misrepresentation of locomotive operation, train operation, and railroad
operation I've ever seen. Doubtless there have been more egregiously bad
movies that feature railroads but fortunately I have not seen them.
_____________________________________________________________________________
Mark W. Hemphill
Medical Scholars Program
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Mike Hughes
> stop, the engineer might have put something on the deadman's pedal to
> keep the train running so that he only had to run the throttle and
> brakes. Also, I'm not surprised that the brake shoes got burned off.
> If you play the movie in slow motion as the engineer opens the throttle,
> you can see that it opens it wide open to notch 8. The crashes were
> realistic too. The crash where the runaway plows through the caboose
> and a flatcar on eastbound 12 was very exciting.
As a British railfan visting Canada in 1989 I took a train across the
Rockies and was fortunate to be able to ride in the cab out from
Vanvouver, The first thing the driver (engineer) did was to jam
his flags on to the dead mans pedal so that he didn't have to keep
his foot down. I can't remember the exact loco specs, but it was
a streamlined type just like one of the locos in the film Runaway
Train. I seem to remember that near the beginning of the part where
the convicts board the train there is some reference to the fact
that the streamliner was an old type and that this was the reason why the
loco consist would not respond to the usual safety systems.
--
Mike Hughes
Print Direct ... the business printers
PO Box 109 Fareham, Hampshire, England. PO15 5JU
Tel 01705 833838 Fax 01705 872288 Intl:+44 1705 833838 +44 1705 872288
Paul J Zawada
Oh, oh, it's starting to come back...
If this is the movie I'm thinking of, at one part the bad guys make
an absolute signal turn red, leaving the Amtrak train a sitting duck
for the runaway train the bad guys had sent straight for them... The
dispatcher then orders the engineer of the train full of passengers to
procede through the red signal to pull into the next siding to avoid
the emminent disaster. However the plot twist is that the engineer
refuses, saying something like "I've been an engineer for thirty
years and I've never disobeyed [sic] a signal..." That's when the
Amtrak track gang [sic] makes the makeshift switch and derails the
bad guys' train.
For the life of me I can't remember why they just didn't tell everyone
to get off the train... Maybe the passengers were being held on the
train at gunpoint... It was one of those screwy disaster movies after
all...
Got to love authentic movies like that... :-)
--zawada
--
Paul J. Zawada | Sr. Network Engineeer
zaw...@ncsa.uiuc.edu | National Center for Supercomputing Applications
+1 217 244 4728 | http://www.ncsa.uiuc.edu/People/zawada
Kevin L. Wagner
A man's wife and baby are killed when a freight train derails and plows
into their house (this is before the movie). He gets a job with the
railroad as a computer maintenance guy and screws up the computer to run
the two trains head on into each other. He then goes to LA's Union
Station, knocks out the engineer in the locker room, and posing as the
engineer climbs into the cab of the engine. Meanwhile, in San
Francisco, the wife of the vice president is going to be riding to LA.
Both trains start out on schedule. The secret service agent in the
dispatcher's office (played by Lloyd Bridges) in LA is watching the
Southbound 3. He then notices that Northbound 12 is heading at #3 on
the same track. E. G. Marshall (the chief dispatcher) calms him down
and shows him where #3 will be switching over onto a second main track
"in time to miss the northbound LA train." He shows them (at first)
just passing near the switch. Bridges then says, "But that's cutting it
pretty close isn't it?" To which Marshall says, "Not really. this board
isn't drawn to scale. Actually they will meet about here. *moves the
train markers away from the switch* There's a 90 minute safety margin."
Lloyd then asks "What happens when that miracle machine of yours [the
computer] blows a fuse?" Marshall tells him that "there are block
towers all along the line, two men in each, making sure everything is
where it ought to be." #3 then approaches the switch. The signal is
red. The switch switches for the second track. The signal goes to
green. The switch goes back to the main track, the signal stays green,
and southbound 3 flies through onto the wrong track. The signals have
been reprogrammed to stay green. The dispatchers try to contact #3, but
since all communications are routed through the computer, they can't get
through to him. The saboteur in northbound 12 contacts the engineer in
#3 and tells him that he has a clear run ahead. He then contacts the
dispatcher and tells him that he's running the show and that he'll only
stop the trains if the president of the railroad gets on TV and tells
the nation that the railroad covered up the cause of the wreck that
killed his family and cleared the railroad of negligence. A computer
specialist is called in to fix the computer. He gets the signals back
in operation. The engineer on #3 sees the red signal, and rather than
stopping, he calls the fake dispatcher in #12. The conductor of #3 is
finally contacted by the real dispatcher. When he tries to get the
engineer to stop the train, he doesn't believe his as the fake
dispatcher has told the engineer that there are terrorists on the train
who will do any thing to stop the train. The dispatchers then decide to
put in a crossover to try and get #3 onto the southbound track.
