NS serious derailment late feb 3 ( ~2100 )

[Euclid]

tree68

 

 

Euclid

If there actually was an out of gage wheelset,

 

 

Which, apparently, there was - given the furor about the new coil cars and the concern with loose wheels.

 

I would not rule it out, but in the furor about loose wheels on the new coil cars, there were no details given.  The timing of the announcement and the Springfield wreck was simultaneous.  But it was not clear to me that they had found this defect in the wreck, or whether the only connection was the defect on the new coil cars, and there being some of those cars in the Springfield train.

 

In any case, I stand by my conclusions about the excess buff and consequent buckling as being the primary cause, even if it was exacerbated by out of gage wheelsets.  I explained that clearly in my post at the top of this page. 

[tree68]

Euclid

If there actually was an out of gage wheelset,

Which, apparently, there was - given the furor about the new coil cars and the concern with loose wheels.

[Euclid]

tree68

 

 

Euclid

Right after the Springfield wreck

 

 

How does the likelihood of an out-of-guage wheelset factor in to your conclusions?

 

If there actually was an out of gage wheelset, whether the gage was over or under, it could have changed the way that the two cars would react to excess buff force in the train caused by excess dynamic braking. 

 

If the wheelset gage were undersize, the flanges would have been further from the rail head than normal.  If it was oversize, the flanges would have been closer to the rail than normal.

 

In either case, the excess buff force would have reacted (deflected) into a buckling force at the couplers.  The flanges would then attempt to resist the flange lateral shift caused by the buckling.  If the gage were too narrow, the buckling would progress further than if the gage were correct.  Then the further the buckling progresses, the more the lateral force of the flanges against the side of the rail head increases. 

 

The greater the flange-to-rail pressure becomes, they greater the tendency for the flange to climb the rail becomes.  You might actually get the same effect if the wheelset gage were too wide.  That would bring the flanges to bear on the rail head side sooner than would be normal (but perhaps with less force).  So, I think it is possible that either the gage being too wide or two narrow could have exacerbated the risk of buckling the train if the buff force was too high. 

 

But whatever the gage condition of the wheelsets was, I think the primary action initiating the derailment was the convergence of the lightness of the empty coil cars, the suddenly uplift of the crossing deck reducing the rail loading (and thus the flange tracking ability), and the hard slack run in from the brake application which was reported to have been made.

 

In the video, I don’t see anything that indicates there was an out of gage wheelset, but I definitely see a hard surge of uplift with coincident bucking of the two coil cars.  I also hear slack and loud draft gear sounds a few seconds before the two coil cars hit the crossing.  

[tree68]

Euclid

Right after the Springfield wreck

How does the likelihood of an out-of-guage wheelset factor in to your conclusions?

[Shadow the Cats owner]

I can tell you this much as a railroad customer we find way more defects in our cars that we get in our SIT yard now than we used to just a few years ago before US railroads put in PSR.  It has gotten to the point were we have a FRA certified crew employed in house now at all our major SIT yard locations just to make needed repairs to equipment before we ship it out after getting the cars empty.  I am not talking about just brake shoes either we literally have had to change out trucks brake beams draft gears and other items that should have been repaired before we got the freaking cars.  

[BaltACD]

 

 

Another view

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uPno1IVTkFY

[Euclid]

Right after the Springfield wreck (referenced in the FRA Safety Advisory) happened, I watched that video of the derailment many times.  It seemed like there was a lot of detail that was telling a story about what was happening.  It was a lot to absorb in about 2-3 seconds.  

 

Suddenly I got the impression that the train had buckled from excessive buff force.  Earlier, I had concluded that the coil car had derailed before it reached the crossing.  But I could never verify that. 

 

What I noticed first is one or more loud bangs seemingly ahead of the coil cars.  What I saw almost immediately after the bangs, was the adjoining ends of two coil cars seeming to sharply bounce upwards as they reached the crossing.  Then when the joint for those cars was about half way across, the joint buckled, seemingly as a reaction to being excessively compressed.  I conclude that the joint between the two coil cars was under high compression, but might have not buckled had the cars not gone over the crossing at that moment.  It looks like the slight elevation increase of the crossing tossed the cars upward, and as they did so, the high buff force was able to release the cars from the tracking effect of the wheel flanges. 

