UP had a coal train derail a coal train heading to Milwaukee in Northbrook, Il. Collapsed bridge.
http://abclocal.go.com/wls/story?section=news/local&id=8724613
Same spot as a couple of years ago, the junction with the CP at Shermer. From what I understand, the bridge collapsed this time (maybe they'll get rid of that annoying center pier in the roadway).The train probably was going to Pleasant Prairie or Oak Creek, based on what I can see of the cars (they look like WEPX).
Carl
Railroader Emeritus (practiced railroading for 46 years--and in 2010 I finally got it right!)
CAACSCOCOM--I don't want to behave improperly, so I just won't behave at all. (SM)
That is going to be some cleanup job, judging by the way those cars are wedged into that gap. How can they say commuter service is not going to be disrupted, unless it didn't go on that route in the first place. Not the media's finest moment.
Amazing photos.
Bruce
So shovel the coal, let this rattler roll.
"A Train is a Place Going Somewhere" CP Rail Public Timetable
"O. S. Irricana"
. . . __ . ______
"Epic Fail !"
Shermer Rd. bridge, at about these Lat./ Long. coords.: N 42.10337 W 87.82933
'Chicken or egg' ambiguous scenario - although there are switches and a crossover just to the northeast, this looks like it happened as the train was moving southwest, and before it reached any facing-point switch or the bridge - see Photos 3, 6, 7, and 10 of 12 at:
http://abclocal.go.com/wls/gallery?section=news/local&id=8724753&photo=3
http://abclocal.go.com/wls/gallery?section=news/local&id=8724753&photo=6
http://abclocal.go.com/wls/gallery?section=news/local&id=8724753&photo=7
http://abclocal.go.com/wls/gallery?section=news/local&id=8724753&photo=10
Perhaps caused by "sun kink" in the rails induced by the extreme heat in the area recently ?
Maybe one of our 'local sources' can get more info ?
- Paul North.
Here is a link to the story in the Chicago Tribune with video: http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/suburbs/northbrook/chi-train-derails-in-near-northbrookglenview-border-20120704,0,3431827.story Officials said there were no injuries to the train crew. The trains was headed northeast on the Milwaukee (New Line) Sub as it was a loaded coal train. No Metra service is affected. The Shermer Road bridge is / was brand new having just been built last year. Right now, because it just happened, there is no known cause. Officials also stated that they don't know why the bridge collapsed. So, I guess the interesting question is: Did the train derail first and take out the new bridge? Or, did the new bridge fail and collapse causing the train to derail? It's one-hundred degrees outside right now, so I have a feeling that the weather / heat is going to have something to do with this derailment. CC
Here is a link to the story in the Chicago Tribune with video:
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/suburbs/northbrook/chi-train-derails-in-near-northbrookglenview-border-20120704,0,3431827.story
Officials said there were no injuries to the train crew. The trains was headed northeast on the Milwaukee (New Line) Sub as it was a loaded coal train. No Metra service is affected. The Shermer Road bridge is / was brand new having just been built last year. Right now, because it just happened, there is no known cause. Officials also stated that they don't know why the bridge collapsed. So, I guess the interesting question is: Did the train derail first and take out the new bridge? Or, did the new bridge fail and collapse causing the train to derail? It's one-hundred degrees outside right now, so I have a feeling that the weather / heat is going to have something to do with this derailment.
CC
AgentKid That is going to be some cleanup job, judging by the way those cars are wedged into that gap. How can they say commuter service is not going to be disrupted, unless it didn't go on that route in the first place. Not the media's finest moment. Amazing photos. Bruce
They could say commuter service was not disrupted because the line is not used by Metra. What's your media bias? The main Trib Local story seemed pretty accurate.
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
Still will be a Huge Mess on the Surface Street Commutes with all the mess that has to be Removed and then hauled away.
Let' use some reporting and appearance to assist a guess.
The engine and nine cars got by the point derailment (tv report).
The track remaining beyond the derailment looks unscarred.
The cars involved are compressed like a slinky- toy, not like the folds of an accordian.
