Trains.com

UP derails coal train on bridge

40177 views
227 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    December 2007
  • From: Georgia USA SW of Atlanta
  • 11,919 posts
Posted by blue streak 1 on Friday, July 6, 2012 1:05 PM

schlimm

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/suburbs/northbrook/chi-couple-found-in-wreckage-of-train-derailment-identified-20120706,0,5846788.story

Clean up halted by court order for 36 hours.  "While the investigation of the derailment continued, extreme heat causing the steel rails to expand between the ties, called a rail kink, was identified as a likely cause of the derailment that led to the subsequent bridge collapse, a Union Pacific spokesman said. The train was en route from Wyoming to an electricity plant in Milwaukee. The bridge is owned and maintained by Union Pacific, officials said."

 

http://mobile.chicagotribune.com/p.p?m=b&a=rp&id=2376588&postId=2376588&postUserId=54&sessionToken=&catId=6957&curAbsIndex=0&resultsUrl=DID%3D6%26DFCL%3D1000%26DSB%3Drank%2523desc%26DBFQ%3DuserId%253A54%26DFC%3Dcat1%252Ccat2%252Ccat3%26DL.w%3D%26DL.d%3D10%26DQ%3DsectionId%253A6957%26DPS%3D0%26DPL%3D3

This article says the couple was a lawyer and his wife out for a july 4 outing. Lawyers who shared office with victim are filing the suit.  Its going to be a big payday that UP has to pay.

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • 9,610 posts
Posted by schlimm on Friday, July 6, 2012 1:00 PM

PigFarmer1

 You, as a person who has no dog in the fight, ought to do the same.   For all you or I know this could have been caused by a broken wheel.   We simply don't know what happened and at this point in time it is foolish to assign blame.

It doesn't seem that anyone is doing that.  The quotes are from the UP spokesperson.

C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 25,292 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Friday, July 6, 2012 12:46 PM

More information being added to the sequence of events

Quote - Chicago Tribune

Erich Gibbs, who owns a business in the area, said he was driving on Shermer under the bridge about noon Wednesday, less than two hours before the accident, and he saw a worker wearing a colored safety vest walking on the tracks.

"It looked like he was checking something out,'' said Gibbs, 72, of Wilmette. "An hour and a half later, the train .... crushed the bridge.''

Davis confirmed that Union Pacific inspectors and monitoring equipment were on the tracks before the accident checking for possible abnormalities in track gauge or shifting. Such inspections are routinely conducted twice a day during extreme heat or cold, he said.

Because of the "heat order," a 40-mph slow zone order, down from 50 mph normally on that segment of track, was in effect at the time of the accident, Davis said. An event recorder in the locomotive showed that the train was traveling at 37 mph when it derailed, he said.

"We ruled out the bridge failing and then the train derailing (by being driven off the tracks,) based on the discussion with the train crew'' as well as viewing the images from a camera on the train, Davis said.

 

 

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

              

  • Member since
    February 2005
  • From: Nebraska
  • 253 posts
Posted by PigFarmer1 on Friday, July 6, 2012 12:14 PM

I'm an MoW employee and I'm not the least bit concerned about this.  If, IF this was a maintenance shortcoming (highly unlikely) this would fall under the realm of B&B and/or the bridge inspector.  MoW doesn't have the responsibility of maintaining bridges.   We don't maintain fixed structures such as bridges because we don't have the specialized expertise for that.

 If this was the result of a problem with a switch there might be a track inspector who ought to be concerned.  I'm willing to wait for the investigation to run its course before I start passing judgement.  You, as a person who has no dog in the fight, ought to do the same.   For all you or I know this could have been caused by a broken wheel.   We simply don't know what happened and at this point in time it is foolish to assign blame.

MoW employee
  • Member since
    July 2006
  • 9,610 posts
Posted by schlimm on Friday, July 6, 2012 12:07 PM

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/suburbs/northbrook/chi-couple-found-in-wreckage-of-train-derailment-identified-20120706,0,5846788.story

Clean up halted by court order for 36 hours.  "While the investigation of the derailment continued, extreme heat causing the steel rails to expand between the ties, called a rail kink, was identified as a likely cause of the derailment that led to the subsequent bridge collapse, a Union Pacific spokesman said. The train was en route from Wyoming to an electricity plant in Milwaukee. The bridge is owned and maintained by Union Pacific, officials said."