Meanwhile the president of the company and the man who investigated the
crash [before the movie] get on TV and "admit" that the crash's cause
was covered up. It's later found out that there was a cover up. Just
as the saboteur is about to slow and stop #12, the engine is uncoupled
from the train. #3 then makes it through the crossover okay. #12's
engine (the saboteur and william Shatner, who uncoupled the engine, have
jumped off at a bridge) then plows off the track where the crossover was
cut in. Both trains then head back to LA, and that's the end of the
movie.
Claes Jonasson
hje...@login.dknet.dk writes:
>There is no such thing as an isolation switch for an emergency handle
>on an engine (we'll leave the Eurostar at rest), when you pull the
>handle you ventilate the brakepipe into free air and the pressure
>drops to nil wich both put the consist into emergency and at the
>same time cut off power on all the engines no matter where in the
>train the handle was operated.
The German ICE has an emergency brake override, whereby the train is
prevented from stopping inside a tunnel. As I recall it is active as soon
as the train is closer to a tunnel than stopping distance and remains
active until the train is leaving the tunnel. If someone pulls an
emergency brake handle, the engineer can still operate the train to a
standstill in a safe location. The idea was to prevent a greater accident
by the train stopping inside a tunnel where it can't be easily reached. I
assume Eurostar has the same feature. I think we'll see it more and more
on high speed trains.
Do regular TGVs have an emergency brake override?
Claes Jonasson
Charles L Rapport
>Don Mitchell donm...@cts.com
Guess I should have waited to read your comments before posting my
previous follow-up. I am sure that "Silver Streak" was inspired by the
Mark W. Hemphill
> Actually, they mentioned the F unit, the girl-brakeman mentioned to one of the
> prisoners (don't remember which one) that the crash had did sometime to the
> door so they couldn't open it.
>
I must have missed that part. Probably it was drowned out by my guffaws.
> It was pretty bad concering railroad operation, but I think it was still an
> exciting movie, and had great scenery. Also notice some of the inside shots
> of the cab (earlier, before they go up to the F unit) inside the cab, the
> roof looks squared off, like a GP35-later unit, but they are in a GP7. Also
> I noticed several scenes where one of the GP7's has Alco trucks, and other
> scenes, both have EMD trucks.
They sort of switched around between ARR GP7s with or without the modern
cabs versus the old cabs and some BA&P GP38-2s as well. The crews on the
movie trains viewed all these going-ons with great hilarity. Each day
was a new report which inevitably began "You wouldn't BELIEVE what these
movie people did yesterday ..."
It ended kinda silly though, the one prisoner
> (Jon Voight) knocked the couplers apart on the lead unit, and separeted him
> (with the prison guard on board) from the other 2. Why didn't they do that
> in the first place ;^)
Duh!
The other interesting part of filming this is that they only wanted to do
it on gray, cloudy days, not clear days, to give the movie its "gloomy"
quality. This resulted in the death of one of their helicopter pilots,
sent up into the Kenia one morning to scout the day's location, as I
recall, during which his rotors touched the side of the Placer River
Gorge resulting in a fatal crash. The wreckage of the chopper rested in
the bottom of the gorge all winter; you could see a rotor blade sticking
out of the snow. The next spring they cleaned it up.
I, as well as people at the ARR, were sort of amazed that the movie made
practically no use of the spectacular scenery in the Placer River
Gorge/Grandview Loops area, which I feel is probably the most rugged
piece of railroad in North America, and certainly the most remote and
with winters much more difficult than anything SP faces in Donner Pass.
In Donner Pass, avalanches are quite rare; here, it's not uncommon to
have several hundred in one storm. Instead the movie makers spent most
of their time in the relatively dull scenery along the Turnagain Arm.
Too bad.
