Trains.com

Amtrak #80 Carolinian hits tractor trailer.

10308 views
38 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    August 2006
  • From: Matthews NC
  • 363 posts
Posted by matthewsaggie on Monday, January 23, 2017 10:23 PM

Amtrak should invite him to ride the cab of the first train into Roanoke when it happens and give him a proper send off.

  • Member since
    September 2010
  • 2,515 posts
Posted by Electroliner 1935 on Monday, January 23, 2017 3:28 PM

Its tough to hear what he has had to endure due to the indifference of others. 

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 25,292 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Monday, January 23, 2017 3:21 PM

[quote user="blue streak 1"]One more victim suffers more from the crash.

http://www.roanoke.com/business/news/chuck-akers-steps-down-from-the-cab-reluctantly/article_f0f50aaa-3421-55b4-bcac-286ee89c80d1.html[/quote]

Mr. Akers career sounds like the definition of being in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

              

  • Member since
    December 2007
  • From: Georgia USA SW of Atlanta
  • 11,919 posts
Posted by blue streak 1 on Monday, January 23, 2017 2:01 PM
  • Member since
    May 2013
  • 3,231 posts
Posted by NorthWest on Friday, May 1, 2015 8:34 PM

$75,000 apiece won't do much. I suspect the requested legal immunity is the big goal here.

  • Member since
    July 2009
  • From: San Francisco East Bay
  • 1,360 posts
Posted by MikeF90 on Friday, May 1, 2015 6:59 PM

Looks like Amtrak and CSX have done their due diligence, and have decided to unleash the lawyers:

http://www.wsoctv.com/news/news/local/amtrak-csx-file-lawsuit-over-halifax-county-train-/nk7QC/

Stay tuned ....

  • Member since
    September 2010
  • 2,515 posts
Posted by Electroliner 1935 on Monday, March 16, 2015 3:53 PM

Noboby has posted anything about the condition of the Engineer or his "student" engineer. I hope they are surviving. 

  • Member since
    August 2013
  • 3,006 posts
Posted by ACY Tom on Monday, March 16, 2015 9:07 AM

Is there any reason an old idea can't be resurrected?  I still think modular construction makes more sense.

Tom

  • Member since
    March 2016
  • From: Burbank IL (near Clearing)
  • 13,540 posts
Posted by CSSHEGEWISCH on Monday, March 16, 2015 6:53 AM

I'm not sure about elsewhere, but a hook & ladder with a steerable rear end is either extinct or almost so in the Chicago Fire Department.  Most ladder trucks that I've seen recently are single units.

The daily commute is part of everyday life but I get two rides a day out of it. Paul
  • Member since
    December 2005
  • From: Cardiff, CA
  • 2,930 posts
Posted by erikem on Sunday, March 15, 2015 5:35 PM

Streak,

You're not the only one wondering the same thing - sounds like you're thinking somethng along the lines of the transporter for the 280mm Atomic Cannon.

  • Member since
    December 2007
  • From: Georgia USA SW of Atlanta
  • 11,919 posts
Posted by blue streak 1 on Sunday, March 15, 2015 5:14 PM

Another thought.  This load was twice as wide and almost twice as long as almost any fire department ladder truck.  So why did the permit not require a steerable rear end for this load like ladder trucks?  Maybe a fault in the permitting process as well ?  These steerable units exit all over the country.  Many units have powered rear ends as well as steersman..

  • Member since
    March 2007
  • From: Rhododendron, OR
  • 1,516 posts
Posted by challenger3980 on Friday, March 13, 2015 12:56 AM

Sam1 wrote:

I suspect that the truckers that haul oversized loads have pressured the legislature in Texas, at least, to allow ever larger loads.  I wonder whether it is true in other states?

 

I think that it is much more likely that the MANUFACTURER building such loads, or the CUSTOMERS buying such loads are the ones pressing for the larger loadsto be permitted.

 

It makes things easier for the manufacturer and/or customer, if the load can be moved in one large piece, NOT the truck driver.

But then I know that blame the driver is even more common here, on this forum, than the rest of the world.

Doug

May your flanges always stay BETWEEN the rails

  • Member since
    August 2013
  • 3,006 posts
Posted by ACY Tom on Thursday, March 12, 2015 10:53 PM

Interesting reading.  As of March 9, their "accelerated construction schedule" got decelerated.  It boggles my mind to think that anybody would even attempt to move a 16' x 16' x 160+' rigid structure any significant distance over narrow highways, or that anybody would actually issue them a permit to do so. The total distance had to be over 400 miles, and the Interstates were supposedly not feasible for a significant portion of that.  Does anybody know what kind of practical turning radius that thing had?

