blue streak 1With all the rain in the south today and tomorrow can we expect more derailments and washouts ?
Sorry. Our crystal ball is temporarily down for repairs.
Norm
With all the rain in the south today and tomorrow can we expect more derailments and washouts ? Our area forecast to have from 3 - 7 " of rain Monday.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
dehusmanThey saw the water over the rail, they started stopping the train but were unable to get the train stopped before they entered the high water. Several posters are making an assumption that the crew knew there was high water there before they got there, which is a pretty bad assumption.
Actually the engineer saw the water rising according to the local press it was not yet over the rail when he went into emergency but I believe it had undercut the roadbed since the creek runs right alongside the roadbed.
EuclidMaybe this has been reported, but let me ask if this train crew made the choice of proceeding through the water; or did they approach it at a speed making it impossible to stop in time?
They saw the water over the rail, they started stopping the train but were unable to get the train stopped before they entered the high water. Several posters are making an assumption that the crew knew there was high water there before they got there, which is a pretty bad assumption.
Dave H. Painted side goes up. My website : wnbranch.com
I don;t want to get into the North vs. South debate but Southern railways and roadbeds put in place near the end of the Civil War (in this case 1872) are not very well constructed because the South was still recovering about that time. Additionally the Southern railways were built to haul mostly cotton to market vs industrial goods, so the rail was generally lighter, sometimes not standard guage and sometimes the rail line was largely landlocked with few or no connections. Further the philosophy was to build the railroad to the nearest port or riverhead instead of build it overland to a Big City destination. Hence the H&TC originated at the Port of Galveston and was only constructed to the Red River boundry (Northern Texas state line).....it ran through Dallas and that was the only real big city it ran through. It built branches later to Austin, Ft. Worth, etc but the mainline was not planned to run through or near either city. H&TC had fairly good business when T&NO took over but it slowly withered away under T&NO and parent SP only kept the line as a through route between Houston and Dallas. The last freight traffic North of Dallas was just for a handful of customers which died out by 1985.
The rail lines in the South before the Civil War were in even worse shape and that is one of the reasons the South lost. The North had heavy line replacements with industrialization, line relocations, grade reductions, gauge standardization, etc, etc.
Looking at the H&TC North of Dallas which was largely abandoned in the 1980's up to McKinney, TX. Mostly light rail, Bridges look flimsey and probably cannot handle a 246,000 lb rail car. Roadbed looks like a little gravel ontop of the Texas Clay not a heavily ballasted line. As I stated previously the Bridges over the creeks do not look like they were built to a 100 year flood mark. Whats worse is the former Texas Electric Interurban bridges that parallel the former H&TC North of Dallas for a bit even sit lower to the water and some have news reports of washing out in the 1920's and 1930's. Texas Electrics roadbed was just thrown together with very little grading above the land that was there. So if it had been preserved beyond the 1950's or whenever it went out of business. Someone would have to had paid a fortune to redo the Texas Electric line at least.
DavidH66 http://www.fox4news.com/news/38277654-story Happened in the DFW area. Also the article stated that the cars the derailed were carrying powdered concrete. What happens if water leaks in there and solidies the poweder? The Mythbuster proves even a stick of dynamite wouldn't break it up, so what you do if that happened with the freight cars?
http://www.fox4news.com/news/38277654-story
Happened in the DFW area. Also the article stated that the cars the derailed were carrying powdered concrete. What happens if water leaks in there and solidies the poweder? The Mythbuster proves even a stick of dynamite wouldn't break it up, so what you do if that happened with the freight cars?
FYI- Corsicana is NOT the DFW area. It's a far out town well outside the outward boundry of the DFW metroplex. The derailment happened just leaving the Southern City Limits of Corsicana along where a river parallels close to the roadbed (says "Mesquite Branch" on Google Earth)
The accident happened on the former Houston and Texas Central rail line (ex-T&NO) which was graded pretty poorly for flash floods....IMO, judging from the largely abandoned part of the line North of Dallas. The rain that came down might have been unusual but railroad grades should be designed for 100 year floods or greater and I see evidence via Google Earth that UP seems to have had a past issue in the same or similar location (bright color of ballast replacement).....just speculation on my part, could be coincidence.
