This morning the southbound Piedmont (Raleigh to Charlotte) struck a tractor-trailer truck stuck on the rails in Mebane, North Carolina, where I live. The driver of the truck was uninjured but the train's engine caught fire (some kind of SD unit, a back up to the regular engine) and derailed. Many passengers were injured but only four seriously enough to be taken to hospitals. You can find some pictures on wral.com. Look for "train hits truck in Mebane." This crossing has seen several accidents since I moved here seven years ago, including one fatality. The problem is not the train! NS keeps the track and crossing signals in good condition but people tend to stop on the tracks waiting for the traffic light on Center St. (U.S. 70) to change. This rig today, with a "low-boy," got hung up on the crossing so the tractor was clear of the train. By the way, the town of 10,000 is pronounced "meh-bin."
John C.
Mebane, NC
I believe the SD unit was the regular power on the Piedmont.
I have examined the footage and also NC DOT's track charts (mid 2009 so could be some changes) and here are the results.
FTGT725 I believe the SD unit was the regular power on the Piedmont.
The regular power is one of the F59PHIs.
Dave
Lackawanna Route of the Phoebe Snow
http://www.bing.com/maps/default.aspx?v=2&cp=44.023938~-99.71&style=h&lvl=4&tilt=-89.875918865193&dir=0&alt=7689462.6842358#JndoZXJlMT1OKzV0aCtTdCUyYytNZWJhbmUlMmMrTkMrMjczMDImYmI9MzYuMDk5NzgwMDY1ODc2NCU3ZS03OS4yNjAxMzAxMDEwMDQ1JTdlMzYuMDkyMDU0NjMwNzM1MSU3ZS03OS4yNzI4NzcyMTQ1NDY5
http://www.wral.com/news/local/image_gallery/7593985/
Phoebe Vet http://www.wral.com/news/local/image_gallery/7593985/
Phoebe: These additional pictures show:
http://www.bytrain.org/passenger/pdf/dotrailequipment.pdf
This list of equipment is not up to date. New equipment was purchased a couple of years ago and has been being overhauled in anticipation of the new service.
Th GP40 which was in this accident was the oldest engine in the fleet.
See 5:14 pm EDT post
Gentlemen: I made a mistake in reading the track charts.As a consequence items 2 - 10 have been modified and original posts will be blanked out. Again sorry!!!!!
blue streak 1 I have examined the footage and also NC DOT's track charts (October 2007) so could be some changes) and here are the results. 1. I hope the engineer is OK \2. The reason that the train did not travel too far beyond the crossing is unknown. The track was upgraded in 2003 (?) to 79 MPH. There are street crossings coming from the 2 + mile siding (extended previously) out of view to the east. (3 head siding signal is visible on side of stopped train). Wonder if engineer big holed the train when he saw the low boy at some distance. The tracks cross 5th (accident site), 4th, and 3rd streets. 3. Train speed outside these streets is presently listed 79 MPH. 4. NC DOT does not at present plan to eliminate all three crossings and increase speed further.(many of the charts have not been updated yet to show the PTC speeds up to 110MPH) 5. Did not find CAT crawler number on load but it is an over width CAT crawler back hoe. Could weigh anywhere near 100,000 -187,000 #s (seriously damaged). Definitely not something an engineer wants to hit. Noted counter weight still attached to backhoe. 6. Engine was #1792 -- anyone with info? Phoebe provided info. 7. First coach was a rebuilt Baggage coach with ironically painted "operation life saver". Car was a 34 seat baggage combine named Yadkin River built 1953. Car # 400101 8. First coach has a large opening ( maybe 8' x 12') in the roof at the right rear location of the car. Dammage assestment? May have been caused by the back hoe's bucket scraping along the roof? 9. Could not see what -- if any damage to other 2 coaches. 10. Fire damage to loco is extensive on the outside. Worse on the left side. Also wreck damage somewhat extensive. Thank goodness not a cab car on front. 11. The first picture of the trainman (engineer?) sitting on the trap steps on an adrenelin let down is very telling. Hope the crew members recover. 12. Still no identification of CAT model (Cat 370 series) 13. Automobile got hit by a rebound from the crash. 14. North side crossing warning completely demolished. 15. Front view of loco #1792 gives the appearance of frame bent. If so that may cause unit to be scrapped. 16. Will NC be able to rent an Amtrak unit to replace? 17. Phoebe is there enough spare equipment so second Piedmont RT can start as planned? 18. Found partial model # on CAT : It is a 37?. 370 series backhoes run from 101K to 187K pounds. Judging from low boy in accident maybe tops 120,000 #s. Wonder if he had oversize over weight permits? If much over 98,000 will have exceeded axel load limits as well. 19. Last car named Gray Squirrell # 400008 56 seat coach built 1964. damages?