[Overmod]

PDF version of FRA Safety Advisory 2023-02, the notice referenced by Zug:

https://railroads.dot.gov/sites/fra.dot.gov/files/2023-04/Safety%20Advisory%20Train%20Build%20final%204.6.2023.pdf

[zugmann]

https://railroads.dot.gov/elibrary/safety-advisory-2023-02-train-makeup-and-operational-safety-concerns

[BaltACD]

Euclid

The video needs to be recognized for what it is, which is labor union advocacy.  It is part of a new genre of videos addressing a variety of grievances such as PSR being a ruse to further enrich the wealthy investors, company cost cutting that compromises safety, inadequate employee time off, etc.  There are many such videos on-line now.  The only solution that will satisfy the demands are numerous new regulations, or full nationalization.  

PSR on its face has always been word salad to further enrich investors, employees be damned.  

While I don't dispute 'The Carmans' complaints.  The only way those complaints would manifest themselves in the East Palestine incident would be if the car that had the hot box had been tagged for a bad journal in some prior inspection and that inspection report had been overruled and the car sent on its way without shop attention.

Not having been a carman, I don't know everything that needs to be looked at or hammer tested in the arrival or departure inspections of trains, so I don't know how apt the inspection time per car actually is.

[Euclid]

The video needs to be recognized for what it is, which is labor union advocacy.  It is part of a new genre of videos addressing a variety of grievances such as PSR being a ruse to further enrich the wealthy investors, company cost cutting that compromises safety, inadequate employee time off, etc.  There are many such videos on-line now.  The only solution that will satisfy the demands are numerous new regulations, or full nationalization.  

[oltmannd]

Overmod

I sure do want to see the specific ways the NS 'reduced inspections' specifically reduced practical attention to bearing and axle condition.  I continue to worry that existing 'carman' inspections don't, and possibly can't, detect the problems that might catastrophically degrade safe operation with little to no effective warning.

"Other" inspection concerns are... in the context of East Palestine... at best the kind of attempted red herrings that the mention of unrelated safety violations so often is in Canadian TCA accident reports.

Both the Union and government response would be much better, and much mor honestly, focused on effective strategies to improve bearing quality, detect actual failures quickly, and determine best practices for rapid remediation.

 

This.  Exactly.

[Overmod]

I sure do want to see the specific ways the NS 'reduced inspections' specifically reduced practical attention to bearing and axle condition.  I continue to worry that existing 'carman' inspections don't, and possibly can't, detect the problems that might catastrophically degrade safe operation with little to no effective warning.

"Other" inspection concerns are... in the context of East Palestine... at best the kind of attempted red herrings that the mention of unrelated safety violations so often is in Canadian TCA accident reports.

Both the Union and government response would be much better, and much more honestly, focused on effective strategies to improve bearing quality, detect actual failures quickly, and determine best practices for rapid remediation.

[diningcar]

Perhaps a carman's name attached, but undoubtedly written by Union lawyers. 

[daveklepper]

The URL worked for me.  Thanks.  Surprised and unhappy that so-called PSR and other management decisions did so much harm.  But I appreciate being informed.   Thanks

[blue streak 1]

Here is a letter publishedin a NARP bulletin from a carman that notes that required inspections of cars have been cut severely by NS.  This letter will be devastating as lawyers will be able to suponea employment records to deterine if the noted cutbacks have actually occurred.

It is almost guaranteed that the last inspection records and maybe other locations of all the cars in this train will come out!

A carman's perspective on the East Palestine derailment and the railroad industry as a whole (therealnews.com)

[charlie hebdo]

Without passing a value judgment, on the governmental level of the Supremes and elsewhere, there seems to be a trend towards deferring to local and state conditions.

[Overmod]

charlie hebdo

...[I was taught to beware of the use of "actually" in a dialog or response as its being a passive-aggressive way of simply saying *You're wrong, bud"]

That's not the way I was taught it, and it's not the way I intend to use it.  The 'actually,' means there are additional facts or context that would lead someone to a different conclusion when recognized.  If someone is "wrong" I'm likely to use the Niven/Pournelle 'That turns out not to be the case' if deploying Canadian passive-aggressiveness -- or just go ahead and blast them.

On the other hand, semantics of many expressions have changed, and I'll take under advisement that the construction has come to have the meaning you bring up.

...the use of private property is subject to restrictions.

The abuse of 'restricting' power over the years is how much of the current legislation regarding railroads, particularly the Federal assumption of authority under the Commerce Clause while retaining (at least post-Staggers) only a focus on objective 'safety'.

I am frankly astounded that the Congress and Presidency did not act to introduce considerable legislation, both safety-related and potentially re-establishing ICC-style oversight over all the myriad ways the Easman-and-after ICC loved to meddle with railroads and their operations.  I see no objective reason whatsoever why a re-establishment of many currently-proposed schemes of re-regulation would be deemed unconstitutional if applied on the Federal and not state or local level; we in fact see a first step toward that in the two-man-crew and crossing-blocking provisions that are nominally irrelevant to a response to the East Palestine disaster.  I am not sure how much clout the Rail Customer Coalition and similar organizations actually wield, but I think there is a groundswell of reaction against PSR-as-usual that is finally going to result in serious Government action.

