As long as the rails remain connected to each other the circuit is complete, the water isn’t a good enough jumper to short the circuit and turn the signals red.
Kinda give lie to the thread entitled “The case for shipping ethanol by rail,” I’d say.
Yes, I thought that was interesting timing.
I’m just getting in on the conversation.
The way I see it, A train is VERY VERY heavy. A typical railroad wheele is heavier, and fairly thinner comared to a automobile wheele. I just don’t think that a train would hydroplain. maby one of you could disprove me, but for now, I’m not convinced. Also, what is the train crew doing? I’m not trying to jump down the engineers throat here, or trying to pretend I know it all. I have offically logged 0.00 hours in an actual locomotive running it. If the witnesses are correct, then the locomotives would have had to blast through the water, soaking the TM’s and most likley causing a short out. SURLEY the engineer was slowing down when he saw the standing water, unless the train was running in reverse at trackspeed, or at least trying to slow the trains speed after going through the water depending on how soon he saw it.
What I think happend, is that the standing water washed out the tracks or made them very unstable. Then the train came at trackspeed and the loco’s got over the pool of water w/o shorting out the traction motors and then the cars proceeded to come off the tracks giving the illousion of the train hydroplaining. Now, if I have made any misstatements please let me know. If I have said anything that isn’t possible, let me know by all means. Sorry if I offended anyone. Also did the crew use the same loco’s to remove the cars that weren’t burning? How did the locomotives not have shorted out traction motors?
Thanks for any corrections, and answers!
Justin
Did that come through Firenet?
Thanks to the article for which Ken so graciously provided the link, it would appear that over half of the train made it across the bad spot (if that was the problem–someone had doubts) before things turned bad. That doesn’t excuse railroad and/or crew for placing this train–we would have called it a Key Train–at risk, even if nothing was seen or felt when the locomotives crossed the site. I was checking the progress of one of our trains (no hazmat on this one) today, and noted that one of the delays it had reported was due to a flash flood watch. That much was definitely in effect in the time and place of the wreck.
I cannot think of a Class 1 or Class 2 that won’t turn their motor track forces loose in the case of bad storm events, especially with severe rain/hail/tornadic/thunderstorm events. Every Class 1 and an awfull lot of the Class 2’s pay to have private weather forecasting and weather doppler radar firms hardwired into their dispatcher/operations stations to alert them to railroad specific conditions. FRA Part 213 track inspection regs call for inspections (loosely, there are far too many variables) during severe weather events.
With the big ex-IC headquarters at Homewood with some of the DS functions there, I’m sure
One person burned to death, three more in critical condition with Third-degree burns cannot be called cheap. There were flooded and closed streets elsewhere in Rockford, and a Flash Flood warning had been out although it was canceled, I don’t know if that was before or after the accident.
Im lost, I think both we, and most important, the NTSB will know more within a week, maybe two. The Black Box readout will tell all. Lets not blame the train crew.
Who said the train was at Track Speed?
Who said the standing water was over the rails or even the ties?
Why did the 60th car derail? (Remember the locomotives pulled 60 cars clear.)
Broken wheel? Broken rail joint? Ballast failure?
You can not pump Ethenol through steel piplines, Ethenal soaks up water, that makes it Rail or filling the Interstates Highways with stainless steel Tank Trucks.
I think the local Rockford, IL newspaper is doing a reasonably good job reporting this story. And for me to say anything that is not negative about “The Media” is unusual. They’re reporting the facts, making them understandable, and not slinging any mud.
The line about the water causing the cars to “loose their grip” on the track is questionable, but who knows. Maybe the water just came up quckly over the track as the train passed. It’s possible.
It was a terrible wreck. One poor woman died from the fire. Others are burned badly. A terrible thing indeed.