I was wondering if they can move the cross over perhaps somewhere between Van Ness Hwy and N Calumet Ave, maybe they should commission new detection software for locomotive computers to detect nearest EOT device and distance to it. It could flash on both conductor and engineer’s screen including advising speed reduction. That could solve the problem of trains having to occupy same block while on a curve or any other instances of obstructed view.
Interesting though, but what if FRED is hanging off the hind end of a train on an adjacent track or even railroad? But in this case, if all was going right and the first train dumped in emergency, it is difficult to ascertain if the following train would have had the time to respond, apparently, in kind. GPS monitoring may be somewhat more helpful, but even then, I’m not sure.
That’s one reason why “half” is a critical and essential part of the requirement of “Restricted Speed” to be able to stop within half of the range of vision, etc.
- Paul North.
Exactly right, Paul!
I hadn’t given any thought to the stack train’s view of the pileup being blocked by standing equipment on the curve. Without question, the wreck should have broken the track on Track 1 and given a red signal to the stack train at 222.2, but I can only conjecture that he was already past that signal, and that warnings of a pileup, or possible pileup, couldn’t be delivered in time to avert disaster.
But as for the manifest following the tanks, the only thing that will exonerate that crew is signal failure (I’m sure tests to determine that possibility have already been conducted). Perhaps fatigue is not to blame, but inattention for whatever reason is the most likely culprit. As we were taught in rules class, there are some times when “moving at Restricted Speed” means not moving at all.
I just returned from the derailment site. Today the NTSB and CSX ran a “re-enactment” train. For the most part it was like watching paint dry, but there were some interesting comments and observations.
CSX parked westbound K693-06 at the same location (just east of CR 400E). Since most ethanol trains are about the same length (mostly 81 cars) the end of the train stretched to a point very close to where the derailment occurred. Two westbounds (Q147-09 and a MT coal hopper train with BNSF power) came thru and then the G523-6 (power only) proceeded west on main 2 (at restricted speed). The train had NTSB personnel on board and it stopped at a point south of the bridge and marked the spot. Obviously they will take measurements.
The derailment occurred 132 feet north of the bridge. So, they will be able to make some calculations and measurements.
Comments were made regarding Q161 - they only had about 3 seconds to spot the derailment. The crew basically got on the floor and rode it out. With only 3 seconds, that is about 264 feet of visability, or about 132 feet south of the bridge (it is called stereo bridge due to same images on both sides).
Personnel today indicated the crew was lucky there was an embankment the locomotives travelled up and that it was basically a sand structure. They went from 57 to 0 mph in a matter of about 200 feet or so. Someone like Paul can figure out the G forces and other engineering forces of that. We were told on Saturday that only 28 containers left the train. If so, that is amazing to me that the train came to a stop that quickly. Paul, perhaps you can explain this a little more.
It was a perfect day for re-enacting the derailment, with temps in the mid 50’s and sunny conditions, almost similar to Friday. They wanted to have it about the same time as Friday and it was about an 40 minutes or so(203pm compared to 118pm).
I pretty
Presuming a uniform rate of deceleration - not likely absolutely, but probably not far off - per some basic physics/ dynamics equations, from an initial speed of 57 MPH = 83.8 ft./ sec., they would have gone to 0 MPH in about 4.8 secs. at an average rate of about -12 MPH per second or - 17.6 ft. per second per second, which is about 0.55 G’s. That’s a lot but not necessarily bone-breaking or crushing by itself - for a 200 lb. guy, he would have been pressed against the front of the cab, etc. with a force of 110 lbs., so with about the strength of a push-up he could have kept from impacting the windshield or the bulkhead, etc.
{Minor edits here at 10:00 PM] Not sure what you’re looking for in the second part of your question, but here’s a stab at it: The rest of the train would have decelerated at roughly the same rate. That would have induced some pretty huge compression/ buff/ “push” forces in the couplers and drawbars, depending on whether and how hard the brakes were applied by then. Assuming the brakes were in full emergency, the deceleration G’s from the brakes alone are about equal to the coefficient of friction on dry rail, or about 0.25 to 0.35 G’s. The remainder of that 0.55+/- G deceleration rate - from 0.20 to 0.30 G’s - was absorbed by the cars and lading/ containers crushing and displacing, the same as in the ‘crush’ or ‘crumple zone’ in the front of your car during a head-on collision. 28 containers off the train would be about 14 +/- double-stack ‘wells’ that were buckled and destroyed eno
A Brief Addendum to this Thread.
To capture the link to Ed’s excellent pictures of this incident and bring them along with this Thread:http://trn.trains.com/Railroad%20News/News%20Wire/2012/01/CSX%20derailment%20site.aspx
As an aside to this story: About 1620 (Tuesday 01/10/12) this afternoon (CDST) a westbound BNSF Stacker (at about track speed) went west with three units, and the shortest stack train I’ve seen in a couple of years of watching out here on the Transcon. The consist seemed to contain similar containers shown in Ed’s photos ( Hamburg/Sud) and others.
Well, I can’t look at the pictures, but I fully agree that Ed did a more than first rate job getting the facts and reporting them.
Thanks Ed.
It has been reported (with videos) that several trains had detoured via Detriot and Grand Rapids. Did any trains detour via Crestline and the former PRR?
greyhound
If you want to see photos, PM me with your email address.
Ed
Probably not since the former PRR main is now basically single-track and probably would lack capacity for detour traffic. It’s also operated by another railroad while the detour mentioned above is still a CSX routing.
Does CSX run any overhead traffic over the former PRR or has it been completely left to the regional railroad? NS still has trackage rights over the line and last year their office car train traversed the route.
Sure they could, but why? The location of the crossovers had no bearing on this accident. The section, from Meridian road to Calumet is the steepest part of Suman hill. Not a good location for a crossover. If the dispatcher needs to stop an eastbound, it would be on the hill, and if it pulled down to the signals would have at least two crossings blocked. While westbounds would not have to worry about stalling, they too would have at least one crossing blocked if stopped at the signal.
I havent seen CSX run any trains on the CFE line in years. Perhaps they have a few over the years, but doubt it. There are grain trains which load at Hamlet, those normally have CSX power, not sure if CSX runs the trains, or CFE does with the power.
n012944 stated the facts regarding the Suman crossover and HBD. It is in a fairly isolated area of Porter County. Now, that being said, there have been several derailments at Suman the past few years. Not sure if the swampy location has anything to do with it or not. Lots of traffic moving thru that area, with quite a few using the crossovers.
I cross CSX at Meridian several times a week and that is a busy road. Any stoppage of trains there to hold for crossing over or due to hot boxes would be a very inefficient event for motorists. As it is, there is a holding area for WBs at Suman that doesnt block a road crossing. EB trains might block Mander Road depending on length, but few EBs are held due to the grade.
Ed