I have been told the passenger speed limit at Halifax is 70 mph, and I'm sure the train was doing that speed, or very close to it, when the obstruction came into view.  I doubt that the speed was much below 60 at impact.

Lucky passengers and crew?  Well, maybe.  One lady, age over 80, was very seriously injured and has had at least two major surgeries so far.  Everybody hopes she'll make it, of course, but it looks like there are no guarantees.  Members of her family were interviewed on TV.

Tom 

  • Member since
    December 2007
  • From: Georgia USA SW of Atlanta
  • 11,919 posts
Posted by blue streak 1 on Thursday, March 12, 2015 7:35 PM

Here is the web site for the equipment being hauled.

http://www.pcxcorp.com/

I feel that the crew and passengers were very lucky.  A locomotive that hits something that weighs more than the loco normally has much more damage to locos and cars..  We have seen the results of hitting construction equipment. For whatever reason the P-42 climbed over the trailer and hit the load at a " fragile " point.  Of course we do not know at what speed the Amtrak was going at collision.  As my farther said " Its the sudden stops that counts " 

 

  • Member since
    December 2007
  • From: Georgia USA SW of Atlanta
  • 11,919 posts
Posted by blue streak 1 on Wednesday, March 11, 2015 5:19 PM

Balt:  It gets more interesting.  Fox news found out his record(s).

 

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2015/03/11/courts-truck-driver-in-nc-amtrak-crash-that-injured-55-is-felon-and-repeat/

 

 

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 25,292 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Wednesday, March 11, 2015 2:35 PM

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

              

  • Member since
    December 2007
  • From: Georgia USA SW of Atlanta
  • 11,919 posts
Posted by blue streak 1 on Wednesday, March 11, 2015 11:58 AM

Any State's oversize permits should have " when crossing  XYZ   RR on highway  ____   call   XYZ  RR at tel #  ___ ___ ____   before crossing track, report to  XYZ RR  crosing number   __________, get clearance to cross RR,   maintain contact with  XYZ ___ RR and tell  XYZ  RR when crossing is clear." 

As well utility  ( eleectric, telephone, cable )  ABC,  etc  is between ___  and  ___  tel  number is   __________.  This could repeated for every segment of a permit.  These permits can be composed linerally much like train orders are made ( Mile post to mile post )

  These locations would only need a one time work to verify any route locations; then any new permit would be just filling in route.

  • Member since
    August 2013
  • 3,006 posts
Posted by ACY Tom on Wednesday, March 11, 2015 11:27 AM

Thanks, Balt. 

Can you spell CYA?  The news video attached to that item ends with the comment, "there could be lawsuits".  Do ya really think so?

Tom

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 25,292 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Wednesday, March 11, 2015 10:26 AM

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

              

  • Member since
    December 2007
  • From: Georgia USA SW of Atlanta
  • 11,919 posts
Posted by blue streak 1 on Wednesday, March 11, 2015 9:08 AM

Boy there are so many articles on this crash that its impossible to cite them all.

A thought.  FWHA and FRA should require that if any oversize load that might not be able to clear a RR crossing in 15 secods then the RR must be notified before crossing the RR crossing.  A load 154 feet long going 5 MPH ( ~ 7 feet / second ) would take 21 seconds to clear. + add in rail width and crossing gate setback 24 seconds. 

Used 15 seconds due to most crossings have a 25 second warning before train arrival.

The turn involved in this crash IMHO automatically makes one think that even a load 80 feet long cannot clear in 15 seconds.

Does anyone think that the NC state patrol is CYA ? 

The problem of oversize loads fouling RR crossings needs addressing nationally.  As well extra wide or extra tall loads will take longer to go thru RR crossings if they have to maneuver around utility lines and / or RR crossing gates. 

 

  • Member since
    August 2013
  • 3,006 posts
Posted by ACY Tom on Tuesday, March 10, 2015 8:59 PM

I can't get the link cited by Dutchrailnut.  An item from the Charlottesville Daily Progress and the Waynesboro News Virginian says the load was too big for the Interstate Highways.  The byline was Michael Biesecker and Jonathan Drew.  It seems to have a fairly balanced coverage.  It says Lt. Jeff Gordon of the NC Highway Patrol claims notifying the RR was not the responsibility of the trooper, implying it was all up to the driver.

Wasn't modular construction considered?  Or fabrication on-site in New Jersey?

