In this thread, some have said that when railroaders offer some information, they are sometimes insulted, or dismissed out of hand, or told that they don’t know what they are talking about. This issue has been characterized as occurring rather often.
Yet, I do not see examples of this behavior. In the last few pages, there has indeed been disagreement over whether this insulting, disrespect, etc. happens, but examples of the insulting behavior that is the root of the issue seems hard to find.
I just read the automated trains thread looking for insults, and I see none. Certainly there is disagreement over whether automation will occur, but I do not see why any one position should be entitled to go unchallenged in such a discussion. It is all a matter of opinion.
I have read this thread again just to check for insults, curt dismissal, etc., and find nothing except for this one disagreement that started on page 7 where member BLS53 posted the following in the 4th post from the top:
“I don't know how it works in the railroad world, but any airline that hastily brought it's workers in to clean up a crash site, would have the NTSB all over them.
Never underestimate the power of the citizens of the communities involved. Most are filthy rich, with considerable political ties. They had a Naval Air Station closed, a couple of years after a jet crashed in one of their neighborhoods.
All said and done, UP might be looking at a permanent re-routing of their coal trains.”
I suggest people read from there to the bottom of the page in order to review the ensuing exchange. That is where this issue of railroaders being insulted, told that they don’t know what they are talking about, or being dismissed out of hand, first began.
I believe that if there is a grievance by one faction toward another faction here, the specifics should be stated. Otherwise it amounts to a blanket charge or broad brush complaint that cannot be confirmed or denied.
Perhaps all the moderators are on the beach this weekend, with no Internet access . . .
I would hope this thread is not locked at least until after the UP public meeting tomorrow night - otherwise, we'll just have to start a new thread to pick up from there.
OK ??
Y6bs evergreen in my mind
Paul_D_North_Jr Perhaps all the moderators are on the beach this weekend, with no Internet access . . . I would hope this thread is not locked at least until after the UP public meeting tomorrow night - otherwise, we'll just have to start a new thread to pick up from there.
Paul,
Since my browser seems to be having a few gremlins following links today...any idea if that public meeting will be "town hall" style? I'd presume it would be so...and I'd be curious if anyone representing the deceased parties will be there as well. It would be interesting to be a fly on some of those walls.
Dan
A rational comment...where'd that come from?
This thread started out as a narrative about events at an unfortunate accident site.
From the time that the victims' son said they wanted an independent investigation into the cause, it's gone downhill. You can probably figure that I, one of the railroaders on the Forum have some thoughts about that whole process. But trust me, you can't know what they are for sure. I've seen former co-workers almost cheerfully say that UP was going to get what it deserved because they bumped off an attorney.
I've also seen arguments on here concerning the former naval air station in the same neighborhood, the revenues of the major class 1 railroads, containerization (for coal? really?), and politics (not partisan, necessarily, but who's connected to whom by what--money--certainly counts as politics).
May I remind a few people of some facts.
First, a loaded coal train derailed at or near the Shermer Road bridge, the site of two previous derailments, one in 1974 and one in 2009. The one in 2009 was a problem with the switch east of the bridge; this one began on or west of the bridge, having nothing to do with the switches. I don't know what caused the 1974 wreck, but it was a different railroad back then, with jointed rail and a thrill ride at any speed (I was there--often!).
Now, the bridge itself:
https://maps.google.com/maps?q=Northbrook,+IL&hl=en&ll=42.103142,-87.829299&spn=0.006655,0.013937&sll=47.243304,-122.334627&sspn=0.025056,0.055747&t=h&hnear=Northbrook,+Cook,+Illinois&z=17&layer=c&cbll=42.103035,-87.829297&panoid=a_pplrvE_GWMwY8juiwbOw&cbp=12,348.34,,0,9.77
Follow the yellow line and take a ride under the bridge. When you get under it, look up...you see ties and skies through there. That is not the kind of bridge that UP wants there. There are girders underneath that will hold up a lot of weight, and a center pier providing further strength and support. But UP wanted to replace this bridge with a more modern design--a through-girder structure without center pier. One need only go further west along this very railroad line to see a good example of UP practice, built over Irving Park Road near York Road in Bensenville. There are two very large girders on the outside, and a ballasted deck, with ties in ballast instead of on steel. They apparently were not allowed to close the road for the amount of time they claimed it would take to replace the bridge.