I have examined the footage and also NC DOT's track charts (October 2007) so could be some changes) and here are the results.
1. I hope the engineer is OK
\2. The reason that the train did not travel too far beyond the crossing is unknown. The track was upgraded in 2003 (?) to 79 MPH. There are street crossings coming from the 2 + mile siding (extended previously) out of view to the east. (3 head siding signal is visible on side of stopped train). Wonder if engineer big holed the train when he saw the low boy at some distance. The tracks cross 5th (accident site), 4th, and 3rd streets.
3. Train speed outside these streets is presently listed 79 MPH.
4. NC DOT does not at present plan to eliminate all three crossings and increase speed further.(many of the charts have not been updated yet to show the PTC speeds up to 110MPH)
5. Did not find CAT crawler number on load but it is an over width CAT crawler back hoe. Could weigh anywhere near 100,000 -187,000 #s (seriously damaged). Definitely not something an engineer wants to hit. Noted counter weight still attached to backhoe.
6. Engine was #1792 -- anyone with info? Phoebe provided info.
7. First coach was a rebuilt Baggage coach with ironically painted "operation life saver". Car was a 34 seat baggage combine named Yadkin River built 1953. Car # 400101
8. First coach has a large opening ( maybe 8' x 12') in the roof at the right rear location of the car. Dammage assestment? May have been caused by the back hoe's bucket scraping along the roof?
9. Could not see what -- if any damage to other 2 coaches.
10. Fire damage to loco is extensive on the outside. Worse on the left side. Also wreck damage somewhat extensive. Thank goodness not a cab car on front.
11. The first picture of the trainman (engineer?) sitting on the trap steps on an adrenelin let down is very telling. Hope the crew members recover.
12. Still no identification of CAT model (Cat 370 series)
13. Automobile got hit by a rebound from the crash.
14. North side crossing warning completely demolished.
15. Front view of loco #1792 gives the appearance of frame bent. If so that may cause unit to be scrapped.
16. Will NC be able to rent an Amtrak unit to replace?
17. Phoebe is there enough spare equipment so second Piedmont RT can start as planned?
18. Found partial model # on CAT : It is a 37?. 370 series backhoes run from 101K to 187K pounds. Judging from low boy in accident maybe tops 120,000 #s. Wonder if he had oversize over weight permits?
If much over 98,000 will have exceeded axel load limits as well.
19. Last car named Gray Squirrell # 400008 56 seat coach built 1964. damages?
This evening's news (which I always take with a grain of salt) said that the train was going about 70 MPH and the truck was hung on the crossing unable to move.
Phoebe Vet This evening's news (which I always take with a grain of salt) said that the train was going about 70 MPH and the truck was hung on the crossing unable to move.
If he was going that fast -- the train stopped within 4 car lengths (3 cars and loco) for a total of approximately 320 ft. that is 1/2 as far as a car at 70 MPH stops on dry pavement. Even if the backhoe was 170,000 #s and low boy another 50,000 #. =s 220,000# vs approx 600,000# train. That seems a little strange. Oh also the backhoe was knocked away ( about 60 - 80 ft ) not glued to loco. So 70 MPH seems highly unlikely. Also if train stopped that fast almost all passengers would have been thrown forward at that rate of decelaration.??.
It can be argured that the low boy wedged under the loco/train slowed the train that fast. I would like to see the track structure underneath the stopped train.
"Train was going about 70" probably means when he locked up the brakes, not at the time of impact.
Look at the crossing. It is a long straight track. He probably hit the brakes as soon as he realized that the truck was not going to move.
If he had hit it at 70 there would have been Horse s**t and feathers all the way to Greensboro.
The Piedmont and Carolinian are back in service.
http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2010/05/14/1435180/amtrak-service-resumes-today.html
This is a replay of last year's Amtrak incident in Brighton, Illinois. (maybe 2 years ago now)
If that crossing was not properly signed by the city/county,the local city/county engineer plus the truck driver ought to be looking for a new profession. No way does the crossing even come close to meeting minimum AREMA/AASHTO standard (approaches +/- 6 inches 30 feet out from the crossing).
Recent construction didn't help much, but the condition has obviously existed for a long time.
