I don’t usually post about grade crossing collisions anymore, but this one was unusual enough to justify doing so, IMHO.
This is one of the better articles (and photos) I’ve seen on the incident earlier today. Fortunately, the engineer is reported to have only minor injuries, after his locomotive turned a 73-ton concrete bean into a collection of concrete chips and rebar spaghetti draped over the front platform . . . [:-^]
Such beams are strong in the vertical direction, but weak in the horizontal direction - kind of like rails, as they bend more easily around curves than vertically.
Then too, the vertical collision posts in the low short nose a modern locomotive are designed and built to withstand some humongous impact forces from striking another train, as we saw in several threads here a few years back. So even this 73-ton beam wouldn’t cause as much of an impact as a single half-empty modern freight car, so the result here speaks well for the integrity and crashworthiness of the locomotive’s “safety cab” design.
The article talks about the truck having some escorts- probably front and rear. The driver states that the beam was on a $400,000 trailer. The driver apparantly knew he’d have a hard time making the corner. And yet, no one thought of communicating with the railroad? [D)]
I suspect there will be some “lessons learned” coming out of this little mishap. Route planning and railroad coordination come immediately to mind. That 100 foot radius curve with a 135 foot load probably wasn’t optimal in the first place.
Glad that nobody was seriously injured. Keep those insurance adjusters working; it helps the employment rate.
Good points, Chuck. I did a little of that kind of work a few years back (MOW equipment moves). If we didn’t already know the route (our moves tended to be repetitive, annual ones, usually preceded by a bunch of pickup trucks and regular tractor-trailer or lowbed loads, with the same drivers, etc.), we’d drive it in advance to look for this kind of thing. The terms and conditions of the standard PennDOT wide/ high/ heavy load permit expressly place the responsibility for checking the suitability of the route on the trucking company (permitee). But probably these moves were awarded to just the lowest bidder, and they assumed that a train wouldn’t come, if they were even aware that it was an active rail line . . . . [sigh]
What’s even more ironic is that the beam was almost certainly destined to a PennDOT bridge project. You’d think that someone there might have been the least bit curious about the routing, and wondered about that curve - standard highway engineering stuff - if not the active rail line, even if it wasn’t their direct responsibility. After all, it’s now their project that’s going to be delayed a few weeks while a new beam is fabricated. Bet this finds its way into the wide/ high/ heavy load and future project manuals somehow, just like the voluminous railroad rulebooks we now hear about: “Contractor shall submit a map and video of the route of the proposed move, identifying all locations of substandard road geometry, close clearances, and railroad crossings, and addressing and describing how they will be handled to avoid incidents and damage”, etc.
Also, the guys in the truck and concrete beam manufacturing shops each just got another couple weeks worth of work to do . . . [swg]
Maybe the most interesting comment was that to observers “the train seemed to be speeding”. NS states a 50 MPH speed for freight trains on the line - not unusual for double-stack moves. That suggest that the train was about 3/4 of a mile from the crossing when the gates and lights kicked in. Hardly enough room for the train to swerve first.
Perception is everything. 50 MPH is a reasonable speed for a stack train or even an ordinary mixed freight, but most of the observers probably think of a 30 MPH unit coal train as normal freight train speed.
Paul North said : [snip] "…The terms and conditions of the standard PennDOT wide/ high/ heavy load permit expressly place the responsibility for checking the suitability of the route on the trucking company (permitee)…". [snip].
To what Paul said about the permitting process. I would yeild to Paul on his knowledge of that process for the PennDOT and Permitting process. In many places the responsibility for permitting is with the Trucker, but then the Insurance of the Delivery (in good order) lays with the ESCORTING Company. The PERMIT for moving said load is deliniated (and routed) by the issuing STATE Agency) Escorts being vital components of the movement of oversized loads. ( The STATE PERMITTING AGENCY, generally, will say they have avoided problem locations, BUT possibly not all points of potential poroblems.
This is why the ESCORT will check the route in advance of a load while performing the ESCORT duty. ( Trucks with large poles (Cat’s whisker) to check overhead heights is one technique) Thus overhead damages are the responsibility of the ESCORT Co.
Looking at the pictures of the locomotive that hit the beam. ( Approx 131 ft in length and 140,000Lbs in weight.) My guess is that the beam ‘exploded’ when the locomotive hit it, because the beam was a prestressed concrete beam, with possibly a hollow core in it. ( Done for weight reduction(?) Under pressure, from that process they can ‘shatter’ , when hit off center. Which possibly accounts for the area covered by broken chunks of concrete. IMHO they were extremely lucky, because that much flying, heavy debris in a confined areas can be just like artillery shrapnel. The rural setting of this probably
Interesting, the way the headlines usually say “Train Derailment” with no clue as to what caused it. Same goes with “Amtrak Wreck” when reporting a grade crossing incident.
I have seen similar beams to those pictured being transported on I-95. The ones that I have seen have had a ‘steering dolly’ (with driver) supporting the rear of the beam. Considering that the only creature comforts afforded to the steering dolly driver were a windscreen and seat - with no other protection from the weather - that is not a job I would desire to have.
I am amazed that between the pilot car crew and the driver of the vehicle, they could not have just LOOKED at the crossing and the terrain it was located in and KNOWN they would have problems and call the railroad (from the contact number that the FRA has required to be posted at every recognized road crossing) for protection for the time necessary to get the load across the road crossing. It is not like we live in an age that prevents immediate telephone communication with virtually anyone, anywhere in the world at anytime.
In my job I have received myrid of these requests and protection is always provided.
The ENS/ panic number at the crossing is supposed to only be used in an emergency, NOT* for general inquiries. The pilot car/ transportation people were clearly negligent in their planning and execution of the move. Hope NS turns the lawdogs loose and makes an example out of them.
(*)Observation: Most railroad websites are marketing toys for the operating departments and often the only contacts listed (outside of the ENS number) are for sales people. Finding info for engineering and local operating folks is tough. Add that to the fact that the general public is railroad stupid (Oh I’m sorry - I need to say train or choo-choo to be PC[:-,]) and common sense deficient, there is a communication problem brewing.
My offhand guess is that by the time of impact the speed had already been reduced a lot from 50 MPH, or whatever speed the train was actually running at before going into emergency. An approaching large object like a locomotive will be perceived as moving faster than a small object for a bunch of optical reasons, which are all enhanced in the observer by the adreniline reaction of watching a collision happen. The scene photos made it clear that the locomotive ended up quite a few car lengths past the crossing, which is what EMS and Fire personnel usually see in grade crossing events. The assumption that a crossing can be cleared by a stopped vehicle when a train has already entered the crossing protection zone is widely held by the public. The truck driver got a very expensive physics lesson.
Of course the NTSB has the recorder and the actual speed will be part of the investigation. The NTSB’s web site does not have info yet, and may not have it for some time.
The pictured locomotive - with the remains of the concrete beam’s reinforcing cables draped over the front platform - NS 2702 is an SD70M-2, per Chris Toth’s NS locomotive roster website, at: