This makes me wish I had an engineering degree, and knew more about structural materials, so I could post a more intelligent comment.
SP, you’re right, it would make sense to increase the impact resistance to match the potential impact – or greater. The only thing I can think is regulators are worried about the cost and weight of additional protections. The cheapest way of beefing up a tanker is to throw more metal on it, which increases the weight dramatically, increasing the fuel costs and ultimately increasing the cost of shipping.
My own uninformed opinion says that if they looked at the materials currently available manufacturers would be able to provide much greater safety factors for very little money. I think the railroad is stuck in the 19th century and has been for some time (though I want their pay, benefits and pension for myself).
We have updated our privacy policy to be more clear and meet the new requirements of the GDPR. By continuing to use our site, you accept our revised Privacy Policy.
If the speed limit is 50MPH, wouldn’t it be a good idea to require the cars to withstand at least a 50MPH impact rather than a 25MPH impact?
Just a thought.
This makes me wish I had an engineering degree, and knew more about structural materials, so I could post a more intelligent comment.
SP, you’re right, it would make sense to increase the impact resistance to match the potential impact – or greater. The only thing I can think is regulators are worried about the cost and weight of additional protections. The cheapest way of beefing up a tanker is to throw more metal on it, which increases the weight dramatically, increasing the fuel costs and ultimately increasing the cost of shipping.
My own uninformed opinion says that if they looked at the materials currently available manufacturers would be able to provide much greater safety factors for very little money. I think the railroad is stuck in the 19th century and has been for some time (though I want their pay, benefits and pension for myself).