Now, the heat: the first of several days in which the highs went over 100. Yes, such temperatures can cause sun kinks. And yes, the camera in the lead unit may see something that an engineer wouldn't necessarily recognize as a threat to his train. And yes, sun kinks can form under a train.Think back to CSX and its derailments involving Amtrak in recent years: sun kinks caused by maintenance practices, occurring where the track structure hadn't been properly prepared at the end of the maintained portion (well, it's all maintained, but you know what I mean). Now, consider the area near the bridge...well-maintained, well-ballasted trackage right next to unyielding trackage with no ballasted roadbed. In the 100-degree temperatures (probably a lot hotter in the sun), a kink would be likely here. The trackage on the bridge can't move, so what gives? The ballasted roadbed just off the bridge. It happened to occur west of the bridge. It could just as easily happened on the other side of the bridge, with the same results other than it would have taken out the switches at the Shermer control point again.
So please, don't even suggest a conspiracy or coverup here. It's in everyone's best interest to get the railroad up and moving again as soon as possible. Nobody was faulting the UP for that, or questioning their methods until the victims were found. Should they have stopped then? No--there could have been others. They cleaned out the coal, and got their railroad back in service. The fact that a car was down there really changed nothing as far as the derailment went--cause was the same. Of course, the fact that there were victims has immediately made this a more costly wreck for UP, and they realize this. But should it matter whether it's a well-connected, beloved lawyer and his wife, or a soccer mom and her kid, or a teenager and his date? No. The lawyers who will be suing the railroad for their negligence will have to find a maintenance practice that would cause such a wreck, or something that was discounted by the bridge inspectors who regularly check the bridge.I predict a lot of rancor at the meeting tomorrow. I would hope that our most vocal critics who think there's a coverup going on would be able to attend and make their views known. But I also hope that people will have the decency to allow the railroad to make their case, and have people who really know what they're talking about show what happened and why.
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)
Another thread assembled in the yard,, headed out on the main line,,,, then a bunch of switches got thrown and it landed in a pot of boiling spaghetti. Uggg!
Modeling the "Fargo Area Rapid Transit" in O scale 3 rail.
CShaveRR Paul_D_North_Jr: Perhaps all the moderators are on the beach this weekend, with no Internet access . . . I would hope this thread is not locked at least until after the UP public meeting tomorrow night - otherwise, we'll just have to start a new thread to pick up from there. A rational comment...where'd that come from?
Paul_D_North_Jr: Perhaps all the moderators are on the beach this weekend, with no Internet access . . . I would hope this thread is not locked at least until after the UP public meeting tomorrow night - otherwise, we'll just have to start a new thread to pick up from there.
Maybe Paul is trying to be a Civil Engineer in more ways than one...
- Erik
schlimm ........................... your opinion is no more valuable, relevant, insightful, superior, etc. b/c you are a railroader than that of someone who is not. Nor is it necessarily any less valuable, etc. Opinions are just that, to be thrown out there for not just us but others beyond the 10-15 of us to read, evaluate and move on. If the professionals want their own forum on which you don't have to deal with the rest of us, petition Trains for a special group. And I hope you don't see this comment as rude, because it was not.
........................... your opinion is no more valuable, relevant, insightful, superior, etc. b/c you are a railroader than that of someone who is not. Nor is it necessarily any less valuable, etc. Opinions are just that, to be thrown out there for not just us but others beyond the 10-15 of us to read, evaluate and move on. If the professionals want their own forum on which you don't have to deal with the rest of us, petition Trains for a special group. And I hope you don't see this comment as rude, because it was not.
Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.
It is interesting that even the subject line of this thread is accusatory of U.P. ("UP derails coal train on bridge")... U.P. did not derail the train. (At least, one hopes that the company did not do so deliberately!) It was a U.P. train that derailed on U.P. property. Properly stated it would be: "U.P. coal train derailment collapses bridge".
I also found it interesting as I read the early development of the thread that no one even asked the question of whether someone might be under the mess.
How would anyone know if there were victims before it was dug out? If a witness came forward to that effect, what would happen then? Same thing that happened in the first place! Crews would come and start removing debris and cleaning up the mess. I doubt if the crew doing the clean up went about it without regard to saving forensics of what caused the derailment, even before they knew of the victims. Same as what the independent investigation would do.
If they knew there were victims, they might not have been as careful to save forensics as what what actually happened!
When the bodies were found, what then? Stop everything and wait for an independent crew to arrive? What about the possibility of others still under the debris? There is always the possibility that someone might have survived the mess and could be rescued, so should the work stop and wait?
Have they gotten to the bottom yet? Was there a pedestrian that was under the bridge?
What if the bodies found were not a beloved attorney and his wife but rather the top two persons on the international list of terrorists? Maybe only the other members of the terrorist organization would be upset... The rest of us would be cheering!
From the beginning of this, the somewhat unspoken question has been, "How could this happen?" and all the replies have been THEORIES of what might be the cause. Anyone that reads these THEORIES, whether put forth by bonefide RR personell or by the armchair railfan or an HO modeler, and thinks the THEORY is being put forth as the actual cause, needs to stop reading the internet altogether!
The old Quaker saying is: "Everyone is crazy but me and thee; and sometimes I wonder about thee."
Semper Vaporo
Pkgs.
[quote user="Murphy Siding"]
What you can't seem to accept, is the fact that some folks here, you and bucyrus come to mind, but that's certainly not the limit of it, seem to project the vibe that you think all railroaders are dummies.
What's obvious, is that your anti-railroader sentiment shows very blatantly. An no, we can't give you specific examples,... [note: for full context, see above post][/quote]
Maybe you are creating it yourself and assigning it to us unconsciously.
That is sometimes what can cause you to pick up a "vibe," as you say.
Otherwise, if it is so obvious to you, I don’t see why you can’t point out specific examples. If it exists as you say, it has to be in specific parts of specific posts. Please point it out to us, so we can see if it is real, or if it in your head.
If I have said something that makes you think that I believe all railroaders are dummies, show me where I said it.
You guys wanna take your "us versus them" argument to PMs? I'd really like to see this thread not get locked or continue to pile up as it appears to be heading for...like it's namesake. I started coming to this board a few years ago because I was told about the quality of posts and the number of 'rails' who were nice enough to answer what they could when they could. The quality has declined, dramatically, of what's left.
Heck, why not a new thread: "TRAINS Posters Derail Thread(s) on Forum"....(again)...
The bridge collapsed on this one already.....
Any argument carried far enough will end up in Semantics--Hartz's law of rhetoric Emerald. Leemer and Southern The route of the Sceptre Express Barry
I just started my blog site...more stuff to come...
http://modeltrainswithmusic.blogspot.ca/
Murphy: It's convenient for you to put words in someone else's mouth and then suggest you can't cite examples of the behavior questioned. But never mind. You see any criticism as negativity while others who aren't needing to be defensive might see it a raising questions and looking for answers, which most folks regard as progress. So be it. Many railroaders on this forum have a lot of informed observations to make about daily operations and most of us appreciate that. What positive contributions or question have you raised of late, BTW? However, that does not make them experts on other aspects of railroading anymore than the kitchen staff in a hospital are experts on housekeeping, to use your type of analogy. Bucyrus asked for examples of non-RRers dissing the pro's, but the on this thread and the (or the one on remote control, as far as I looked) I didn't see that occurring until after greyhounds' comment to the Navy guy, and then it got nasty. But everyone had calmed down last night. Clearing the air about this long-standing issue may be a good thing. Why not say something constructive for a change instead of attempting to stir the pot with your personal vendetta?