No secondary derailment back in the 132 car train......yes, all loads and maybe a DPU.
Visible sun-kink? 9 cars and the engine by...not at all likely..
The beyond- derailment-track looks OK. If there is a point of derailment on the track approaching the bridge, scarring indicating a dragged derailed car that swerved enough to big hole the train by uncoupling a brake pipe hose would result in a looser accordian- pleat pile-up and often another slack caused derailment way back in the train.
Catastrophic bridge failure, cars drop into the chasm, head-end cars and engine break off, head-end causes DPU to big-hole the rear-end stretching that out, but not soon enough to stop the slinky like pile-up in the gap left by the failed bridge.
When the bridge failed it shoved the parallel track with it. A derailment probably woud have left that other track undisturbed until the derailed cars crunched it and the track curve would not show.
Is that enough to defend the NTSB for not offering preliminary assumptions.
I will not speculate as to the cause. But let us look at the restoration. All these ideas are subject to C & Cs.
1. whether the bridge collapsed or not the impact of 286,000 # cars hitting the bridge supports may compromise those supports so they will have to be replaced ??
2. If supports compromised then foundations may have to be replaced ? happened here on an automobile bridge collapse.
3. No matter what repairs needed I imagine several UP engineering persons got called in on their july 4th holiday.
4. It appears that UP will have an easy time diverting around this derailmen by tN
Paul, the train would have been headed timetable north (geographic northeast) here. Judging from photo "6 of 12" in one of those links, the mess occurred on trackage southwest of the facing-point switches, so it's probably safe to say that those weren't the cause of the wreck (I believe that one of them was, in November 2009).This junction (where CP trains from Bensenville leave the UP to get to their own line to Wisconsin, or where trains from Milwaukee join the UP to get to Bensenville) is known as Shermer, probably for the road.
In my previous post I'd mentioned the center pier of the UP bridge over Shermer Road. At that point I hadn't heard about a rebuilding of the bridge. Obviously whatever happened will require the bridge to be rebuilt once more. Wouldn't be surprised if a shoofly is in place fairly quickly, but that road is going to be closed for a while until a permanent bridge (more permanent, we hope!) is put up.It's been forever since I've ridden over that trackage, so it's pointless to compare how good it was in my memory with how it should be now. It's 50-mph track, with ABS and welded rail (jointed yet when I was working it). A sun-kink in this extreme heat (it got up to 102 today) shouldn't be ruled out, but neither should equipment failure.
4. thanks to carl's clarification we now know that the only way to address the reroute problem will probably be a shoe fly. I wonder if the closness of the METRA LINE will affect the placement of such.
5. How much traffic does UP and CP have on this line ?
6. any way to route traffic to Rondout and Upton ( UP - EJE connection ) from Proviso ?
The UP portion of the freight line crosses the Metra line a sufficient distance away for a shoofly to be built, in my estimation. UP sends coal trains up this line to at least four destinations now, perhaps five. There are also two or three manifests in each direction, and a less-than-daily Roadrailer pair. Can't comment on CP's volume. I'm sure that their traffic isn't anywhere near what it was in MILW days--what goes through here now for UP is less than half of what I remember from CNW days.UP could get onto the old EJ&E at West Chicago and head north, but I don't know how things are laid out at Bartlett, Rondout, or Upton.
schlimm They could say commuter service was not disrupted because the like is not used by Metra. What's your media bias?
They could say commuter service was not disrupted because the like is not used by Metra. What's your media bias?
I was just thinking the local population would know where the route is, and the guy in the video was just talking to fill airtime. Trying to sound knowledgeable and important. Don't think I am picking on anyone in particular, the media doesn't do well with train wrecks around here either.
Carl's latest post does make it seem that the commuter line is close enough to this site that confusion could be possible.
The fire was caused by electrical lines that were knocked down. UP is going to try to have the derailment and bridge removed within the next twenty-four hours (Thursday night). After the cleanup they plan to fill the gap where the bridge was with stone until a new bridge can be built. It sounds like Shermer Road will be closed for awhile. No word on any reroutes.
