Trains.com

Amtrak #80 Carolinian hits tractor trailer.

10307 views
38 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    December 2007
  • From: Georgia USA SW of Atlanta
  • 11,919 posts
Amtrak #80 Carolinian hits tractor trailer.
Posted by blue streak 1 on Monday, March 9, 2015 1:58 PM
  • Member since
    August 2013
  • 3,006 posts
Posted by ACY Tom on Monday, March 9, 2015 2:31 PM

If this happened at Halifax, it is on CSX's primary route between the NE and FL.  There is no readily available way around it, although the old SAL line would have filled that role if it still existed.  This will be a major disruption of all freight and passenger service on that line. 

Tom

  • Member since
    December 2007
  • From: Georgia USA SW of Atlanta
  • 11,919 posts
Posted by blue streak 1 on Monday, March 9, 2015 2:59 PM

Google street view.

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

Several thoughts.

1.  The distance  from the tracks to the intersection is only about 40 feet.  Intersections of this nature should be rebuilt further from RR tracks.  Any TT or even 2 cars cannot clear.  Since this a NC DOT road and train they should be able to fix this within a 1 - 3  year period. 

2.  There are traffic lights at the intersection but not on the approach side.

3.  Load appears to be a manufactured home both longer and wider than a normal tractor trailer.  May have also been taller than normal 13'6"  ?

4.  In reference to #3 one report states load was trying to turn left but was having problems,  Maybe trying to clear traffic lights or maybe went left of overhead RR signal. ?

5.  Stated was trying to turn for 15 (?) minutes with help of state trooper. That may be why the cell  phone video is available.

6.  If #5 why didn't trooper follow procedure and immediately notify CSX ?

7.  40 injured

8. Just what Amtrak doesn't need another loco down for months.

9.  Heritage baggage car may have runits last revenue mile ?

 

  

 

  • Member since
    December 2007
  • From: Georgia USA SW of Atlanta
  • 11,919 posts
Posted by blue streak 1 on Monday, March 9, 2015 4:21 PM

The following link at about :05 shows a multi axel carrier that is often used for transporting manufactured homes.  One report read says that whole rig was 164' in length.  If so quite a rig.

http://news.yahoo.com/amtrak-train-truck-collide-north-carolina-several-hurt-180638852.html

 

 

  • Member since
    August 2013
  • 3,006 posts
Posted by ACY Tom on Monday, March 9, 2015 5:16 PM

The reference to 15 minutes came from a bystander.  We don't know whether this is a wild estimate or a reliable figure.   I also heard 30 minutes.  Maybe it was only five.  Maybe the call had been placed to CSX, but not enough time to get the message to the train.  This possible delay in reporting the problem might be an important factor in the coming investigation.  Or it might not be relevant at all.  We don't know at this point, so we ought to reserve judgment on that.  It will surely come out in the investigation.

Tom

  • Member since
    December 2007
  • From: Georgia USA SW of Atlanta
  • 11,919 posts
Posted by blue streak 1 on Monday, March 9, 2015 6:03 PM

Additional report that says NC state patrol was escorting the load.

http://wtvr.com/2015/03/09/watch-terrifying-moment-when-amtrak-train-collides-into-tractor-trailer/

 

 

  • Member since
    May 2013
  • 3,231 posts
Posted by NorthWest on Monday, March 9, 2015 8:01 PM

One of the first comments on a local article on this was "pipelines are safer than trains". Hmm

  • Member since
    August 2013
  • 3,006 posts
Posted by ACY Tom on Monday, March 9, 2015 9:14 PM

The news item cited by Blue Streak says a Highway Patrol officer claims there was about 4 minutes' notice before the collision.

The Auto Train is starting late from both endpoints tonight, but it is running.  Southbound Auto Train 53 left Lorton a little before 9 p.m.  Presumably, the track will be open when that train gets to Halifax (normally about 3-1/2 hours, but hard to predict a time under the circumstances).

Tom

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 25,292 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Monday, March 9, 2015 11:23 PM

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

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

              

  • Member since
    November 2006
  • From: NW Pa Snow-belt.
  • 2,216 posts
Posted by ricktrains4824 on Tuesday, March 10, 2015 8:07 AM

I have to agree here, unfortunately this incident could have been very easily avoided, had the state trooper placed a phone call and simply confirmed it was safe to go across the tracks. Even just warning the RR that they MIGHT have to slow down, give them time to stop a train IF need be, to avoid the accident from occurring. Simple solution, overlooked by an local authority, possibly because they were not knowledgeable enough of the subject, or he/she just didn't feel that it would have been an issue crossing safely, and were unfortunately incorrect on this. Did this state trooper have knowledge that he/she could call the RR and they would hold up, or at least slow down ahead of time, rail traffic nearby, before they even attempted to cross the tracks? It is a shame, that this accident occurred, and that many people got hurt, when it could, and should, have very easily been avoided. Would be more shameful though if it was due to simply not knowing these facts of a simple phone call would have avoided it. Another point, is some have said that the RR was notified about 4 minutes prior to the collision, was the Amtrak crew given the message? Yes, you would need, probably, more time to stop, but did they get the message in time to slow down? Even just slowed enough that they would not have derailed even though the collision would have still happened? 

Ricky W.

HO scale Proto-freelancer.

My Railroad rules:

1: It's my railroad, my rules.

2: It's for having fun and enjoyment.

3: Any objections, consult above rules.

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

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

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

              

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

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

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

Tom

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

ACY

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

Tom

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

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

              

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

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

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

BaltACD

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

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

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

1.  Load was some kind of electrical equipment.

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

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

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

5.  Unit was going to New Jersey.

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

 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Does anyone think that the NC state patrol is CYA ? 

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

 

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

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

              

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

Thanks, Balt. 

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

Tom

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

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

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

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

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

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

              

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

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

 

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

 

 

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

Here is the web site for the equipment being hauled.

http://www.pcxcorp.com/

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

 

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

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

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

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

Tom 

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

Sam1 wrote:

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

 

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

 

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

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

Doug

May your flanges always stay BETWEEN the rails

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

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

  • Member since
    December 2005
  • From: Cardiff, CA
  • 2,930 posts
Posted by erikem on Sunday, March 15, 2015 5:35 PM

Streak,

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

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