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
Bucyrus Murphy Siding: What you can't seem to accept, is the fact that some folks here, you and bucyrus come to mind, but that's certainly not the limit of it, seem to project the vibe that you think all railroaders are dummies. What's obvious, is that your anti-railroader sentiment shows very blatantly. An no, we can't give you specific examples, , because 1) It's so ingrained in everything you post that you can't see or admit you're doing it, and 2) You'd just want to argue about it forever. Maybe you are creating it yourself and assigning it to us unconsciously. That is sometimes what can cause you to pick up a "vibe," as you say. Otherwise, if it is so obvious to you, I don’t see why you can’t point out specific examples. If it exists as you say, it has to be in specific parts of specific posts. Please point it out to us, so we can see if it is real, or if it in your head. If I have said something that makes you think that I believe all railroaders are dummies, show me where I said it.
Murphy Siding: What you can't seem to accept, is the fact that some folks here, you and bucyrus come to mind, but that's certainly not the limit of it, seem to project the vibe that you think all railroaders are dummies. What's obvious, is that your anti-railroader sentiment shows very blatantly. An no, we can't give you specific examples, , because 1) It's so ingrained in everything you post that you can't see or admit you're doing it, and 2) You'd just want to argue about it forever.
What's obvious, is that your anti-railroader sentiment shows very blatantly. An no, we can't give you specific examples, , because 1) It's so ingrained in everything you post that you can't see or admit you're doing it, and 2) You'd just want to argue about it forever.
schlimm Murphy: It's convenient for you to put words in someone else's mouth and then suggest you can't cite examples of the behavior questioned. But never mind. You see any criticism as negativity while others who aren't needing to be defensive might see it a raising questions and looking for answers, which most folks regard as progress. So be it. Many railroaders on this forum have a lot of informed observations to make about daily operations and most of us appreciate that. What positive contributions or question have you raised of late, BTW? However, that does not make them experts on other aspects of railroading anymore than the kitchen staff in a hospital are experts on housekeeping, to use your type of analogy. Bucyrus asked for examples of non-RRers dissing the pro's, but the on this thread and the (or the one on remote control, as far as I looked) I didn't see that occurring until after greyhounds' comment to the Navy guy, and then it got nasty. But everyone had calmed down last night. Clearing the air about this long-standing issue may be a good thing. Why not say something constructive for a change instead of attempting to stir the pot with your personal vendetta?
No, the reason Bucyrus left it out was b/c it was so inflammatory. You like stirring things up,so you put it in red. You seem to have a need to interfere with where this thread had already gone - largely resolved. Feeling left out b/c you missed last night? BTW, I'm not offended in the least by what you want to believe, however wrong you are in your assumptions. As they say, "Consider the source!"
[quote user="Murphy Siding" Ding! Ding! Ding! We have a winner!! Please note: You intentionally left off part of my post to make it look out of context and to contrue the meaning. For clarity, I have put it back in. It's the part in red.[/quote]
Norris,
There was no conspiracy to take you out of context and change your meaning. I just edited for simplicity. Your whole text is just the second post above for anybody's quick reference. But I went back and edited my post with the quote from you, to add the proper punctuation and a helpful note about where people can get your full drift if they want. I have had a lot of PMs with folks on the forum, and we all pretty much agree on what the ingrained problem is here. We are all picking up the same vibe.
I think BOTH sides need to take a step back from the internet wrestling ring....
