I’m a newbie here.Not sure of the exact date.CSX had a bridge washout with a train on the bridge. The diesel was in the washout nose first. A large hydraulic crane,sideboom’s and a diesel on the remaining track were used to rescue this unit. Anybody have pictures,video’s of this rescue. This happened probably at least 5yrs ago. I’ve tried Rail Pictures and looked some of the Train mags I have,I saw it somewhere. Thanks Bob.
I remember that, too, although I don’t have any pictures or video. Nevertheless, as a starting point here’s a link to a news report from July 23, 1997 about a CSX coal train that was caught in 10 inch rainfall from the remnants of Hurricane Danny in the Charlotte, North Carolina area, and washed out a trestle over the Little Sugar Creek and dumped 5 “cars” - the report’s word, not mine - and some diesel fuel into the stream:
http://www.wral.com/news/local/story/164346
Most of those facts sound about right, except I was thinking it might have happened in the 2001 - 2003 time frame instead - or maybe it happened more than once ?
Anyway, I also remember the photo that you refer to appearing in Trains - in about the 1st 20 pages - of one of the fall issues of whatever year it was, because I showed it to my cousin who had just moved up to the Northeast from the Carolinas. So check out the Oct. and Nov. issues of each year, and let us know what you find !
- Paul North.
Are you talking about the Trinity River bridge collapse, where a CXS locomotive was left stranded in mid air?
http://rides.webshots.com/photo/1119856736034755993jdfcoM
If so, the CSX motor was the second locomotive…the train was a UP, with the CSX repaying power hours…
I believe the 1997 incident is about right. I can recall seeing video of the bridge & fill collapse and the engine falling toward the water. As I recall, the train had had a minor derailment and the crew had gone on the hours of service at the specific location before the derailed car/s could be rerailed. A recrew was either enroute to the train or had just arrived at the train at the time of the collapse. The incident did occur in the Charlotte, NC area on a coal train operating on the ‘Blue Ridge/Clinchfield’ coal route to the South.
An excerpt from another report the next day from the same source:
“More than 6 inches of rain fell in Charlotte Wednesday, causing a motorist’s death and the collapse of a railroad bridge over Little Sugar Creek. The lead locomotive of a 90-car CSX coal train plunged into the creek after the three-person crew evacuated. Two other cars derailed.” [emphasis added - PDN.]
The link to it is at: http://www.wral.com/news/local/story/164378
- Paul North.
I’ll look in Trains. Thanks for the replys,this has been an on-off search. The accident was a washout with the loco nose first in the mud.The back end was against the bank,the loco was completly down in the washout.The hydraulic crane was set up in the washout area after a leveling with a dozer. the sidebooms and other loco were up on the track.It has puzzled me how the lift went because that crane would have to take the complete weight then slide it back on the track at the height with the other loco pulling it back. Bob
I tried using Trains reference typing CSX,washout, Little Sugar Creek. Anybody direct me if I’m not doing something right? Thanks Bob
I doubt if anything from that far back is generally available on-line, at least at this website. You might want to contact the Trains staff specifically to ask.
Alternatively, try using “Charlotte”, “North Carolina”, “flash flood”, “Hurricane Danny”, “July 1997”, singly or in various combinations. If it is on-line, I doubt if it is indexed or referenced under “Little Sugar Creek” - that seems way too detailed to me. Also, I believe one of those reports called it simply “Sugar Creek”, so you might want to try that too. Good luck !
- Paul North.
Oh, OK, maybe what you’re really asking is a “rigging”-type question, which I don’t have any great knowledge of - other than to leave it to the real experts, and keep out of the way !
That said, I’ll nevertheless speculate that the sidebooms were also lifting as well - probably the upper end of the loco closest to them. As you describe the scene, they would have been in a good position to do that - their cables would be nearly vertical, just extended pretty long. Even if they could only take part of the load, that might have been enough to allow the crane to do the rest at its end. Otherwise, why else would the sidebooms have been there and part of the lift ? I think you’re right about the other locomotive being used to provide the horizontal force to move the downed loco away from the hole as it was lifted.
Keep in mind, for safe crane (and side boom) operation the cables have to be pretty much in alignment line with the boom’s axis, at least for the big pulls. For light loads, yeah, they can be skewed or angled sideways a little bit, and no harm done; for more than that, get something else to do it - likje the winch that’s usually down on the back end of the sidebooms. This also illustrates a principle to these things - don’t just tie a bunch of cables on and lift away and expect it to work. Instead, figure out the ta
Thanks again for the info.My father and I had a small construction business and we have had equipment stuck so I know what you mean. I work somewhere with benefits and steady pay now so I have time for hobbies(the wife encouraged this move).I do think looking back that it was for the best however I do/did like construction.Bob
[emphasis added - PDN]
Thinking about this a little further, esp. in view of the CPR photos referenced above, you do have a pretty good question. (By the way, note that the caption said it was an Alco, but I called it a F-unit - I think I’m right - can anyone confirm ?)
Here’s why: If the loco was more or less horizontal, its weight would be distributed and lifted about equally at each end (depending on the arrangement and weight of its internal equipment and the balance of same, of course). Any slight variation in the lifting rate of the crane/ sidebooms at either end wouldn’t matter much - it would just get slightly out of level, and the natural flexibility of the lifting cables would “give” enouyh to adjust and compensate for that.
In the nearly vertical or steeply sloped position that you described and that the CPR loco is in, the same is true - theoretically. The practical problem is that if the lifting rates are not carefully controlled and matched, then the crane at whichever end is being lifted the fastest will all of a sudden find itself carrying a whole lot more of the load - the lifting cables on the other end will simply be under somewhat less tension and go a little slack when that occurs. Further, this isn’t often self-regulating - as the cable goes slack it doesn’t necessarily reel in faster or otherwise keep a constant tension or