Gordon DeGrandis
>
>Having seen the latest Steven Segal (sp?) flop IMHO as he starred in
>Under Seige two, I wonder what peoples opinions are on the most realistic
>train crash in a movie - or to that matter the most realistic train movie.
>
>There are a few that spring quickly to mind. The first which doesn't have
>much to do with a train in it was (arrgh forgot the name of the film) -
[...snip...]
>brakes of the locomotives I found realistic... and again, the crash which
>smashed to pieces the rear of a freight train slowly getting onto a
>siding was again unprecendented.
>
>Any opinions anyone?
>
>
>--
>Regards, World Wide Web
>David http://whirligig.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~db93/david.html
>db...@ecs.soton.ac.uk
>
You should take a look at the movie called "The Train". It stars Burt Lancaster
as a French railroad worker during the last days of WWII in France. He must stop
a German train carrying some of France's best art from leaving the country. The
climax of the movie is when there is a staged accident with 2 steam engines, and
then the art train engine crashes into the whole mess. It is just supurb!! I
even bought the video.
Check it out and enjoy
------------------------------------------------
Gordon DeGrandis _____ Gordon.D...@ping.be
Contraste Europe S.A.
These are my opinions
The Larch
> I have to disagree. Railroad-wise this is a TERRIBLE movie. About the
> only thing that was real in this movie was that it used real locomotives
> and real people. Everything else was a complete crock, right down to the
> people crawling over the nose of the F7A because, apparently, they were
> too dumb to open the nose door. These units had a deadman's pedal at one
> time but it had long since been disconnected. And there is no way you
> can burn off the brake shoes on a light locomotive before you bring it to
> a stop. Brake horsepower with on-tread braking is at least 450
> pounds/wheel or, for eight wheels, 3600 lbs. And when you activate the
> emergency brakes (or break the train line) this activates the PC switch
> and reduces the throttle to idle.
Actually, they mentioned the F unit, the girl-brakeman mentioned to one of the
prisoners (don't remember which one) that the crash had did sometime to the
door so they couldn't open it.
> Even in the 118-mph runaway of the 2700-ton loaded UP tie train on Cima
> Hill in 1980 the locomotive involved still had effective brake shoes
> after it wrecked, even though its independent brakes were the only
> effective brakes on the entire train.
> I could go on but it seems pointless. Runaway Train was the worst
> misrepresentation of locomotive operation, train operation, and railroad
> operation I've ever seen. Doubtless there have been more egregiously bad
> movies that feature railroads but fortunately I have not seen them.
It was pretty bad concering railroad operation, but I think it was still an
exciting movie, and had great scenery. Also notice some of the inside shots
of the cab (earlier, before they go up to the F unit) inside the cab, the
roof looks squared off, like a GP35-later unit, but they are in a GP7. Also
I noticed several scenes where one of the GP7's has Alco trucks, and other
scenes, both have EMD trucks. It ended kinda silly though, the one prisoner
(Jon Voight) knocked the couplers apart on the lead unit, and separeted him
(with the prison guard on board) from the other 2. Why didn't they do that
in the first place ;^)
--
Fred Ochs
Western Michigan University
oc...@cs.wmich.edu OR oc...@yakko.cs.wmich.edu
http://yakko.cs.wmich.edu/~ochs
Ross Bligh
1. The 'Sliver Streak' was filmed in many different locations across
Canada. It's actually fun to watch the movie and try and figure out
where the scenes were actually shot (If my memory serves me correctly,
Calgary doubles for St.Louis)
2. There was a movie made about (as I recall) escaped POW's who steal a
train and use it to flee Nazi Germany. I think that it was called "Von
Ryan's Express" and starred Gregory Peck. Just out of curiosity, were
the rail sequences in the film realistic, or strictly Hollywood? And,
pardon me if my ignorance is showing, but was it just fiction or based on
a true story?
The Larch
missed it) They had the scene where they had the burning bridge across the
gorge, and that steam engine crashed into the gorge when the bridge collapsed.
It was pretty realistic, considering they used a real steam engine ;^)
Damon Hill
>
> I'm surprised no-one has mentioned The General, with Buster Keaton (unless I
> missed it) They had the scene where they had the burning bridge across the
> gorge, and that steam engine crashed into the gorge when the bridge collapsed.
> It was pretty realistic, considering they used a real steam engine ;^)
The bridge itself was the flimsiest thing I've ever seen; couldn't possibly
held the weight of anything more than an empty flatcar.
