Add a Comment

Comment by Michael Huyck on July 13, 2008 at 1:28pm

hey guys you know it all great to set here and chop up a guys idea but the biggest problem in fighting all woodland fires is water supply, I feel it would to easier to truck water 5-10 miles then to have to truck it 50-60 miles or better yet atleast if there s a 10 cars at 10k per tank car setting in a siding someplace close to the fire that i feel that would be better and a lot, also if you have a fire moving toward a railroad track that is used 6-12 times a day it would be great to send out the tank train to make a fire break at the tracks im doing GPS searching right now and have found that resent fires have been with in 5 miles oh a train track w sidings open to use
Ive noticed that most of the problems with that im money or funds. see whaen the state govener orders the state guard in to an area he has the othority to all take and use what ever means he need to get the emergency in order now we need to press the governers of these state to when they activate the guard unit to also step up and order the rail roads to asst in any way they can ie water supply or equipment to areas of need. As chiefs of depts need to also and fire command need to get messages to the goveners its not that hard to figure out a way to stop these fires also countys need to purchess old tank cars from the rail roads and startigically locate them in the countys when they Know every year they are going to need water 2-4, 10k tank cars set up in area would sure help also there are a lot of old ACCR Apparatuses being replaced that could also be used as tankers Guys if we could just start asking for local help im one guy and i go around in my travels ever day and strt BS conversations and when i get to fighting woodland fires most that have the resouces to help out are never asked for there help witch i agree they sometimes shoulden have to be asked but never know


well enough for my soap box today all be safe
Michael Huyck
P.O. box 12043
Spring, texas 77391
713-816-9110

Comment by lutan1 on July 8, 2008 at 5:19pm

If the fire is big enough to ignite a significant number of crossties, then we're looking at a train derailment. I can't imagine any type of incident where adding a train derailment would be an improvement.
No, but it'd take your mind off the woes of the current wildfire for a little while... :)

Comment by Ben Waller on July 5, 2008 at 4:39pm

A few more hurdles that get between this idea and practical delivery...

Rail lines close to wildfires tend to lose quite a few of those creosote-soaked cross ties to the fire. I've fought several fires around rail lines, and when those cross ties ignite, they're damn near impossible to extinguish. I've even seen demonstrations where they have been ignited, let burn for about 20 minutes, submerged in water for 10 minutes, and re-ignite after being exposed to air.

A few burning cross ties can shut down the rail line. If even one train is between the proposed firefighting rail tanker and the fire, the tanker isn't going to make it to the fire.

If the fire is big enough to ignite a significant number of crossties, then we're looking at a train derailment. I can't imagine any type of incident where adding a train derailment would be an improvement.

Comment by lutan1 on July 4, 2008 at 5:16pm

yep....

Comment by Ben Waller on July 4, 2008 at 12:03pm

Then there's the little problem of having a railroad conveniently where the wildfire is.
If you can't get a tanker train near the fire, it's a waste of time, effort, and money to worry about it in the first place.

Comment by lutan1 on July 2, 2008 at 7:12am

I have no idea how it works in the States, but I use to work for the Australian Government equivalent of FEMA and in theory this can happen, but in reality there's a lot of hurdles to jump through and over.

The main one is the cost- regardless of what we think, there's always costs involved. The cost of the train (hire of it for want of a better word), the costs of the staff to crew it, the costs of diverting or changing schedules to either allow this train through or to take its original load and put it on another route or train and so on.

All of these things cost money and someone, somewhere has to pay for it. Unfortuanetly, while I agree with your sentiments about being able to possibly save a life or property or to do it, the owner of the train, the tracks, the other cargo, etc has to pay. Goodwill can only go so far.

The other issue under our system (Again, I don't know how the US syatem operates), but over here, the Commonwealth can only get invovled when all State level resources are exhausted or unavailable and a specific request is made for Commonwealth resources. (And a train and the track system is not a Commonwelath resource for them to do as they please).

Comment by Michael Huyck on July 1, 2008 at 10:35pm

Hello ted, Im sorry that you feel it wont work, If there a will theres a way to make everything work im also an ex US Coast Guard Member and im a true believer that if u put your head to doing something it will work. Astonomically expensive u say well tell that to your family if you had just lost every thing and there was a way to help our fellow Brothers and sisters get the wildland fires under control but we arent doing it because it cost to much, As for the inspections we arnt hauling chemicals its water non flamible and it wont burn ohhh my god thats right what will put the fires out we need it too the locations( I just love what my wife said to me WHO U PISSING OFF NOW???) I told here now one yet but give me time I will be on the phones or emailing the railroad company across the USA for there support and for the cost well they can donate the services to there country. who ever you are that thinks im just going to drop this because someone says its not cost effenciante well u got a nother thing coming if you wanna know were i live i live in Spring texas.