Train Wreck In Mer Rouge, LA 10/05/14

Bad.  I wonder if the engine turned over.  Looks like the derailment occurred a couple of hundred feet past the crossing (possibly from debris from the crossing accident carried by the train and wedged into a switch?).

Wow!  I hope everyone on the truck and the train survived this.  I wonder how bad the derailment was?

 

Art

Driver bailed, train crew (conductor and engineer) were airlifted from the scene and are apparently in stable condition. Leaking gas was argon.

Yup. You can see the lead unit overturning just as it passes out of view at the left, about 13-14 seconds in.

---PCJ

*Ignorant Question Alert*

In regards to Wyhog's story. In a situation like that if the truck driver was able to yank the trailer off the crossing, could that damage the rails to point it could cause a derailment?

 

Wow that looked pretty bad..After all this time you would think truckers would be aware of crossings and their hazards..

Well, your key words are "..truckers would be aware…", and there in lies the major issue with trucks vs. trains!

You can't entirely let the road engineers off the hook here.  (I are one, once, so I should know...).  My guess is a 6" out of face raise run through an existing Xing.  City notified and road raise coordinated.  I like to think that City officials phoned up their favorite contractor and he fixed it with a wedge of asphalt on either side with City Engineer being last to hear.  But who knows.

 

Notice in looking between the engines that the tractor cab does not move, appearing somewhat clear.  Also notice it is down somewhat, suggesting that far side roadway may have fallen away several feet, unlike the near side approach.  This may not have been immediately apparent to the truck driver until it was too late to stop.

 

These situations are not all that rare.  Dirt crossings are particularly bad.  (I had a friend who grounded the front cross frame of a '68 Camaro-- the unit body with a front subframe bolted on-- at such a crossing.)

 

You need road engineers who recognize such situation.  And you've probably got them in most states if the routes are Federal or state routes.  But in every city or town for local crossings?  The railroad management, to some extent, has to look out for the locomotive engineers in certain situations.  As here, they often are the more badly injured.  Certainly there is a need to identify such hazardous geometry ahead of time.  Someone, somewhere, has to care.  And so often, no one knows who that person should have been.

 

Edit-- After writing, I looked at the video again.  You can see the pavement wedge in the picture, near side.  Less apparent, we seem to be looking at the high side of a superelevated railroad curve.  That situation can involve as much as 6" of elevation difference in the two rails-- meaning the road would have to have a ten percent grade to match perfectly.  That's really awkward.  Now I'd say this is multiple tracks (arms are  not generally used with single track, with exceptions).  That can mean multiple really awkward, which is truly awkward.

 

--Frank

So Frank,

 

You don't think that the trucking company should have surveyed the route, especially since they had such a "low load"?

Don't trains hit low bridges every now and then? We don't know all the facts here. Maybe the driver was on the approved route? maybe not? Was the grade crossing changed recently? Was the train going over its speed limit? Did something mechanical break on the truck when crossing? Where all the permits correct? Did someone call the RR? was the message relayed to the train crew?

I'll wait for the facts

 

 

 

Saw this tonight on ABC evening news.  The story was dangers of rail crossings and opened with the LA video.  Had to rewind it to make sure I heard reporter right.  In essence the reporter said " A UNION PACIFIC train collided with a work crane in Mer Rouge...etc etc"  Only problem was it was Norfolk Southern in the lead. 

Of course, maybe borrowed NS power running on UP tracks (I don't know this territory).  But still, would be nice if reporter got details correct.  But guess its "get it on the air first and we'll fix/retract it later" mentality.

It was a UP train and as most UP trains in Louisiana do, it had lots of chemicals. Most people do not have a clue as to how bad some of those chemicals can be rolling through their towns.

 

Here is an image of the lead unit after it was lifted off its side. It turned over on the conductor's side.  

Dan

 

 

Hot Water, that's a good point.  I didn't even see that it was a lowboy at first, just assumed it was.