--Damon
Todd Clark
employee who hijacked what I think was an Amtrak train. Supposably there
was two tracks that ran from San Francisco To Los Angeles with no switches
in between. A crew built a crossover with about thirty seconds to spare
before the train barrels through and crashes. Anyone else have anything to
add. I would love to get this on video if anyone has it on tape. I will
trade a railroad video for the ability to make a copy of the it.
- Todd Clark
Kevin L. Wagner
Ken Stitzel
scenes. Of course, there are zillions of train films and zillions of trains
in films not obviously about trains, so who knows what mayhem lurks out there
in movie-land?
There is some 50s or 60s western in which they staged a real head-on
collision between two D&RG narrow gauge locos. (Was this "Denver and
Rio Grande? Ticket to Tomahawk? something else?) The locos were going to
the scrappers, anyway, so it's not as wasteful as it sounds (yeah, right).
Unfortunately, Hollywood thought a real head-on would be too dull, so they
loaded up the locomotives and tenders with dynamite. The locos barely
touch cow-catchers and BOOM--all the juicy details are obscured in smoke.
You'd think they could have at least staged a real boiler explosion or
something.
Another fave of mine is an old Clint Eastwood western called "Joe Kidd".
Not a lot of trains, but at one point Clint drives a locomotive into a
bar--fairly humorous. Clint has to get into a town held by the bad guys.
He fires up a locomotive outside of town and drives it off the end of a
stub track into the side wall of a row of buildings. Cut to two bad guys
in a bar sipping their whiskey. They look at each other, wondering what
the heck, as they hear a lot of crashing and feel the building shake.
Then the locomotive comes crashing through the wall from behind the bar,
totally trashing the place, and Clint shoots them. (You can just imagine
their last unbelieving thoughts: "What the hell was in that whiskey?!")
Not a great film, but I kinda like that scene.
--
Ken Stitzel
k...@fc.hp.com
Learning Products Engineer (glorified tech writer)
Hewlett-Packard Company, Fort Collins, CO (opinions my own, etc.)
Roger Mitchell
locomotives used in regular freight service in the US are not equipped with
them and they are only required on locomotives used in passenger service by
the Federal Railroad Administration. Steam locomotives used in passenger
service are exempt from the requirement also.
Roger Mitchell
FCMRYS
Classified
: In article <4a231k$4...@bright.ecs.soton.ac.uk>,
: db...@ecs.soton.ac.uk (Classified) wrote:
: >Another I have seen is the Cassandra Crossing. Well for starters, I do
: >not know of any screw coupling systems which are automated in anyway such
: >that they can be detached from a remote point without human physical
: >assistance. And as in Under Seige 2, the carriages would simply not
: >seperate as they came off the rails. That just doesn't happen.
: Let me point out I haven't seen the actual movie.....however...:
: the European screw coupler will break at something like 100 tons
: of pulling force, thus it is just might break in an accident.
Yes the couplers might break on *impact*, but not simply by one coach
falling off the edge and starting a descent. Unless the force is
eqivalent to 100 tons?
: This is a point where the american or britich buck-eye coupler is
: much safer, the coaches will stay in line even after a derailment.
The coupler is prone to disengaging vertically. Btw does anyone know the
difference between a standard american or brtish buck-eye coupler and the
'tightlock' coupler (apart from the obvious electrical//air connection box)
There is a difference because units with differing coupler types, Ie A
class 423 VEP and 456 should not be coupled together.
: Someone else wrote:
: >>The first movie is "Silver Streak". [...] It was also an exciting
: >>scene to watch as they're trying to uncouple the engines and first
: >>three cars from the rest of the train and it keeps getting closer
: >>and closer to the station.
: When the locomotive is pulling hard - notch 8 remember ? - it is
: downrignt impossible to move the handle of that coupler, the coupler
: is actually held together by the pulling force of the locomotive.
: To uncouple a moving train you must put the loco back to idle and
: perhaps even apply the locomotive_only brake sightly, to have the
: carriages move forward by their momentum. Then you pull the handle.
This is very true, but I believe it is difficult but not impossible.
Hence he had to pull damn hard on the handle.
There was a movie in which a locomotive was trying to couple onto a
runaway train (anyone remember that).. that was realistic in that it can
be difficult to get a buck-eye coupler to lock - the jaws of one side
must be open for one and the speed not too high.