And to be honest, there are quite a few places that some kind of 'mandatory oversight' would be beneficial -- the problem is that I wouldn't trust many of the twentysomethings in Congress and agency line and staff to develop and word proposals effectively and fairly enough.  Nor would I trust most 'representatives' of the railroads to do so.  That leaves an important role for shipper organizations and lobbyists... if they can get out of the common where-you-stand-is-where-you-sit attitude that so contributes to our present social fragmentation.

The rails' carte blanche exemption from state and local regulations as interstate commerce is likely to be modified, maybe soon.

To be honest, I disagree; what I expect is new Federal legislation expanding the scope of Federal action (or interference) with how railroads blithely choose to make their decisions.  One example is going to be FDA-like inspection of rail-bearing remanufacturing.  Another might be mandatory reciprocal switching both by common carriers and contractors.

[Convicted One]

Actually, the proposal that all trackside neighboring properties sign an acknowledgement that the choo-choo hauls dangerous materials....OR...suffer  a forfeiture  of rights to collect  punative damages, still seems a bit one sided. What inducement do they have to enter into this agreement?  Or are we saying "since the railroad want's this, then so shall it be"?

 

I can think of all sorts of hazards or perils we are forced to coexist with, without having to surrender rights.

If a dangerous war criminal moves in next door, are we expected to just accept that our residency has now become high risk, and sign away rights to the benefit of the hazard?  I would not want to...Even if the war criminal was there first...I still see no reason to award favoritism to the hazard

[blue streak 1]

I never said RRs would be shielded from damages.  However in retrospective punative damages need some thought,  Punative damages should go to persons affected maybe by an ackknowledgment document.  Additional punative damages should go to say maybe directly to Amtrak improvements on a route selected by Amtrak.  The south of lake route as one example.

 

[charlie hebdo]

Overmod

 

 

charlie hebdo

If a rail line wants to change operations from 4 trains per day to 24 monster trains, that is not an automatic given.

 

 

Actually, it is.  That's a matter of how a company can use its private property.  Furthermore the federal presumption makes it less possible for municipalities or owners to complain about the additional noise, potential trespasser risk, etc. and pass legislation mandating quiet operation on particular days, number of trains at certain times of day, etc. (as has been so often tried -- remember the reports in Trains of local sheriffs using a radar gun on trains?)

 

On the other hand, they CAN demand that no crossing be kept unblocked more than 15 minutes, and I personally think there ought to be severe fines when that is not accomplished.  I suspect that in the wake of East Palestine someone at DOT or FRA is going to wake up to the idea that any 'loud' mainline train is going to be a less safe train, and allow fines for trains or lines that generate certain kinds of noise (say, flatwheel noise above a certain dBm) and use the time-honored enforcement mechanism from the double-nickel speed limit law to permit anyone with an adjusted meter to bring an "enforcement action" or "penalty".  

 

"Actually' [I was taught to beware of the use of "actually" in a dialog or response as its being a passive-aggressive way of simply saying *You're wrong, bud"] it depends. As I said, the use of private property is subject to restrictions. The rails' carte blanche exemption from state and local regulations as interstate commerce is likely to be modified, maybe soon.

 

[azrail]

And for those who live near a public street where 100s of vehicles carrying hazmat pass daily?

[Euclid]

There are already nuisances and dangers caused by railroads that extend outside of their legal boundaries.  I don’t know what, if any, legal remedies exist for those impacted by such intrusions, which include grade crossing delays and train and horn noise at all hours. Generally these intrusions are something that society accepts or at least feels that there is no remedy for.

 

But this proposal also includes the intrusions of derailments that may spill and expose people to dangers and damage from hazmat.  Does Blue Streak propose that these dangers and potential for massive damage also become accepted without redress just like the train noise and grade crossing delays? 

 

I assume that is the intent of this proposal.  After all, it is posted in the thread about the East Palestine wreck, and it would indeed be a gift to the Norfolk Southern RR if they were shielded from all damage claims arising from that wreck.  In that case, it may indeed be a gift of several billion dollars to NS.   

 

Also, this would not be an easement.

 

In the first place, an easement must have a grantor and a grantee.  In the case of this proposal, there is no grantor who agrees to accept this hardship inflicted on them from the danger and nuisance inflicted on them by the nearby railroad operations.  That is why I call this a gift to the railroad industry. 