  • Member since
    March 2005
  • From: Brewster, NY
  • 648 posts
Posted by Dutchrailnut on Tuesday, March 10, 2015 8:17 PM

and for clincher
http://www.wncn.com/story/28359720/highway-patrol-never-notified-csx-prior-to-amtrak-collision

  • Member since
    December 2007
  • From: Georgia USA SW of Atlanta
  • 11,919 posts
Posted by blue streak 1 on Tuesday, March 10, 2015 7:41 PM

Well must retract sveral statements and assumptions.  Load was 16 feet wide and 16 feet tall ( no indication whether this was loaded height ).

1.  Load was some kind of electrical equipment.

2.  Load and tractor trailer weighed in at 258,000 pounds.   That weight certainly did not do the damage it could have.  Suspect loco frame may be bent ? load listed at 164 feet but no indication if that was just the unit or the total length of the rig.

3.  Load was on 13 axles.  or approximately 20,000 # per axle.  That is usually more weight than the 16,000 per axle allowed on regular tractor trailers that have the apparent axle spacing..

4.  Unit built in Clayton, NC approximately 20 miles SE of Raleigh.  

5.  Unit was going to New Jersey.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/college-student-in-recent-car-wreck-survives-train-crash/ar-AA9AsnO#page=1

 

The insurance claims are going to be many and very high amounts.

 The above article stated trooper must be in contact with RR dispatcher whenever crossing any RR.

16 foot height might indicate the overhead crossing signals might have fouled the load ? 

  • Member since
    December 2007
  • From: Georgia USA SW of Atlanta
  • 11,919 posts
Posted by blue streak 1 on Tuesday, March 10, 2015 6:38 PM

I may have made an assumption not based on any fact so far.

Did the load come straight down the road that crosses CSX or did load come from the south road that is west of the CSX tracks ?

Noticed that this road also has very wide fillets for turning.  That is not prevelant on other NC roads.  There are several buildings down that road where the home might have been made.

https://www.google.com/maps/@36.3307096,-77.5937943,62m/data=!3m1!1e3!5m1!1e4

 

  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Tuesday, March 10, 2015 5:44 PM

BaltACD

NC Trooper should have requested the railroad hold traffic for the safe passage of the load.  Railroads honor such requests from local authorities.  This incident has been caused by Trooper failing to protect the movement of the oversized load across the tracks. 

The trooper appears to have made a mistake. But it would be prudent to wait for the investigation to make a definitive conclusion. 

But the cause may go deeper.  Based on what I read, the oversize load was so large that the truck could not navigate the turn.  It needed to back up and have another go at it.  But traffic behind it had stacked up, and the truck could not back-up.  Which raises a point!  

Why are these huge, oversized loads permitted on the highways?  Is the permitting of these huge loads a root or contributing cause of the accident?

In Texas I have seen oversize loads that take up more than a lane and a half on the Interstate.  Getting around them is dicey.  And when they are coming at you on a two lane road in west Texas, for example, many times you have to take to the shoulder to avoid being clobbered. 

I suspect that the truckers that haul oversized loads have pressured the legislature in Texas, at least, to allow ever larger loads.  I wonder whether it is true in other states?

  • Member since
    December 2007
  • From: Georgia USA SW of Atlanta
  • 11,919 posts
Posted by blue streak 1 on Tuesday, March 10, 2015 4:30 PM

Read somewhere that a student engineer + trainer were on loco.  That report seems subject to doubt but does anyone know ?

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 25,292 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Tuesday, March 10, 2015 12:36 PM

ACY

Remember the old adage: "Late trains get later".

Tom

Don't I know it - they are out of their 'normal' operating slot and being late have lost their incentive to be operated On Time.

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

              

  • Member since
    August 2013
  • 3,006 posts
Posted by ACY Tom on Tuesday, March 10, 2015 11:16 AM

Yes, the Auto Trains left their points of origin about 4 - 5 hours late last night.  If it had maintained normal running speed, the southbound train would have passed the site a little after midnight.  However, in the actual event, that train did not pass Halifax until about 3 a.m. due to traffic backups.  If that train maintains its current speed, it is expected to arrive at Sanford around 4 p.m. (a very loose estimate).  That means arrival at Sanford approximately 7 hours late.  Don't expect that train to make up much, if any, time with a quick turnaround at Sanford.  I understand the northbound Auto Train is doing better, but have no definite information on that. 

Remember the old adage: "Late trains get later".

Tom

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 25,292 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Tuesday, March 10, 2015 11:04 AM

A secondary result of this incident has both sides of Auto Train leaving their origins nearly 4 hours late.  With the lack of additional equipment, these trains will either have to 'run themselves' back On Time or Amtrak will have to 'bite the bullet' and cancel a trip from each origin to have the following day's origination be On Time.

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

              

Join our Community!

Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.

Search the Community

Newsletter Sign-Up

By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our privacy policy