BTW, the Locomotive Engineer stated to the press that he saw the water rising towards the roadbed so he placed the train into Emergency saving a good part of the train and a larger pile-up. So it sounds like he came upon the location just as the floodwaters were approaching it. I know where I live just North of Dallas I have watched a small trickling creek you can jump across and only 6 inches deep at the most become a raging torrent 20-30 feet deep in the center and 80 feet wide across in about 5-10 min. Yes it happens that water rises that fast down here in a downpour so the Engineers story is very plausible. The other thing that is kind of scary if you have a house near a creek is animals can sense it comming so you get a animal migration of various poisonious snakes, spiders and rodents from the deep grass at the waters edge outward from the river just before the flood hits the area.....interesting to see also. Not sure how they know it is comming? Ground vibration maybe? Some of them get washed away and do not make it to high ground in time. Which you have to think about when swimming in that crud.
Also, check out the Trinity River Flood Plain in Dallas. You see these huge viaducts crossing a flat grassy plain with a small little creek in the middle with a large embankment on each side of the grassy plain. That river does expand quite a bit in heavy rains.
LakeWas swimming to safety, in the crews job description?
Actually, local news reports said they swam to "dry land" (high ground?) and rescue people had to take them from there to safety by boat.
Some non-railroaders in Sunday School this morning made comments about somebody being "pretty dumb to drive a train into a wash out". I defended the crew; pointing out that it was night, the track will sag and be unable to support a train before it actually breaks, it takes quite a distance to stop a train, etc.
ChuckAllen, TX
BaltACD edblysard That was the scuttlebutt from the UP crews that brought our yard transfers in today... From what I saw on the national evening news shows - I am surprised that any of Houston is still above water!
edblysard That was the scuttlebutt from the UP crews that brought our yard transfers in today...
That was the scuttlebutt from the UP crews that brought our yard transfers in today...
From what I saw on the national evening news shows - I am surprised that any of Houston is still above water!
23 17 46 11
kgbw49 Put the cement cars back on trucks and press them in to service as buffer cars on crude or ethanol unit trains?
Put the cement cars back on trucks and press them in to service as buffer cars on crude or ethanol unit trains?
After being on their sides, in water, I suspect any remaining load would be off center and creating a laterlly unbalanced car.
BaltACD Euclid Paul_D_North_Jr More seriously - and I don't want to criticize the train crew, because I don't know all the facts here yet - but: What about the "Safety First" rule ? ("When in doubt, the safe course must be taken.") What's safe about proceeding* on a track with water over the railhead - in this kind of a major storm - which is so muddy (turbid) that the ties and subgrade can't be seen ? Washouts are common enough in these kind of extreme weather events, so maybe the pre-trip safety briefing should have included and addressed that, too. *Even at restricted speed, whatever that is in a situation like this where there's no specific visible obstruction on the track (like another train, or a blind curve ahead, etc.), but the track itself - right in front of the locomotive - may be the unsafe obstruction ? Even the National Weather Service has the "Turn around - don't drown" mantra going out to the public for these kinds of storms, about how 6" of fast-moving water is enough to sweep people off their feet and float cars, etc. Wouldn't it have been better for the train crew to just stop and stay stopped until either the MOW forces could check it out, a hi-rail patrol truck go first ( - but see pargraph above), or someone else qualified to do so examined the situation more closely ? Thankfully, the crew got out OK, and the worst part is going to be a couple million $ of damaged equipment. Perhaps this close call will lead to more consideration being given to this the next time** (which could right about now, too, what with the remains of Tropical Storm Patricia moving through that region of the country). ** http://despair.com/products/mistakes - click on the left thumbnail for the best view - Paul North. I too was wondering about that. Maybe this has been reported, but let me ask if this train crew made the choice of proceeding through the water; or did they approach it at a speed making it impossible to stop in time? Or did they see something at 0330 or thereabouts and stopped where the thought they were clear - only to find out as the weather, time and water flowed on that where they were stopped wasn't clear and the flowing water did what flowing water does and we got the picture after the Sun came up.