 

C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan

  • Member since
    April 2007
  • From: Iowa
  • 3,293 posts
Posted by Semper Vaporo on Friday, July 6, 2012 12:00 PM

edbenton

...

 If a Bridge that is over 100 Years old can hold up why did one 1 Year old FAIL. 

Throw a dozen fully loaded coal cars at a 100 year old bridge and it might very well fall down too.

 

Semper Vaporo

Pkgs.

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • 459 posts
Posted by jclass on Friday, July 6, 2012 11:59 AM

What a horrible situation.  Very saddening.

One thing - to use "collapse" to define what happened isn't a good choice of words.  The investigators should be allowed to define what the cause was.  Not a good idea to suggest a term for what happened.

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 25,292 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Friday, July 6, 2012 11:37 AM

edbenton

If a Bridge that is over 100 Years old can hold up why did one 1 Year old FAIL. 

19th Century engineers had very little knowledge of the exact strength of the materials they used in construction projects as well as limited abilities to calculate the stresses the project would have to withstand, as such, they would 'over-design' the project and use a amount of material that, in their mind, would not fail.

21st Century engineers know the exact strength of the materials they are using and can calculate the strength requirements of project they are designing.  Since most all projects have a lowest cost component in their construction - using more or heavier material than is actually necessary for the project will decrease the profit for construction company that is actually building the project.

Example - The B&O Building in Baltimore was built after the original was destroyed in the Great Baltimore Fire of 1904 - The building was built in 11 months and was 13 stories high - Chessie System placed their mainframe computers on the 11th, 12th, & 13th floors of the building.  When Chessie transferred staffing from the B&O Building to the Charles Center Building in the 1980's, with Charles Center having been constructed in the 1960's, it was discovered that the only locations in Charles Center that could withstand the floor loading of the computers was either the basement or the elevator lobby; as a result the computers stayed in the B&O Building.

Engineering in the 21st Century is about building something at the lowest cost - not about building it to last for eternity.

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

              

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Aurora, IL
  • 4,515 posts
Posted by eolafan on Friday, July 6, 2012 11:15 AM

Appears like authorities have identified the victims of the derailment as being a married couple ages 69 and 70 who lived about a block away from the derailment site.  Wrong place at the wrong time...fate is a fickle thing.

Eolafan (a.k.a. Jim)
  • Member since
    June 2001
  • From: Lombard (west of Chicago), Illinois
  • 13,681 posts
Posted by CShaveRR on Friday, July 6, 2012 9:54 AM

From what I've gathered, the cleanup (cleanout) has been completed, and Shermer Road is being blocked with fill dirt.  Expect rail traffic to be moving along the route by later today.  Eventually the bridge will be completely rebuilt, and that's when you can expect to see a real shoofly.

I understand that UP detoured a Roadrailer train out west and up the Spine Line.  CP is using old MILW lines into the city and out.

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)

  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Friday, July 6, 2012 9:47 AM

How are you going to prove that the bridge did not fail first and cause the derailment? 

 

While a derailing train can derail first and then knock down a bridge as a consequence, I don’t see how they prove that in this case.  The pileup is right on the bridge site with the bridge totally destroyed. 

 

The only way they are going to show that the derailment happened first is to find damage to the track far enough ahead of the bridge, and to show that damage as being the first car to derail.  I doubt they have such evidence. 

 

  • Member since
    September 2002
  • From: Back home on the Chi to KC racetrack
  • 2,011 posts
Posted by edbenton on Friday, July 6, 2012 9:36 AM

Ever thought that the far end abutment failed just after the Locos passed and then the Bridge Collasped.  Consider this for a second I live in a Slab house and it was built with a slab rated for 5000PSI concrete.  The Previous Owners added a back addtion with Weaker Concrete and guess what I have Foundation issues back there in my Breeze way.  So could it have been a issue with the Pier not holding.  If a Bridge that is over 100 Years old can hold up why did one 1 Year old FAIL. 