Gordon Helbert
I have heard they actually crashed the lead engine into a station in SoCal,
Pasadena or San Bernardino?? This would seem out of place however since the
rest of the movie was filmed in Canada. Saw and interview with Gene Wilder a
while back, and his comment was Amtrak did not want anything to do with it,
hence the AmRoad.
The crash looks real, especially in frame mode, watching the lamp globes break
on the hood of the engine. The impression I got was the trucks left the loco
frame when it crashed thru the buffer, its shown kind of 'leaping' off the tracks.
However some of the falling plaster and columns are obviously very lightweight,
prob some type of foam.
In article <drm6.35....@psu.edu>, dr...@psu.edu says...
>
>As I remember, they used a mock up of a diesel attached to a flat bed truck
>trailer and ran it through the set with many cameras running. It was done in
>one take, again as I remember. You'll notice you never see the running gear
>throughout the scene.
DMFerreter
"catch" a runaway train. As I recall this movie was called "RUNAWAY" and
was filmed on the Rio Grande front range.
The story has something to do with a ski train that has brakes that don't
work. ( I cannot recall if they are sabatoged or what). The passengers
attempt various ways to build air pressure with hand pumps (located in
each car ??? movie magic license). Finally the railroad sends out a
"brand new" engine to try and catch the train by chasing it to the stub
end depot. After many attempts they finally stop the train with sparks
from the wheels and just a few feet from crashing into the platform.
I think they painted a Rio Grande GP-35 into a wild silver scheme and
lettered it for some artifical road. I recall seeing this movie on TV
back in the mid 1970's and again about 4 years ago. If there is a video
available it would be fun to see again.
The Larch
Yea, but didn't he just run the General over it previous to that scene? The
bridge was on fire, and I seem to remember them mentioning that they had
purposely weakened the bridge, by cutting some of the structure members or
something, so it would collapse. I've got a Buster Keaton special on tape
somewhere, I'll have to look it up. I'm sure they mentioned it in the special.
Richard Salmon
: Erik Hjelme (hje...@login.dknet.dk) wrote:
: : In article <4a231k$4...@bright.ecs.soton.ac.uk>,
: : db...@ecs.soton.ac.uk (Classified) wrote:
:
: : >Another I have seen is the Cassandra Crossing. Well for starters, I do
: : >not know of any screw coupling systems which are automated in anyway such
: : >that they can be detached from a remote point without human physical
: : >assistance. And as in Under Seige 2, the carriages would simply not
: : >seperate as they came off the rails. That just doesn't happen.
:
: : Let me point out I haven't seen the actual movie.....however...:
: : the European screw coupler will break at something like 100 tons
: : of pulling force, thus it is just might break in an accident.
:
: Yes the couplers might break on *impact*, but not simply by one coach
: falling off the edge and starting a descent. Unless the force is
: eqivalent to 100 tons?
In the late 60's under-maintained (shortly to be withdrawn) stock on the
London to Southampton line used to uncouple itself regularly (these were
bukeyes). On the point about couplings breaking, I would have thought
that a force of much more than 100 tons would be required to break it.
However, a coach falling would have quite a lot of leverage against the
adjacent one, so it could break. I would think it more likely to just
have become detatched.
: : This is a point where the american or britich buck-eye coupler is
: : much safer, the coaches will stay in line even after a derailment.
:
: The coupler is prone to disengaging vertically. Btw does anyone know the
: difference between a standard american or brtish buck-eye coupler and the
: 'tightlock' coupler (apart from the obvious electrical//air connection box)
: There is a difference because units with differing coupler types, Ie A
: class 423 VEP and 456 should not be coupled together.
I understood that the principal difference between UK and US buckeyes was
a size difference of about 3/4. The old UK buckeye has been prone to
disengaging vertically. All main-line passed buckeye stock has to have a
modification involving a plate welded to the top (or is it the bottom) to
prevent this. This has had to be applied to the VSOE (Orient Express) UK
Pullman Train. Those Pullmans (the two ex-Brighton Belle cars) which were
originally screw coupled have had to have buckeyes and Pullman
Gangways fitted.