CNW 6000 Paul, Since my browser seems to be having a few gremlins following links today...any idea if that public meeting will be "town hall" style? I'd presume it would be so...and I'd be curious if anyone representing the deceased parties will be there as well. It would be interesting to be a fly on some of those walls.
"Community members seeking answers about the train derailment and viaduct collapse will have the opportunity to question authorities at a public meeting Monday hosted by the villages of Glenview and Northbrook. Union Pacific Railroad officials will be on hand to address the concerns of residents and businesses.
The meeting begins at 7 p.m. in the Sheely Center for the Performing Arts at Glenbrook North High School, 2300 Shermer Road, Northbrook.
Railroad representatives will discuss a 2009 train derailment near that location and repairs made to the Shermer Road viaduct in 2011.
. . . [synopsis of 2009 derailment omitted - PDN]
Union Pacific officials also will share their preliminary findings on the July 4 derailment and update area residents about temporary repairs and plans for the permanent bridge replacement and claims processing, according to a joint news release from both villages.
Representatives from the Federal Railroad Administration, Illinois Commerce Commission and Illinois Department of Transportation also are expected to be present Monday.
Davis said Union Pacific and the Federal Railroad Administration are conducting a detailed investigation, which could take anywhere from three to 12 months."
And from the VIllage of Glenview's press release:
"Community meeting on rail bridge collapse set
​At the request of Glenview and Northbrook officials, representatives of Union Pacific Railroad have agreed to appear at a community meeting to explain the circumstances of the July 4 derailment and viaduct collapse on Shermer Road that killed two Glenview residents. The UP officials can also discuss the safety history of the viaduct, the site of two prior derailments; information and schedules regarding construction of the replacement viaduct; and the condition of the track through Glenview.
The meeting has been scheduled at 7 p.m. Monday, July 16, at Glenbrook North High School, 2300 Shermer Road, in the Sheely Center for the Performing Arts."
- Paul North.
How long was this coal train, and what was the first car to derail counted from the head end?
Thanks for the google link ...
It is amazing that they repaired a bridge of that design. When they rebuild will they also increase the clearance beyond 14 feet?
Robert
Bucyrus How long was this coal train, and what was the first car to derail counted from the head end?
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/suburbs/northbrook/chi-train-derails-in-near-northbrookglenview-border-20120704,0,3431827.story
"The train had three locomotive engines and 31 of its 138 train cars derailed, Davis said. About a third of the train had passed the 86-foot-long bridge before the derailment and the locomotives did not derail. . . .
About 20 cars had crossed over and the remainder were south of the bridge at the time of the derailment."
Unit coal trains are generally around 135 cars in length.
So, a third of the train would be about 45 cars. The other reference says 20 cars. It looks like the derailment began very close to the bridge.
Some have suggested that the 31 derailed cars piled up on the bridge, and then the extreme weight of all those cars collapsed the bridge.
I can see a scenario where a sun kink developed approaching the bridge as the train passed over that spot. Then when the kink became offset enough (say 6-8 feet of offset), it derailed the train. With the train derailing after deviating from the centerline, the leading car of the derailment might have simply snagged the bridge and knocked it down as the train was rolling across it. I don’t know if that bridge had raised girders that could have snagged the first car to derail.
But if the first couple of derailing cars snagged the bridge girder and knocked down the bridge, then the following cars would have dropped into the chasm and jammed it full of tightly packed cars as appears to be the case.
In the other scenario of 31 cars piling up on the bridge and collapsing it by their weight, I don’t see it very likely that 31 cars would pile up in compact heap on top of the standing bridge. With the bridge being up in the air, derailing cars would have tended to fall away and spread out more.
So my guess is that the beginning of the derailment knocked down the bridge and then the following 25-30 cars fell into the hole where they were confined, and thus could be compacted tightly together by the momentum of the following cars that did not derail.
In one of the photos, I see part of the bridge deck displaced out to the side, which would be indicative of the deck being shoved ahead and buckled by being snagged by the derailed cars.