(The recent incident with the video of the hung up food service truck and the CSX train also comes to mind)
The link to the news station's website has about 70 photos, from several persons. Most are repetitive views of the fire, but some are different views. A few quick observations:
- It appears that the water on the fire wasn't having much effect, until the foam was applied, but without a video or 'time stamps' on the photos that's just speculation on my part as to how long that took;
- The loco is probably scrap due to frame and engine block damage from the heat of the evidently somewhat long exposure to the large fire;
- Said fire likely resulted from the lowboy trailer being wedged underneath the loco's fuel tank and being dragged down the track, generating sparks along the way;
- The low nose of the loco is remarkably undamaged. Even if long-hood forward operation was still practiced, I don't know that the result would have been hugely different, except for the scars on the engineer's psyche;
- It looks like the loco's coupler/ anti-climber contacted the hoe's engine compartment, bashed it in, and then broke the chains and knocked it off the lowboy to land clear of the tracks. The hoe is otherwise remarkably undamaged, which is what leads me to conclude this. Fortunately it did not become wedged under the loco also;
- Since it appears the hoe was an over-width load per blue streak 1's research and posts above, it makes sense that the loco would have struck the overhanging side of the hoe before contacting the lowboy itself.
- The impact broke the lowboy trailer at it's hydraulic joint. The goose-neck portion is still attached to the tractor on the far side of the crossing; the loading ramp end is somewhere under the loco;
- Concur with blue streak 1's assessment that dragging the lowboy might have helped slow the train somewhat quicker/ sooner, likely from the rear tires dragging on the ground. The lowboy's steel frame skidding on the track rails would not be much different from the loco's steel wheels sliding from the emergency brake application;
- Note the sign in some of the photos that says in large print, ''DO NOT STOP ON CROSSING'';
- Wonder what the ground clearance of that lowboy 'as loaded' was ? Although the street appears to ramp upwards a little bit towards the track, it doesn't look too extreme. I did not see any of the ''Low Ground Clearance'' warning signs on any of the crossing signals or approach signs;
- These things are never good, and I can see the total damages here being in the $2 to 4 million range. However - to find a silver lining in this particular cloud - it does appear to have been an excellent opportunity for the local emergency responders to deal with a real-live train fire and potential mass-casualty crisis during daylight and favorable conditions, and to gain valuable knowledge and experience in doing that for the next incident - which hopefully never occurs, of course. From what I can see and know - which isn't much - it looks like they did pretty well with it. [Please forgive the possibly irreverent or non-serious tone of that comment, but this is 'top of mind' for me this morning - mainly because our local services had their annual training 'simulation of a disaster' exercise at the local amusement park last night.] I'll PM tree68 / Larryand see if he wants to add anything to this.
- Paul North.
Paul_D_North_JrThe link to the news station's website has about 70 photos
I like irony of photo #43 with the "Operation Lifesaver" logo.
Geez, you'd think a driver for a trucking firm that specializes in handling this type of equipment would have brains in excess of what is necessary to keep the body warm.
I was surprised to see the huge fire that resulted; it almost looks like a Hollywood-staged incident.
mudchicken This is a replay of last year's Amtrak incident in Brighton, Illinois. (maybe 2 years ago now) If that crossing was not properly signed by the city/county,the local city/county engineer plus the truck driver ought to be looking for a new profession. No way does the crossing even come close to meeting minimum AREMA/AASHTO standard (approaches +/- 6 inches 30 feet out from the crossing). Recent construction didn't help much, but the condition has obviously existed for a long time. (The recent incident with the video of the hung up food service truck and the CSX train also comes to mind)
That crossing was recently upgraded. NCDOT has been spending hundreds of millions of dollars bringing all the track between Raleigh and Charlotte up to 79 MPH standards. If you look at the photos closely you will see that it has 4 gates which block all 4 lanes on both sides of the road.
The track there is running between two parallel roads.
SO?
You're missing the point. The approach grades are all wrong. In fact they are BUTT UGLY.
There is much more to it than just gates and a new crossing surface. If the state bubbas (probably non-railroaders*) or consultant that funded the thing didn't even notice the grade issue, shame on them too.
(IF you read Paul's previous post, he saw it and commented on it the same time as me)...
*IMHO - An awful lot of the so-called Transportation Engineers are bus people with a new title - totally unqualified to railroad, just trying to cash-in on the new railroad people transportation emphasis. They ought to lose their license over something like this if they said nothing during the inspection and evaluation stage of the crossing upgrades.
^ What mudchicken said, pretty much. - PDN
From a 2008 Canadian TSB report on a very similar collision - RAIL REPORT - 2008 - R08T0158 - at:
http://tsb.gc.ca/eng/rapports-reports/rail/2008/r08t0158/r08t0158.asp#s2.6
Low ground clearance highway-railway warning signage is standardized in the United States through the Department of Transportation Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD). Chapter 8, Section 8B.17, sets forth guidance for the posting of such signs. It states, in part, "if the highway profile conditions are sufficiently abrupt to create hang-up situation for long wheelbase vehicles or for trailers with low ground clearance, the Low Ground Clearance Highway-Rail Grade Crossing (W10-5) sign [see Figure 4] should be installed in advance of the highway-rail grade crossing."