--
Richard Salmon
Marc Dufour
==============================================================
cal@doppler (Calvin Henry-Cotnam)
écrivit le - wrote on 13 Dec 1995 14:40:53 GMT:
--------------------------------------------------------------
>DMFerreter (dmfer...@aol.com) wrote:
>: There was a posting questioning a movie where they used a locomotive to
>: "catch" a runaway train. As I recall this movie was called "RUNAWAY" and
>: was filmed on the Rio Grande front range.
>I recall seeing this movie a couple of times. The one thing that stuck
>out in my mind as portraying reality was the scene where the train was
>to hit a curve where they believed it was going too fast to take.
>The train made it throught the curve, but as it passed, there were crowds
>of onlookers there to "see the crash" that never came. Of course, much
>of the crowd was positioned in just the right spot to be taken out by
>the train if it crashed, and it was this that struck me as being "reality".
>If it's not people who run grade crossings, it is people who hang around
>in such situations who are just asking to have the world's average IQ
>raised a few points.
Reminds me, a few weeks after there was a big crash at an airshow in
Europe (some Italian stunt planes fell on the audience), there was an
airshow at Saint-Hubert CFB base near Montréal.
Well, probably to be "safe" from falling planes, plenty of people
throught it was smart to sit on the CN mainline going by the base. Of
course, the CN cops got them off quick enough...
-------------------Pour la République Française du Québec------------------
Ask yourself: What is social progress?
Is it when individuals can accumulate as much wealth/power as possible no
matter how, or is it when the little guys are protected from the big guys?
--- Marc Dufour -- [\] ACUC 6 31874 & TDI -- http://www.accent.net/emdx ---
Calvin Henry-Cotnam
: There was a posting questioning a movie where they used a locomotive to
: "catch" a runaway train. As I recall this movie was called "RUNAWAY" and
: was filmed on the Rio Grande front range.
I recall seeing this movie a couple of times. The one thing that stuck
out in my mind as portraying reality was the scene where the train was
to hit a curve where they believed it was going too fast to take.
The train made it throught the curve, but as it passed, there were crowds
of onlookers there to "see the crash" that never came. Of course, much
of the crowd was positioned in just the right spot to be taken out by
the train if it crashed, and it was this that struck me as being "reality".
If it's not people who run grade crossings, it is people who hang around
in such situations who are just asking to have the world's average IQ
raised a few points.
--
Calvin Henry-Cotnam, CATE | "If it's one thing that distinguishes
Ryerson Polytechnic University | us from other people, it's the absence
Toronto, Ontario, Canada | of vulgar noises" - Hyacinth Bucket
was: c...@ee.ryerson.ca is: c...@cate.ryerson.ca
Jamie Hurst
>From: ste...@rain.org (Steven Reynolds)
>Subject: Re: Most realistic train crash
>Date: Wed, 13 Dec 1995 20:02:09 GMT
>k...@fc.hp.com (Ken Stitzel) wrote:
>>Here's my vote for "The Fugitive" and "The Train" for best railway crash
>Did they use real locos in "The Fugitive"? Probably not, but it looked great!
>What surprise me was that the headlight on a trailing locomotive went on when it
>left the track. I know they don't leave the headlamps on on trailing locos.
>Hollywood I guess.
Yes they did use real locos. There was a good discussion on this when the
movie first came out. If I remember right one was an ex-N&W. I don't remember
the others. If someone else remembers, please tell us what they were and
their place in the train in the movie.
Thanks,
Jamie
Steven Reynolds
>Here's my vote for "The Fugitive" and "The Train" for best railway crash
Did they use real locos in "The Fugitive"? Probably not, but it looked great!
What surprise me was that the headlight on a trailing locomotive went on when it
left the track. I know they don't leave the headlamps on on trailing locos.
Hollywood I guess.
>Another fave of mine is an old Clint Eastwood western called "Joe Kidd".
>Not a lot of trains, but at one point Clint drives a locomotive into a
Yes, it was impressive!
>Not a great film, but I kinda like that scene.
Typical Clint Eastwood western but I enjoyed it.
>--
>Ken Stitzel
>k...@fc.hp.com
>Learning Products Engineer (glorified tech writer)
>Hewlett-Packard Company, Fort Collins, CO (opinions my own, etc.)
Steve
--
Steven A. Reynolds Amateur Radio AA6OT
ste...@coyote.rain.org Santa Barbara, CA
Antny
>> I am sure that "Silver Streak" was inspired by the
>> 1953 GG1 grand entrance into Washington's Union Station!