 

Not only would preventing damage and injury claims against the railroads be a gift to them; but it would also diminish the incentive for the railroads to improve technology that would increase the safety of handling dangerous chemicals.  That too would be a gift.   

[Convicted One]

tree68

As long as their facility meets zoning laws, there's not much that can be done.

Codes can be dynamic, tailored to suit whatever demons are perceived to be a threat to the social order.  We have dozens of arcane restrictions the local authotity can impose (no matter how out of place they appear in today's world)  upon how private land owners utilize their "plant". And many of those restrictions were crafted to address problems perceived to be worth mitigating at the time of inception.

It's not unthinkable to envision this current set of unfortunate  incidents as being someone's motivation .

 

Just my personal suspicion, but I believe one of the biggest changes that will come from this tragedy, is that the railroads will lose some of their immunity to local intervention...

[Overmod]

tree68

Not much different than a trucking company significantly increasing their fleet, resulting in more traffic on area roads.  As long as their facility meets zoning laws, there's not much that can be done.

Actually, it's radically different.  A vividly-recalled example was relatively close to you.  There is a long grade on 9W north of the George Washington Bridge, and the decision was made that it should be closed to truck traffic above a certain size.  This left NO reasonable highway open for... well, all the truck traffic north of Manhattan on the west side of the Hudson, except what could cross much further up on the Tappan Zee.  However... all the trucks started using route 303, making it more or less suddenly completely unsuitable for safe bicycling... and the towns who suffered the traffic, noise, and road damage were told they had no recourse in getting it stopped because it was the 'only' way trucks could now travel...

The trucking FACILITY and approach roads necessary to reach it cannot be banned, but municipality DPWs can assuredly charge every bit they want for the cumulative damage to public roads.  Subject only to wanting to keep the tax revenue and jobs benefits from the enhanced facility operations, of course... but many of those will not be 'local'.

[tree68]

charlie hebdo

If a rail line wants to change operations from 4 trains per day to 24 monster trains, that is not an automatic given.

Not much different than a trucking company significantly increasing their fleet, resulting in more traffic on area roads.  As long as their facility meets zoning laws, there's not much that can be done.

[Overmod]

charlie hebdo

If a rail line wants to change operations from 4 trains per day to 24 monster trains, that is not an automatic given.

Actually, it is.  That's a matter of how a company can use its private property.  Furthermore the federal presumption makes it less possible for municipalities or owners to complain about the additional noise, potential trespasser risk, etc. and pass legislation mandating quiet operation on particular days, number of trains at certain times of day, etc. (as has been so often tried -- remember the reports in Trains of local sheriffs using a radar gun on trains?)

On the other hand, they CAN demand that no crossing be kept unblocked more than 15 minutes, and I personally think there ought to be severe fines when that is not accomplished.  I suspect that in the wake of East Palestine someone at DOT or FRA is going to wake up to the idea that any 'loud' mainline train is going to be a less safe train, and allow fines for trains or lines that generate certain kinds of noise (say, flatwheel noise above a certain dBm) and use the time-honored enforcement mechanism from the double-nickel speed limit law to permit anyone with an adjusted meter to bring an "enforcement action" or "penalty".  

[ns145]

.

[tree68]

Convicted One

I read his intent slightly different from what it appears you may have.   Notice he states "property value"

Indeed - it was the "gifting it to the railroads" part that got my attention.  I'm not sure I understand how that works.  I saw that is simply forcing a potential buyer to understand that they live next to the railroad, with its inherent risks.  The punitive part is a reach.  That's like saying that you can't collect punitive damages if someone drives off the highway and hits your house with their car.  

This type of thing goes on all the time outside of the railroad world.  A village near me is seeing some controversy because a group wants to build a shelter for homeless/disadvantaged people and the neighbors feel it will negatively impact their property value.  

 

[charlie hebdo]

Convicted One

 

 

tree68

I would suspect it would be more like an easement than a taking.

 

 

I read his intent slightly different from what it appears you may have.   Notice he states "property value"

Current property owners located within an (proposed) "evac zone" have remedies that Blue Streak is proposing be forfeited.  Unless existing residents are compensated for this proposed forfeiture, doesn't that basically amount to seizure?

More to the point, the effect that loss of rights will have on the value of the property thusly compromised.

 

Correct. Although the railroad ROW is there, that does not give it carte blanche to do whatever it wants on its land anymore than any of us have such an unequivocal "right" in our society. Thr rails seem to ignore the duty we all have to be good neighbors.

If a rail line wants to change operations from 4 trains per day to 24 monster trains, that is not an automatic given.