Figure 4. United States Department of Transportationstandardized low ground clearance W10-5 sign
- Paul North
After further consideration, a couple corrections/ modifications to the portions below of my previous post -
Paul_D_North_Jr - It looks like the loco's coupler/ anti-climber contacted the hoe's tracks and undercarriage, engine compartment, bashed it in, and then broke the chains and knocked it off the lowboy to land clear of the tracks. The hoe is otherwise remarkably undamaged, which is what leads me to conclude this. Fortunately it did not become wedged under the loco also; - Since it appears the hoe was an over-width load per blue streak 1's research and posts above, it makes sense that the loco would have struck the lower and wider tracks portion overhanging side of the hoe before contacting the lowboy itself.
- Since it appears the hoe was an over-width load per blue streak 1's research and posts above, it makes sense that the loco would have struck the lower and wider tracks portion overhanging side of the hoe before contacting the lowboy itself.
Since the undercarriage is the 'foundation' of the hoe and has a good portion of its weight, when that was essentially 'kicked' off the lowboy by impact from the loco's /coupler anti-climber, the rest of the hoe just followed. The damage to the hoe's engine compartment probably resulted from incidental contact with the low hood or other portions of the loco as the hoe went sailing ahead and off to the side.
Wonder how much insurance that ''good ol' boy'' has ? He might be hoping that title to his house is held jointly with his wife - otherwise I see a sheriff's seizure and sale to pay off the damage judgments in his future . . .
As far as any wrong doing on the driver, more than likely he may be local having crossthis and other crossings many times and the updates could have raised the tracks. These type of trailers will slide across tracks easily if the driver is able to keep his speed up and ina gear to provide the extra power needed to do so. -many years been there, done that. Never seen a warning sign such as that one and living in area with 20 or more NW crossings thereare no signs although some of those can`t be used by this type trailer, which doesn`t use any hydraulic on the connection, its usually air operated pin. I`m not 100% sure but guessing tractor and trailer can be permited for 125,000 gross, tare wt around 36,000. Never hauled a 370 but looking at it I don`t it getting 100,000. Local companies usually will obtain blanket permits to cover all loads needing permits by the month or more and don`t get one for a trip.Thats all folks, I leave now for the pros to continue.
This is one of the photos from the wreck site:
Horrific crash, minor injuries - Traffic - NewsObserver.com
It appears the crossing was properly signed.
Something many low boy drivers tend to forget.
1. Empty low boy trailers are bowed up about 8-10" in the middle between the king pin and trailer wheels. So a low clearance crossing can be crossed empty.
2. When the 37? series (110K - 187K) backhoe is loaded the low boy bow may disappear and may even become bowed down. Now the backhoe + lowboy will drag and maybe snag on the same crossing he cleared earlier.
3. It has happened at least 3 times in the past 2 years here in my town. Fortunately CSX got stopped in time.
Perhaps the people in Mebane just shouldn't be allowed to cross railroad tracks.
http://www.wsoctv.com/news/news/local/1-killed-when-amtrak-train-collides-vehicle-mebane/njTPt/
MEBANE, N.C. —
An Amtrak train headed to Charlotte collided with a car Tuesday afternoon in Mebane.
Phoebe VetAn Amtrak train headed to Charlotte collided with a car Tuesday afternoon in Mebane.
Apparently a pretty direct result of four-quadrant gating, for you 'quiet zones are safe' aficionados...
Phoebee: Maybe its time for NC DOT to worry about the heavy traffic crossings instead of the below crossings of 2 - 6 trains a day?
http://www.progressiverailroading.com/c_s/news/North-Carolina-DOTs-Rail-Division-boosts-safety-at-six-public-crossings--42908
Phoebe Vet Perhaps the people in Mebane just shouldn't be allowed to cross railroad tracks. http://www.wsoctv.com/news/news/local/1-killed-when-amtrak-train-collides-vehicle-mebane/njTPt/ MEBANE, N.C. — An Amtrak train headed to Charlotte collided with a car Tuesday afternoon in Mebane.
Looks like it provided a afternoon's entertainment for the locals from the video.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
blue streak 1 Phoebee: Maybe its time for NC DOT to worry about the heavy traffic crossings instead of the below crossings of 2 - 6 trains a day? http://www.progressiverailroading.com/c_s/news/North-Carolina-DOTs-Rail-Division-boosts-safety-at-six-public-crossings--42908
NC DOTas been systematically sealing the entire corridor for several years in anticipation of the SE Corridor.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.