Always at war with those that think OTR trucking is EASY.
  • Member since
    July 2006
  • 63 posts
Posted by UChicagoMatt on Friday, July 6, 2012 9:20 AM

I live and work right by here. Loaded trains move northeast. Empty ones southwest. This was a loaded coal train. Now with two found dead in a luxury car under the collapsed bridge. More tragic!

 

I've been under and around this bridge dozens of times. It is small with a center pier. It was also the site of a 1974 CN&W derailment and again maybe in 2009. The bridge is tiny compared with the wider, much longer bridge across Willow/Palatine Road. It is right  at the bridge point where the joint line separates with the ex-Milwaukee heading to a junction in Northbrook while the ex-CN&W continues at elevation to the northeast. Farther to the northeast the UP (nee CN&W) line cross the Metra Milwaukee District, but this is at least 1/2 mile to the south. So cries of delays for Metra related to this are off-base. However, delays may occur if CP plans to send its trains east on the ex-Milwaukee West line to "Pacific Junction" at Tower A5 where freights could head north. This would cause interference on the Metra West and North Milwaukee District lines plus Amtrak since north of A5 there are only two tracks and freights would have to move the eastern track. Any word on plans for a longer re-route now that deaths are involved?

  • Member since
    June 2001
  • From: Lombard (west of Chicago), Illinois
  • 13,681 posts
Posted by CShaveRR on Friday, July 6, 2012 9:13 AM

blue streak 1

carl isn't the bridge a double track bridge?


Yes, it is--that's why I allowed a maximum of four 53-foot cars putting weight on the 86-foot bridge instead of two (and that also influenced my calculations in the "standing-the-cars-on-end" scenario).

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)

  • Member since
    October 2010
  • From: Centennial, CO
  • 3,218 posts
Posted by Stourbridge Lion on Friday, July 6, 2012 8:22 AM

whipw - Welcome to trains.com! Cowboy

  • Member since
    September 2002
  • From: Back home on the Chi to KC racetrack
  • 2,011 posts
Posted by edbenton on Friday, July 6, 2012 8:03 AM

Why am I saying the UP screwed up simple Chicago has a History of 100 Degree days and they know it.  UP right now has egg on its face in IL right now on the Joliet to St Louis line with the Cement Ties that they are having to Replace already that were Just Laid.  Now the Bridge Collaspe sorry but the Lawyers in Chicago are Sharks that are going to be smelling Blood and are going to come after them hard.  The Bridge is going to be a major piece in this investigation.  Remember it was only one Year OLD.  Bad Welds someplace Seen stuff like that happen and they are weaker than Spec and Break.  You throw in some massive heating for a week and your going to find the flaws. 

Always at war with those that think OTR trucking is EASY.
  • Member since
    July 2012
  • 3 posts
Posted by whipw on Friday, July 6, 2012 12:13 AM

It was either here or on another forum I heard of a previous bridge collapse at this same location in the 1970s.  A little research yielded a copyrighted photo from the Chicago Tribune dated October 20, 1974. The derailment and bridge collapse took place on Saturday October 19.  The picture looks eerily similar to the current one except the visible cars on top of the pile are open top gondolas and bulkhead flats.  No coal but a lot of twisted metal.  The picture is naturally black and white and poorer quality.

The caption indicates that 12 cars derailed, and that authorities are unsure whether the derailment or the bridge collapse came first.  Sounds kind of familiar....

If interested in the photo you can retrieve from Chicago Tribune archives using the issue date, "Chicago and North Western" and Shermer.  There is a nominal fee...

-whipw

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 25,292 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Thursday, July 5, 2012 10:35 PM

Since we are SPECULATING on a cause....I'll put my two cents in sun buckled rail. 

It was a 100+ day in Chicago.  The movement of a train - even at less than track speed - can and does set up mechanical forces in the track structure that coupled with the expansive pressure of the rail due to the higher than normal temperatures can cause the rail to buckle - normally in a lateral direction - thus setting up a 'curve' that is too sharp for the wheel/rail interface to handle and thus the first wheel set gets derailed and the the rest is history.

A train derailing onto and into a bridge will be putting higher than designed stresses in ways and places that the bridge design was never intended to see.  Stress any object where no stresses were ever anticipated and you will see the object fail.

