[SIZE=6]@kyuktothecore @Charley Flani @shocks stealing and underhand tactics will only hurt China in the long run. And they won’t go very far simply because the country’s they steal from are waiting to avenge through similar underhand business tactics as seen in the article above. So how do you become a super power in such an environment where you don’t want to follow the laid down laws? Mnaiba tunawaibia… mnaelekea wapi?![/SIZE]
[SIZE=6]Ati you don’t want to pay the Japanese na mmeiba bullet train yao live. Well, this is what happens when you steal technology from others and in your hurry to steal you don’t really get to know how to operate that technology expertly. This is the train China stole from Japan:[/SIZE]
[SIZE=6] Wenzhou train collision - Wikipedia [/SIZE]
[SIZE=7]Wenzhou train collision[/SIZE]
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Wenzhou train collisionhttps://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/0/0d/Wenzhou_PDL_wreck_at_night.jpg
An image of the wreck; after the collision, four cars of the rear train fell off the Ou River bridge, slamming into the ground more than 20 m (66 ft) below
Date Saturday, 23 July 2011Time 20:34 CST (UTC+08:00)Location Lucheng District, Wenzhou, Zhejiang
[CENTER]
[/CENTER]
On 23 July 2011, two high-speed trains travelling on the Yongtaiwen railway line collided on a viaduct in the suburbs of Wenzhou, Zhejiang province, China. The two trains derailed each other, and four cars fell off the viaduct.[3] 40 people were killed,[2] at least 192 were injured, 12 of which were severe injuries.[4] Officials responded to the accident by hastily concluding rescue operations and ordering the burial of the derailed cars. These actions elicited strong criticism from Chinese media and online communities. In response, the government issued directives to restrict media coverage, which was met with limited compliance, even on state-owned networks.
The collision was the first fatal crash involving high-speed rail (HSR) in China, and is the third-deadliest HSR accident in history, after the 1998 Eschede train disaster in Germany and 2013 Santiago de Compostela rail disaster in Spain. High speed was not a factor in the accident, however, since neither train was moving faster than 99 km/h (62 mph), a moderate speed for a passenger train.
The accident, the first of its kind, had a profound impact on the development of high-speed rail in China. Public confidence in high-speed rail eroded, resulting in fewer passengers using the service. Construction of high-speed rail lines in China was temporarily suspended as the accident was under investigation. Speeds on other major high-speed rail lines in China were reduced. China’s reputation in high-speed railway technology was scrutinized internationally.
In response to the accident, Railways minister Sheng Guangzu announced a comprehensive two-month railway safety review. The official investigation completed in December 2011 blamed faulty signal systems which failed to warn the second train of the stationary first train on the same track, as well as a series of management failures on the part of railway officials in carrying out due procedure.
[SIZE=6]THEY COULDN’T EVEN TELL WHAT CAUSED THE ACCIDENT, wizi ya ujinga:[/SIZE]
As of 31 July 2011, Chinese authorities had failed to provide any logical explanation of why the safeguards built into the CTCS-2 signal technology had failed to work in the Wenzhou collision. Various announcements indicated both defects in equipment (lightning strikes had disabled devices) and defects in operating procedures (staff operated signals in “manual mode”). Chinese official announcements were both [SIZE=5]confused and confusing.[/SIZE] An Lusheng, the chief of the Shanghai Railway Bureau, was quoted as saying that a device had [SIZE=5]“failed to turn from green to red.” [/SIZE]But CTCS-2 equipped trains do not rely on drivers observing green or red wayside signals, the driver has a computer-controlled monitor in front of him. Early announcements spoke of Train D3115 being stopped by a lightning strike, but that would not cause the accident. The second train D301 should not have been allowed to run into it. Whether Train D3115 was stopped by lightning or for any other reason is irrelevant.
The fuzzy and confused official announcements up to 31 July gave increasing hints that a [SIZE=5]lightning strike [/SIZE]caused some wayside-mounted piece of signal equipment to malfunction (the official investigation report in December 2011 identified a trackside LKD2-T1 signal assembly which malfunctioned after being struck by lightning, causing a false indication in the control center that a section of track was unoccupied). If the equipment was not fail-safe, an incorrect response by staff could then cause an accident. Significantly, on 28 July 2011, An Lusheng “faulted the quality of equipment, personnel and on-site controls. He described safeguards as ‘still quite weak’.”[9]
On 4 August 2011 a high-ranking work safety official [SIZE=5]ruled out[/SIZE] the possibility of natural disaster having caused the train crash. “Now I can say for sure that this is not a natural disaster,” Huang Yi, the spokesman and a leading official with the State Administration of Work Safety, said during an on-line chat hosted by people.com.cn, the online arm of People’s Daily. He added that the railway authorities had also pointed out loopholes and deficiencies in safety management, which had emerged in the accident.[12]
The official investigation, completed in December 2011, blamed faulty signal systems which had failed to warn the second train of the stationary first train on the same track, as well as a series of management failures on the part of railway officials in carrying out due procedure.
[SIZE=7]AND THESE ARE THE TRAINS THEY STOLE THEIR IDEAS FROM:[/SIZE]
Rolling stock[edit]
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/92/CRH2-139E.jpg/220px-CRH2-139E.jpg
CRH2-139E, the trainset that was destroyed in the accident. This picture was captured in February 2011, five months before the accident.
The two trains involved were based on technology from Bombardier and Kawasaki.[13] Train CRH1-046B is a variant of the Swedish Bombardier Regina, while the second train CRH2-139E is a derivative of the Japanese E2 Series Shinkansen ‘bullet train.’[7] Kawasaki and other companies in Japan are currently challenging China’s high-speed rail project for patent license violations. The Chinese maker has been attempting to patent the same technology and alleged improvements.[14] The trains were of the “D train” class and thus in the first generation of China’s express trains, not the faster “G train” class, which travel at 300 km/h (186 mph).[6]