What Happens When You Exceed Your Bandwidth to Keep Track of Every Track

You tease the bull long enough, you get the horn!

You step on the tiger's tail and you're gonna get bit! lol

All that action sure looked good though!

--Greg

You'll probable be hearing from DOT officials. Was the operator screened for alcohol and or drugs? Have you started moving in the cranes and flatbeds, cleanup crews? Was HAZMAT notified?

This wreck will probable be breaking news, and first indication, "operator error"!

At least nothing hit the floor. It could have been worse.

Nothing like a few derailed cars to humble you.  Happens to me more than I like when running more than one train on a track. My layout is not near the size of Lee's

Brent

Just like your photo - hopefully - none make the floor......

Lee, Great layout !!!

If you were to just incorporate a subway you would have it all...

Love it :-)

I love it!...not the accident, but the effort.  An ambitious goal no doubt

That's why I have 8 main lines that can be completely independent of one another. Passenger cars and engines that are too nice to risk any collision.

I'm confident that NSA has notified the NTSB. There's the making of another book here...

The streets look super.

This seems like an argument against your other thread (Why I run Conventional).  Wouldn't a collision have been avoided with DSC speed control?

Darn and I was hoping that the railfan filming this got the crash.  Sorry to see it though.  Lee I love all your posts and your layout looks awesome too

I was running 6 on 3 main lines and watching the #2 line closely as it has a 90 deg crossing. Then crash! Breaker trip! A coupler failed on the #3 main line #1 train and the second train ran into the cars of the first train as the first engine raced off into the back of the second train. WHERE IS THE REMOTE! HIT THE MAIN POWER BUTTON! alas, 2 dozen cars in a pile, 2 engines upset and some where I lost my Pepsi. nothing broken and only a little grass to repair. So I feel your pain.

Dan Chase

I don't think so, I think the same would have happened had they been under any ty[eo f speee control.  The four trains on the same loop were all cruising at exactly the same speed, an MTH BR-44 at 12 volts and three LC+ locos set to match them all running at about a scale 29 mph.  No problems with them: what happened is that two of the flatcars with ramps (see contributed reason (b) above,  tangled on a curve and somehow that tipped or shook a tractor being a tractor being transported out of its chocks and it tumbled down the hill in front or another train, which de-railed.  Just about then I saw the first wreck and went to shut down the power when a third loco ran into the back of the first de-railed train.  Then the bus coming along the road hit one of the de-railed cars.  By then though, I cut the master kill switch.

It just goes to show, it's always somethin' (Roseanne Roseannadanna)

Chain reaction, insufficient traffic control on the rails.

You need more signaling, or maybe just more engineers.

I see what your problem was, you have a foreigner running on American rails. The engineer most likely did not understand the signals. Thus Ka-plunk! 

What Happens When You Exceed Your Bandwidth to Keep Track of Every Track

 Twenty-two moving things was far more movement than I could keep track of.  No one died, but rolling stock was slightly damaged in this incident.

Lee

As you well know, if you want to operate 22 or more moving things and avoid damaging accidents you need more 'bandwidth."

Just like in the 1:1 scale world there are two ways to do that.  You can:

A.  Throw more people at the problem.

OR

B.  Deploy technology that increases the efficiency of one person.

In the real world throwing bodies at a problem is prohibitively expensive.  For a home layout operator it may be inconvenient.

Most of your locomotives have technology on board that you have chosen not to fully utilize.  It would be easy for you to begin to use it and it would be relatively inexpensive for you to do so.

Using the on board technology in our trains also opens up possibilities for automation and more efficient user interfaces that allow one person to track and control more than they can with conventional control.

If damaging accidents are bad...

...then Layout SCADA is a good thing. 

Most of your locomotives have technology on board that you have chosen not to fully utilize.  It would be easy for you to begin to use it and it would be relatively inexpensive for you to do so.

Except Lee states the cause of the accident was, "that two of the flatcars with ramps (see contributed reason (b) above,  tangled on a curve and somehow that tipped or shook a tractor being a tractor being transported out of its chocks and it tumbled down the hill in front or another train, which de-railed."

Technology or lack there of, had nothing to do with the accident.