Even if the girders were not raised with ends that could have snagged the cars, the first cars to derail might have simply dug into the roadbed, and bulldozed through the concrete abutment, running directly into the end of the bridge deck, shoving it ahead, and knocking it off its supports.
Very interesting theory ... As I looked at the street view of "ties and sky" I wondered about the temperature differential of the rail over the bridge vs. rail over the ballast as they are different heat sinks. Just like the sign says "Bridges Ice before Roadways". I can also see the merit of the ties being ballasted as that would also provide a seperation for the expansion and contraction of the bridge.
This could have lead to a weak point at the transition from ballast to bridge.
On the chance that this thread might actually be getting back on topic, FRA this morning (July 16) issued a "safety advisory" on buckled track. It mentions the Northbrook accident, although it doesn't give much information on it that wasn't already known. Here's the web address:
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2012-07-16/pdf/2012-17343.pdf
One thing the advisory does mention, which I hadn't seen before, is that UP had preliminarily determined the rail had buckled track "adjacent to the bridge". The advisory goes to discuss track conditions around "fixed track structures (such as grade crossings, turnouts, and bridges), where rail donditions are considerably tighter and are therefore more susceptible to the development of track buckles," That gives some support to one of the previous posts, which suggested that the relative rigidity of the track fastening on the bridge may have been a factor in buckling the track approaching the bridge.
Falcon48,
Thanks for posting that link. There is some good information there.
It would be very interesting to see a derailment from a sun kink as it actually happens. When the U.P. said they have video evidence and crew sighting of the fact that the derailment happened before the bridge collapsed, I wondered how that would be discernable at the distance it was away. But with a sun kink, I can see how it might have been visually obvious.
As others have mentioned here, sun kinks can fully develop with no train present. But often, they develop under a moving train. The heat expansion compresses the rail like a spring. Then as the train passes, it kneads the track in the direction it is moving, thus piling up the expanded energy in the forward direction of the train. Eventually, the piling up force becomes so great that it buckles the track out sideways. This sideways buckling does not necessarily occur in one sudden event like a dam burst.
Instead, it often occurs gradually. The kink is just the track structure ballooning outward from the centerline, and it grows larger as the cars pass over it. It can’t just jump out all at once because the weight of the passing cars tend to hold it down, so it can’t slide sideways in one fell swoop easily. Therefore, it might be that 10-40 cars run through the kink without derailing. But eventually the track walks off the ballast, and loses its uniform footing. The cars might derail from the collapsing track footing, or from the centrifugal force of the track loop feature. I suppose in some cases the derailment will initiate with the breaking or tipping of the rail. The term, "kink" might be somewhat misleading. It is more like a graceful ballooning outward that might extend over a 100 feet or more of track. But the term, kink is certainly appropriate in the overall sense of the condition.
Regarding being able to see this from 2000-4000 feet:
With an average derailment, the cars would be moving in chaotic patterns. So if you were looking at a pileup occurring next to a bridge, it would be hard to tell whether the derailment was caused by a bridge failure or if the derailment happened first, and then took out the bridge.
But with a sun kink developing under the train, it might be quite visually obvious to observe the moving train running progressively further off center before it actually derailed. It would be like watching a train coming out of a curve in the distance. So if that were observed first, and then a derailment occurred, it would be logical to conclude that the derailment was caused by a sun kink rather than by a structural failure of the bridge.
CWR is a technology that the industry has yet to FULLY MASTER.
The extremes of weather, both heat and cold, are the areas where the technology has yet to be fully mastered.
One thing that I noticed in the four incidents highlighted by the article that Falcon48 linked - all the incidents were on Western carriers on properties that have always been considered by many the masters of CWR technology.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
BaltACD One thing that I noticed in the four incidents highlighted by the article that Falcon48 linked - all the incidents were on Western carriers on properties that have always been considered by many the masters of CWR technology.
"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
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.