Cleanup on aisle 5. If only it were closer I might get some salvagable flat sections of the 3/16" aluminum they use for the sides of those cars to build a flatbed onto my Ford Ranger.
11 years ago UP had engines on both ends of a coal train they were switching at the King power plant in Bayport Minnesota. There was a miscommunication and engines at both ends tried to push toward each other. Two aluminum coal cars got sandwiched together and twisted up like a smashed ham sandwich. It was quite the site to see. I wished I had taken pictures of it.
Modeling the "Fargo Area Rapid Transit" in O scale 3 rail.
NEWS FLASH: Local news media just reported crews have found a crushed car contaning a body in the mangled wreck of the coal train in question. May the victim R.I.P.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/suburbs/northbrook/ct-met-train-derailment-overpass-20120705,0,4983947.story
This is the update including the discovery of a body, as well as preliminary investigation results.
They only had 7 Million Lbs of Train debris to dig through BEFORE they found this man. Boy talk about a Shocker. I would not want to be UP right now. Think about it they had that Head On on the Golden State Route now this with a Civilian Dead in it and now they think MORE may be with him. I would not want to be a MOW worker right now as My Boss is going to be hammering us with a Red Hot Hammer. Let alone the Hiers of this guy they admitted the Bridge could NOT handle the Load of the Derailment on the Paper. Can you say Jackpot to them and their ATTY.
It keeps getting worse. 2nd body found.
edbenton I would not want to be a MOW worker right now... Let alone the Hiers of this guy they admitted the Bridge could NOT handle the Load of the Derailment on the Paper. Can you say Jackpot to them and their ATTY.
I would not want to be a MOW worker right now... Let alone the Hiers of this guy they admitted the Bridge could NOT handle the Load of the Derailment on the Paper. Can you say Jackpot to them and their ATTY.
I don't see any negilence as a cause for the bridge collapsing. The bridge was designed for a certain number of cars on the rails. The train piled up way more cars on the bridge than it was designed to carry. Basically the derailment collapsed the bridge. It was not a defective bridge design.
A quote from Mr. Benton:
edbentonthey admitted the Bridge could NOT handle the Load of the Derailment on the Paper.
Now, the quote from the newspaper article:
The preliminary investigation has ruled out the failure of the bridge as the trigger to the accident, said UP spokesman Mark Davis. The bridge was not designed to carry the load of 28 coal cars that derailed, each weighing 75 tons to 85 tons, on the 86-foot bridge, Davis said.
Okay. First of all, each loaded coal car could weigh around 140 tons. So 28 cars would be something just under 4000 tons on an 86-foot bridge (so yes, Ed, your seven-million-pound figure (plus the weight of the bridge itself) could be conservative. I don't think anyone will be able to use that little tidbit against UP in a case, though. A normal load for the bridge would be at most four of these 53-foot cars at once. Or perhaps six or seven ore cars weighing as much. Twenty-eight cars can't even be fit on this bridge standing on end! So if they all piled up on top of any structure, it's unlikely to hold. There is no way UP could, or should, design a bridge for something like this.Sure, UP will be sued, and I suspect that UP will settle. But I doubt that "Jackpot" is going to be bandied about too much in either arena.
The underdesigned bridge arguments have zilch for credibility.
carl isn't the bridge a double track bridge?
mudchicken The underdesigned bridge arguments have zilch for credibility.
"We have met the enemy and he is us." Pogo Possum "We have met the anemone... and he is Russ." Bucky Katt "Prediction is very difficult, especially if it's about the future." Niels Bohr, Nobel laureate in physics
“We ruled out the bridge failing and then the train derailing, based on the discussion with the train crew’’ as well as viewing the images from a camera on the train, Davis said. “The derailment occurred and then what happened was that 28 cars piled onto the bridge structure. Under all that weight, the bridge went down.’’
Hard to imagine any bridge holding up under that weight. Ed must be reading from a very different news account.