Euclid Paul_D_North_Jr More seriously - and I don't want to criticize the train crew, because I don't know all the facts here yet - but: What about the "Safety First" rule ? ("When in doubt, the safe course must be taken.") What's safe about proceeding* on a track with water over the railhead - in this kind of a major storm - which is so muddy (turbid) that the ties and subgrade can't be seen ? Washouts are common enough in these kind of extreme weather events, so maybe the pre-trip safety briefing should have included and addressed that, too. *Even at restricted speed, whatever that is in a situation like this where there's no specific visible obstruction on the track (like another train, or a blind curve ahead, etc.), but the track itself - right in front of the locomotive - may be the unsafe obstruction ? Even the National Weather Service has the "Turn around - don't drown" mantra going out to the public for these kinds of storms, about how 6" of fast-moving water is enough to sweep people off their feet and float cars, etc. Wouldn't it have been better for the train crew to just stop and stay stopped until either the MOW forces could check it out, a hi-rail patrol truck go first ( - but see pargraph above), or someone else qualified to do so examined the situation more closely ? Thankfully, the crew got out OK, and the worst part is going to be a couple million $ of damaged equipment. Perhaps this close call will lead to more consideration being given to this the next time** (which could right about now, too, what with the remains of Tropical Storm Patricia moving through that region of the country). ** http://despair.com/products/mistakes - click on the left thumbnail for the best view - Paul North. I too was wondering about that. Maybe this has been reported, but let me ask if this train crew made the choice of proceeding through the water; or did they approach it at a speed making it impossible to stop in time?
Paul_D_North_Jr More seriously - and I don't want to criticize the train crew, because I don't know all the facts here yet - but: What about the "Safety First" rule ? ("When in doubt, the safe course must be taken.") What's safe about proceeding* on a track with water over the railhead - in this kind of a major storm - which is so muddy (turbid) that the ties and subgrade can't be seen ? Washouts are common enough in these kind of extreme weather events, so maybe the pre-trip safety briefing should have included and addressed that, too. *Even at restricted speed, whatever that is in a situation like this where there's no specific visible obstruction on the track (like another train, or a blind curve ahead, etc.), but the track itself - right in front of the locomotive - may be the unsafe obstruction ? Even the National Weather Service has the "Turn around - don't drown" mantra going out to the public for these kinds of storms, about how 6" of fast-moving water is enough to sweep people off their feet and float cars, etc. Wouldn't it have been better for the train crew to just stop and stay stopped until either the MOW forces could check it out, a hi-rail patrol truck go first ( - but see pargraph above), or someone else qualified to do so examined the situation more closely ? Thankfully, the crew got out OK, and the worst part is going to be a couple million $ of damaged equipment. Perhaps this close call will lead to more consideration being given to this the next time** (which could right about now, too, what with the remains of Tropical Storm Patricia moving through that region of the country). ** http://despair.com/products/mistakes - click on the left thumbnail for the best view - Paul North.
More seriously - and I don't want to criticize the train crew, because I don't know all the facts here yet - but:
What about the "Safety First" rule ? ("When in doubt, the safe course must be taken.") What's safe about proceeding* on a track with water over the railhead - in this kind of a major storm - which is so muddy (turbid) that the ties and subgrade can't be seen ? Washouts are common enough in these kind of extreme weather events, so maybe the pre-trip safety briefing should have included and addressed that, too.
*Even at restricted speed, whatever that is in a situation like this where there's no specific visible obstruction on the track (like another train, or a blind curve ahead, etc.), but the track itself - right in front of the locomotive - may be the unsafe obstruction ?
Even the National Weather Service has the "Turn around - don't drown" mantra going out to the public for these kinds of storms, about how 6" of fast-moving water is enough to sweep people off their feet and float cars, etc.
Wouldn't it have been better for the train crew to just stop and stay stopped until either the MOW forces could check it out, a hi-rail patrol truck go first ( - but see pargraph above), or someone else qualified to do so examined the situation more closely ?
Thankfully, the crew got out OK, and the worst part is going to be a couple million $ of damaged equipment. Perhaps this close call will lead to more consideration being given to this the next time** (which could right about now, too, what with the remains of Tropical Storm Patricia moving through that region of the country).