>
>locomotive crash through the floor, as an additional spectacle.
>
Hold on now, what is this? I never heard about that! Tell me more.
The Larch
> >Here's my vote for "The Fugitive" and "The Train" for best railway crash
> Did they use real locos in "The Fugitive"? Probably not, but it looked great!
> What surprise me was that the headlight on a trailing locomotive went on when it
> left the track. I know they don't leave the headlamps on on trailing locos.
> Hollywood I guess.
They were real engines, but non-functional. The hi-nose GP30 was just a shell,
I'm not sure about the 1901 (an ex-CSX U18B)
I wouldn't necessarily say that about leaving headlights on, I've seen trains
before where at least one trailing unit had the headlight on, either one
direction or the other.
Renegade 17
>Having seen the latest Steven Segal (sp?) flop IMHO as he starred in
>Under Seige two, I wonder what peoples opinions are on the most realistic
>train crash in a movie - or to that matter the most realistic train movie.
One of the most realistic train wrecks I've ever seen is in "Train Of
Events", filmed by Ealing Studios about 1948 (just after
Nationalisation - you see both "British Railways" and "LMS" on
(different) locos in the movie. It starts and finishes with a truly
spectacular pile up, fillmed for real in Camden Yard - it's brilliant!
Bye......!
John, The Renegade.
### - This post was brought to you by
The Margaret Thatcher Memorial London Commuter Railway Company PLC.
### - Say NO!!! to Privatisation!
jkn...@mail.msen.com
> db...@ecs.soton.ac.uk (Classified) wrote:
>
>
> >Having seen the latest Steven Segal (sp?) flop IMHO as he starred in
> >Under Seige two, I wonder what peoples opinions are on the most realistic
> >train crash in a movie - or to that matter the most realistic train movie.
>
> One of the most realistic train wrecks I've ever seen is in "Train Of
> Events", filmed by Ealing Studios about 1948 (just after
> Nationalisation - you see both "British Railways" and "LMS" on
> (different) locos in the movie. It starts and finishes with a truly
> spectacular pile up, fillmed for real in Camden Yard - it's brilliant!
>
> Bye......!>>>>
You should check out "The Train", an early 60's Burt Lancaster film that tkes place in France in 1944 or 45. They actually derailed
a train for it. Awesome train movie, by the way.
Jeff Knorek
jkn...@msen.com
John Albert Fehr
well, how about "How the West was Won"? the last (or next-to-last) reel has a shoot-out
aboard a runaway train that ends in a derailment. looked pretty realistic to me... -John
Greg H, Sydney Aus
>db...@ecs.soton.ac.uk (Classified) wrote:
>>Having seen the latest Steven Segal (sp?) flop IMHO as he starred in
>>Under Seige two, I wonder what peoples opinions are on the most realistic
>>train crash in a movie - or to that matter the most realistic train movie.
>One of the most realistic train wrecks I've ever seen is in "Train Of
>Events", filmed by Ealing Studios about 1948 (just after
>Nationalisation - you see both "British Railways" and "LMS" on
>(different) locos in the movie. It starts and finishes with a truly
>spectacular pile up, fillmed for real in Camden Yard - it's brilliant!
>John, The Renegade.
Agreed that the crash was spectacular, but as I remember it,
there were some very obvious models - especially when the train
hit the tanker - used in filming this scene, so I must accept
your comment about "filmed for real" with a grain of scepticism.
But, as always, I'll stand corrected.
(Refer also to my posting under the thread "Railways on film and
TV" about the blacking out of the last digit in the number of the
engine involved in the collision in the film)
Greg H.
noak...@ozemail.com.au
Hurstville, Sydney, Australia
****************************************
I've worked my way up from nothing to a
state of extreme poverty (Groucho Marx)
****************************************
Ian Gardner
Wilder and Richard Pryor. Definitely all models but as I recall
convincing models nonetheless
--
Ian Gardner Toronto, Ontario Canada
"Be clamorous and leap all civil bounds
Rather than make unprofited return"
Mark Brader
Not a remake. The similarly titled 1934 movie is unrelated.
(This according to Maltin's guidebook; I haven't seen it myself.)
--
Mark Brader "To err is human, but to really mess things up
m...@sq.com you need a timetable planner!"
SoftQuad Inc., Toronto -- Richard Porter
My text in this article is in the public domain.