Coincidently as a 100% DCS user, I have PS2 trains that don't all go the same Scale speed as indicated on the remote.  So a user must always be on the lookout because eventually a PS2 train going 40 SMPH will catch another PS2 train going 40 SMPH if I leave them unattended long enough.

Ron

Yikes! 

That was a cool video.  22 moving items is way out of my league.

Early on, I managed to run 4 engines with TMCC from 1 hand-held.  Eventually, I managed a rear-end collision.  That was enough for me.

Your layout looks terrific! 

George

I must say Lee, your probable the "bravest man" I know in Model Railroading. This event will probable be passed on for generation to come. History always remembers tragedy's, wars, and wrecks. In another time, another place, I'm sure someone will attempt to re-create this stupendous event.

Lee states the cause of the accident was, "that two of the flatcars with ramps (see contributed reason (b) above,  tangled on a curve and somehow that tipped or shook a tractor being a tractor being transported out of its chocks and it tumbled down the hill in front or another train, which de-railed."

 

Technology or lack there of, had nothing to do with the accident.

If Lee utilized the available technology to cut his workload controlling trains he could have more "bandwidth" available for spotting other problems and improve his response time when a problem does begin to develop.

Congress is scheduling hearings to discuss how to speed up the implementation of PTC.

I tried 4 trains on one track. Got them all going ok, stopping was really ugly.

Lee, if you had used the handyman's secret weapon, duct tape, on those ramps none of this would have happened, and you would not have become famous.

Gomez Aadams, you have a new competitor!

Great layout, and I admire your drive to see how much you could get running at one time!!

I had much the same problem with some Legacy locos back when I ran Legacy (eight or nine years ago) but not, so far, with LC+ What is neat about the LC+ locos I have so far is that when set to the same position the five steamers I have all go exactly the same speed.  It can run one up to within a foot of the next and adjust it to the same position and they will orbit the layout like that.  Awesome.  Again, the problem was those psky piggyback cars and their ramps.  I don't understand how they manage to flop over and bind, but problem solves (I Plastruck cemented them in the up position). 

I find I am most comfortable running about nine"things" if no more than three are only any loop.  This afternoon I had Jeanie and Bill Sellar (Ogaugenut on the forum) visit.  I ran the BR-44 and two LC+ locos with full 12-car trains on mainline #1, setting the LC+ steamers to match the BR-44's speed, MTH NW-2 cow and calf and train on #2 loop, WBB 44 tonner cow and calf and train on loop #3, only three cars in my downtown streets, This way there was a lot of movement but not so much risk of something getting close to something else.  It was not only not too much to watch and control, but allowed me plenty of attention span to talk with them for a couple of hours.  

And I really love the BR-44.  Maybe the finest thing MTH has ever made!   Just fantastic!

Lee what you need are some assistants to help you keep an eye on the action. I would like to help...oh wait I have done what you did with just one train at a time (whoops).

We need Merle Haggard to write a song about the wreck . . . .

I have a train buddy that is an air traffic controller.  I suspect he will say, "Just another day at the office (minus the crash)."

Anyway, impressive effort.  And like NASCAR, the crashes are always more interesting than the race.

Bob

Three words: Block Control Relays.

My son told me that this is an everyday occurrence between Raleigh and Fuquay. And they have a driver for everything. But no master kill switch.

I agree.  If you watch the local news there is a crash on those roads they report every evening.  People get killed once or twice a year.  

As to kill switches, well, don't mention them to the police over in Durham, or they will think you are talking about switchblades!

Time to call Hulcher.

From their web site, "...Hulcher is the industry leader in derailment response..."

Thank goodness the people in the bus did not get hit by those derailed box cars.

What did the O Scale FRA inspectors find was the cause of the wreck?

Also, Lee...has your layout ever been in a magazine or a DVD?

Well, lets review the challenge...

You had sufficient bandwidth, but a load failure caused the train incident. Implement new load securing procedures and try again. keep you primary focus on the trains. A streets incident is far less costly.

Fun challenge, you were 8 years old again!

Your signature says it all, Lee!

"If no one as ever done it that way, it might be fun to try."

The crash certainly wasn't intended but I bet that was fun! Nice layout Lee. All your pictures and videos seem to be taken from the same perspective. I never realized what a nice layout you have. Try to avoid the crashes in the future but keep having fun.