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

              

  • Member since
    October 2006
  • From: Allentown, PA
  • 9,810 posts
Posted by Paul_D_North_Jr on Thursday, July 5, 2012 9:46 PM

Carl, thanks much for yesterday's clarification/ correction of the direction of the train's travel.  I didn't write it clearly, but I too was interpreting the photos as indicating that the switches were not a cause, though they might have been involved in the aftermath (see below).

Photo 3 of 12 - http://abclocal.go.com/wls/gallery?section=news/local&id=8724753&photo=3 - appears to have been taken from just about right above Willow Rd., looking southwest - note the half-dozen neatly trimmed round trees/ shrubs along the left side, and the right-angle 'jog' in the paving at the upper right of that photo's image, and compare with any of the aerial views of that portion of the site (plus the presence of the 4 tracks, signals, etc.).  Note that the cars still on the track in the bottom of the photo are on the 2nd track to the northwest (A Main Track?  Which direction, normally, if any ?), and the derailed car at the top of the photo is skewed, with its upper (southwest) truck on and apparently having torn up the 4th track to the southwest. 

I can believe that the bridge collapsed under the sudden impact load of the many derailed cars, and such a collapse - by itself - does not seem like negligence to me, because that is way above and beyond any generally accepted bridge design criteria.  But I have a hard time believing that a 1-year old modern bridge collapsed under merely the normal weight of a fully loaded coal train passing over it.  Why ?  As noted above, the locos and 9 cars passed over the bridge.  The trucks of any 2 modern locos coupled together will be carrying around 105 tons each (70,000 lb. axle loading), or 210 tons altogether, but the adjacent trucks of any 2 coal cars of 286K or 315K capacity will be carrying 143 or 157.5 tons, respectively - considerably less.  Yes, the C-C trucks of the locos are longer than the 4-wheel freight car trucks and so spread their weight more and act kind of like another short 'mini-bridge' span above the actual bridge, but I suspect that if there was a structural flaw in the bridge it would have been found by the locos, not the cars.

- Paul North.       

"This Fascinating Railroad Business" (title of 1943 book by Robert Selph Henry of the AAR)
  • Member since
    June 2001
  • From: Lombard (west of Chicago), Illinois
  • 13,681 posts
Posted by CShaveRR on Thursday, July 5, 2012 8:02 PM

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!)

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)

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 25,292 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Thursday, July 5, 2012 7:55 PM

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.

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!

              

  • Member since
    March 2012
  • 493 posts
Posted by DwightBranch on Thursday, July 5, 2012 7:33 PM

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.

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • 9,610 posts
Posted by schlimm on Thursday, July 5, 2012 7:19 PM

“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.

C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan

  • Member since
    September 2002
  • From: Rockton, IL
  • 4,821 posts
Posted by jeaton on Thursday, July 5, 2012 7:18 PM

mudchicken

The underdesigned bridge arguments have zilch for credibility.

Nothing to it.  Just prove that after centuries of bridge design, the engineers got it all wrong. DunceHuh?

"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

  • Member since
    December 2007
  • From: Georgia USA SW of Atlanta
  • 11,919 posts
UP derails coal train on bridge
Posted by blue streak 1 on Thursday, July 5, 2012 6:57 PM

carl isn't the bridge a double track bridge?

 

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Denver / La Junta
  • 10,820 posts
Posted by mudchicken on Thursday, July 5, 2012 6:44 PM

The underdesigned bridge arguments have zilch for credibility.

Mudchicken Nothing is worth taking the risk of losing a life over. Come home tonight in the same condition that you left home this morning in. Safety begins with ME.... cinscocom-west
  • Member since
    June 2001
  • From: Lombard (west of Chicago), Illinois
  • 13,681 posts
Posted by CShaveRR on Thursday, July 5, 2012 6:22 PM

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.

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)

  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, July 5, 2012 6:10 PM

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 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.  

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • 9,610 posts
Posted by schlimm on Thursday, July 5, 2012 5:16 PM

C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan

  • Member since
    September 2002
  • From: Back home on the Chi to KC racetrack
  • 2,011 posts
Posted by edbenton on Thursday, July 5, 2012 4:27 PM

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. 

Always at war with those that think OTR trucking is EASY.

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