When do you need train brakes?

Harlock · Post by **Harlock** » Thu Jul 02, 2009 6:19 pm

I think, referring to my previous post, that if you have to spin your wheels backwards or lock them up trying to stop, you need more braking power.

Regarding the argument of 'safety equipment makes us less safe', I think in this case that it shows that all the hardware needs to go hand in hand with a state of mind. Pretend you have no brakes, because one day you might think you have them and realize you forgot to turn the compressor switch on, or your battery died.

I don't think that Matt was trying to say that we should not have safety equipment, that line of thought was taken completely out of context. I would not go back to the days of no seatbelts in cars, for example. Safety devices are secondary insurance, but not a substitute for good driving. There ARE statistical studies that back up what Matt is saying, but that is not an advocation of less safety equipment.

this analogy works better as an other example - read Heinlein's Tunnel in the Sky, a survivalist story disguised as science fiction. The kids who felt invincible because they had taken pistols with them died first. Not because of the weapons, but because of their incorrect assumptions about how much they would be protected by an unknown threat, which snuck up on them before they had time to use said pistols. That is the kind of analogy that Matt was trying to draw. A false sense of security.

Trainman4602 · Post by **Trainman4602** » Thu Jul 02, 2009 6:24 pm

I agree with Terry on his last post.

But still no more from me on automatic air brakes with real triple valves and true scale train control.

I AM SAFE ARE YOU?

Post by **cbrew** » Thu Jul 02, 2009 7:51 pm

Trainman4602 wrote: I AM SAFE ARE YOU?

Yes Dave, Yes i am.
I always do a brake system test be fore i leave the steaming bay.
I will never run with out brakes, Even Vacuum brakes are better then nothing!

as far as i am concerned, if you can stop you train, I dont want you running around me or my friends!

Trainman4602 · Post by **Trainman4602** » Thu Jul 02, 2009 8:14 pm

Thanks Chris
Anyone else out there with a positive statement about the use of brakes.

BryceGTX · Post by **BryceGTX** » Thu Jul 02, 2009 10:04 pm

It seems a triple valve system is very good, but not infailable. Even a triple valve system had a tough time dealing with the hills out west, a "Sweeny Compressor" system was used on early locomotives to augment air by using the steam cylinders of the engine to compress air.

Even on level grades, it also seems that leaky connectors and other parts often times caused air problems.

Not sure I call this fail safe. It seems to me, fail safe is when the brakes are applied without any air pressure. The triple valve requires local air pressure on each car.

Also, it seems to me that very good brakes are disc brakes, not shoes rubbing on wheels. So all this discussion about excellent brakes is only relative.
Bryce

Trainman4602 · Post by **Trainman4602** » Thu Jul 02, 2009 10:10 pm

When fellows talk air brakes they often refer to the full size

My system should never be compared to the full size.

First my system works every time I mean that. No one will ever know that because now I’ll never give out the secret of how it works. I have all ready given out to much.

Too many know it all jerks I’ll keep it to my self.

Curtis_F · Post by **Curtis_F** » Thu Jul 02, 2009 10:22 pm

Trainman4602 wrote:Anyone else out there with a positive statement about the use of brakes.

There are pages of statements that can be said positively about train brakes. And dozens more pages that can be said positively about Automatic train brakes like yours.

------------------

Unfortunately such statements are not "on topic" for this thread. Greg posed three questions to get personal opinions from people. Debates on types of brakes are diluting the root purpose of this particular discussion.

Just my uncalled for $0.02

Curtis F.

BryceGTX · Post by **BryceGTX** » Thu Jul 02, 2009 10:26 pm

Trainman4602 wrote:First my system works every time I mean that. No one will ever know that because now I’ll never give out the secret of how it works. I have all ready given out to much.

Too many know it all jerks I’ll keep it to my self.

It seems to me, your system acts similar to a triple valve system in that it uses the loss of train line pressure to operate the brakes with local pressure.

I would like to see a simpler fail safe system.... I suspect others also... And it can be done.
Bryce

Curtis_F · Post by **Curtis_F** » Thu Jul 02, 2009 10:27 pm

For those proposing a set stopping distance, such as Matt's "50 ft on a 2% down grade" here's a question;

If that's in a clubs Rule Book does that mean they need to have a track 50+ ft long that every train leaving the main station must stop on to prove that it meets the requirement?

Trainman4602 · Post by **Trainman4602** » Thu Jul 02, 2009 10:31 pm

Look let get something straight right now

Train brakes or no train brakes that is the question.

My First answer was that I believe in brakes on all cars. That was and will always be my answer.

Some one else attacked the automatic brake question. I just answered it , defending my system.

I really think I need to stop answer these fools on here

I got to get back to working on trains
TOO MUCH BS.

BryceGTX · Post by **BryceGTX** » Thu Jul 02, 2009 10:44 pm

Trainman4602 wrote:Some one else attacked the automatic brake question. I just answered it , defending my system.

You were the one that brought up your system was infailable on this thread. If you expect that statement to stand, be prepared to defend it. As history shows, such systems are not infailable. And personal insults like "Fool" does not make your argument any more valid.

Bryce

Mike Walsh · Post by **Mike Walsh** » Thu Jul 02, 2009 10:47 pm

Wow... This is turning into a flame war.. Let's stop fanning the flames.... >sigh<