CShaveRR A quote from Mr. Benton: edbenton: they admitted the Bridge could NOT handle the Load of the Derailment on the Paper. Now, the quote from the newspaper article: The preliminary investigation has ruled out the failure of the bridge as the trigger to the accident, said UP spokesman Mark Davis. The bridge was not designed to carry the load of 28 coal cars that derailed, each weighing 75 tons to 85 tons, on the 86-foot bridge, Davis said. Okay. First of all, each loaded coal car could weigh around 140 tons. So 28 cars would be something just under 4000 tons on an 86-foot bridge (so yes, Ed, your seven-million-pound figure (plus the weight of the bridge itself) could be conservative. I don't think anyone will be able to use that little tidbit against UP in a case, though. A normal load for the bridge would be at most four of these 53-foot cars at once. Or perhaps six or seven ore cars weighing as much. Twenty-eight cars can't even be fit on this bridge standing on end! So if they all piled up on top of any structure, it's unlikely to hold. There is no way UP could, or should, design a bridge for something like this.Sure, UP will be sued, and I suspect that UP will settle. But I doubt that "Jackpot" is going to be bandied about too much in either arena.
edbenton: they admitted the Bridge could NOT handle the Load of the Derailment on the Paper.
Okay, I guess I missed something, but 28 cars on a two track 86' bridge would need to be stacked 14 cars high in two stacks to fit in that space, right? That obviously cannot be true so think the number must be wrong.
DwightBranch CShaveRR: A quote from Mr. Benton: edbenton: they admitted the Bridge could NOT handle the Load of the Derailment on the Paper. Now, the quote from the newspaper article: The preliminary investigation has ruled out the failure of the bridge as the trigger to the accident, said UP spokesman Mark Davis. The bridge was not designed to carry the load of 28 coal cars that derailed, each weighing 75 tons to 85 tons, on the 86-foot bridge, Davis said. Okay. First of all, each loaded coal car could weigh around 140 tons. So 28 cars would be something just under 4000 tons on an 86-foot bridge (so yes, Ed, your seven-million-pound figure (plus the weight of the bridge itself) could be conservative. I don't think anyone will be able to use that little tidbit against UP in a case, though. A normal load for the bridge would be at most four of these 53-foot cars at once. Or perhaps six or seven ore cars weighing as much. Twenty-eight cars can't even be fit on this bridge standing on end! So if they all piled up on top of any structure, it's unlikely to hold. There is no way UP could, or should, design a bridge for something like this.Sure, UP will be sued, and I suspect that UP will settle. But I doubt that "Jackpot" is going to be bandied about too much in either arena. Okay, I guess I missed something, but 28 cars on a two track 86' bridge would need to be stacked 14 cars high in two stacks to fit in that space, right? That obviously cannot be true so think the number must be wrong.
CShaveRR: A quote from Mr. Benton: edbenton: they admitted the Bridge could NOT handle the Load of the Derailment on the Paper. Now, the quote from the newspaper article: The preliminary investigation has ruled out the failure of the bridge as the trigger to the accident, said UP spokesman Mark Davis. The bridge was not designed to carry the load of 28 coal cars that derailed, each weighing 75 tons to 85 tons, on the 86-foot bridge, Davis said. Okay. First of all, each loaded coal car could weigh around 140 tons. So 28 cars would be something just under 4000 tons on an 86-foot bridge (so yes, Ed, your seven-million-pound figure (plus the weight of the bridge itself) could be conservative. I don't think anyone will be able to use that little tidbit against UP in a case, though. A normal load for the bridge would be at most four of these 53-foot cars at once. Or perhaps six or seven ore cars weighing as much. Twenty-eight cars can't even be fit on this bridge standing on end! So if they all piled up on top of any structure, it's unlikely to hold. There is no way UP could, or should, design a bridge for something like this.Sure, UP will be sued, and I suspect that UP will settle. But I doubt that "Jackpot" is going to be bandied about too much in either arena.
You would be amazed how derailing cars can accordian and then pile on top of themselves - my carrier had a runaway down a mountain - 96 cars of coal in approximately 5 car lengths of linear space.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
I suspect that 28 cars was the total number of cars that were derailed, not all of which would up between the abutments.(Balt, I remember that one!)
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.