** http://despair.com/products/mistakes - click on the left thumbnail for the best view
- Paul North.
I too was wondering about that. Maybe this has been reported, but let me ask if this train crew made the choice of proceeding through the water; or did they approach it at a speed making it impossible to stop in time?
Or did they see something at 0330 or thereabouts and stopped where the thought they were clear - only to find out as the weather, time and water flowed on that where they were stopped wasn't clear and the flowing water did what flowing water does and we got the picture after the Sun came up.
Remember, the pictures we are seeing were taken after the Sun was up - incident was reported as happening at 0330 - what the crew saw then and what we are seeing in the pictures 5 to 6 hours after the incident can be two entirely different scenes.
Usual inane comments about 'what if it was an oil train?'
Then the cars would tip over and get wet. The train stopped before it overturned.
Does every rail story have to go to Keystone XL bickering?
Preview of the next thread:
Do Cement Trains cause Track Damage?
The powdered cement gets shook up and "fluidizes", the "sloshing" of the cement damages the track and causes derailments. I know its coming.
The local yokel said, "Tanker cars." They look like covered hoppers to me.
First found this on NBC web news. The comments ranged from just plain dumb ("That train should have moved a week ago.") to downright idiotic.
Glad that the crew got out with nothing worse than wet clothes.
Chuck
Norm48327 mudchicken Any bets on how long before somebody claims PTC would have prevented this? I'll give the media 15 minutes; Bucky 24 hours. Flame suit on.
mudchicken Any bets on how long before somebody claims PTC would have prevented this?
I'll give the media 15 minutes; Bucky 24 hours. Flame suit on.
Johnny
mudchickenAny bets on how long before somebody claims PTC would have prevented this?
My guess is that it was a pretty slow roll over, the track was not totally submerged (4-5" ATR rule on the traction motors) and scour was not visible to the crew running at restricted speed. Wild ride for the train crew.
The track forces, already run ragged from chasing raindrops, have a big job in front of them, compounded by the mess Hulcher is about to start making. I think the unit of property test has been met. Finding suitable dry fill material ought to be a thrill.
Any bets on how long before somebody claims PTC would have prevented this?
Diesel fuel already leaking. As noted by a CNN reporter.
http://www.cnn.com/2015/10/24/us/texas-oklahoma-arkansas-lousiana-flooding/index.html
Jeff
Was swimming to safety, in the crews job description?
News reports said that is what they did to get clear of the engines.
Ken G Price My N-Scale Layout
Digitrax Super Empire Builder Radio System. South Valley Texas Railroad. SVTRR
N-Scale out west. 1996-1998 or so! UP, SP, Missouri Pacific, C&NW.
Wow - like $3 - 4 million worth of locomotives on their sides getting an immersion bath. That's like the value of 30 - 40 hopper cars (less if the value of the cement cargo is taken into account). Plus, how long until the diesel fuel and lube oil start leaking from them ? (though "dilution is the solution). Much more of that and they could either wash downstream, or become covered in so much silt adn other debris that recovery will be very difficult.
Cement like that will turn into mortar when just water is added, like what holds bricks in a wall together. (Note that "cement" is not "concrete" - it's just 1 [a powder-like substance] of the 4 principal ingredients of concrete, the others being coarse aggregate / stone, sand, and water.) Perhaps surprisingly, that mortar is much weaker than a concrete made from it (which spreads the cement paste over a much larger surface area and hence is thinner). It's the coarse aggregate / large stones that governs the strength of the concrete ("shear strength" in particular).
And with that much water running into it, the mortar may have too much water in the mix - that, pancake batter, etc. are all susceptible to the same kind of problem, which anyone who has tried it will know. That could make the wet cement/ mortar much weaker and flowable, so the mortar mix may actually wash out of the hopper cars, or at least be easier to chip out.
Eric Myers, emergency management coordinator for Navarro County, told NBC News the tankers contained cement. He said that the county had received 20 to 21 inches of rainfall in the past 24 hours, and said authorities had performed 72 swift water rescues.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.