I must not have had a good frame of the truck itself until I shut down in a hurry without looking.  I have a clear frame now. It's clear that truck would normally have needed some sort of permit.  It's very probably overweight and definitely mildly overwide.  Definitely overlength too, but this might have been permitted conditioned on enough escort vehicles.  Overweight would address bridge issues (depends on how much fatigue life of the structure is affected).  States handle overweight, and it is a mixed bag; generally it only triggers review of the bridge situation.

Problem is, I don't know of any state which systematically checks to see if the intent of the original design geometry of railroad crossing pavement elevation is maintained through "minor" changes and repavings.  In fact, the only road I know where pavement profile errors were systematically corrected during routine repaving was and is the New Jersey Turnpike.  And the NJ Turnpike has no at-grade crossings.  Of course, I have limited personal experience-- roads and bridges in 22 states plus the province of Ontario.

The only thing I can see that might trigger a detailed route review is the height of the load.  Given that the overhead truss arms carrying the flashing red lights would normally use the 18-foot clearance, we could estimate (from the truss being somewhat over 3-feet deep & a pole base barely visible & a base nearby) the cab on the crane on the lowboy is about 15 or 16 feet high.  The US 165 under the green sign indicates that normally 15-feet of clearance (IIRC, and it may be 16 in some situations) can be expected most of the time, plus 6" where new to allow for two 3" lifts of repaving.

One thing I now notice is that this lowboy may have an airlift system to raise and lower the bed.  It looks like the bed is lower than one might expect.  Was the tractor and its air disconnected long enough for this system to depressurize?  It seems that the bed is bent over the near rail by the weight of the crane, whose wheelbase straddles this point.  So there are a number of questions.  Is the white pickup (cross-street, far right side) an escort vehicle?  Was the driver alone, or were there several persons?  I timed the train at about 40 mph.  You'd have needed a motorized flagman and a parallel street.  Had there been a requirement to notify the dispatcher that was not followed?  Was there mechanical failure of any lift bed system?  Was this adhoc or a carefully planned move that somehow went awry?  Were safety actions forgotten in the confusion?  A mindset that nothing could go wrong?

The unfortunate abrupt rise in the pavement can clearly be seen if you look at the right curb line.  It angles upward just where the last shadow of the gantry mast falls on it (The curb ends at a point where the hood of the white pickup show)s.  The frame showing this occurs very near the beginning (0:06 seconds) at the time when the camera veers to the left and very briefly catches the green sign and a post left and behind it.  I'm using Firefox, so I can toggle to the frame while writing.

This was not your ordinary lowboy nor your ordinary load.

--Frank

I certainly hope the members of the crew are recovering and that they will be able to continue life without disabilities or lingering pain.

 

It would be interesting to know whether anyone at the crossing thought to call the 800 number (which is always posted on the signal or crossbuck with the DOT crossing number, and -- if there are active warning devices [flashers, gates, etc.] -- on the relay cabinet with the milepost location and the name of the road) and report the disabled truck to the railroad.  They apparently had time to uncouple the truck tractor, so they had time to make that call (and maybe they did call).  I know that, if I were driving a truck with an oversized load and got hung up at a railroad crossing, that would be my first action.  That ought to be law, but apparently is not, as I had to take a Texas CDL test a few years back and it was not on the exam, nor in the study information.  Much of the material in CDL tests is Federally mandated, and, in those cases, no state variation exists.  This should be one of those cases, making the driver responsible for immediately calling, and under the same penalties as the other most serious commercial vehicle violations -- revocation of commercial license for one year the first time, and forever if there is a second.

 

I don't know for sure how promptly that phone call results in the Dispatcher being informed and, in turn, advising the train to stop.  However the sooner the call is made, the sooner the process starts.  Meanwhile, trains may be advancing toward the crossing at high speed, so any delay in calling may make all the difference between a crossing collision and stopping short of the crossing.  In fact, I am going to write my Congressman about this.

Horrific! and the engineer stayed on the horn till impact.

 

Seeing the wreck/derailment as it happens give one a far better appreciation for the amount of forces at work here.

 

It amazing how many cars continued to roll through the crossing  like there was no accident as the front of the train becomes an accordian.

 

Lucky it was not Chlorine or propane... really bad stuff. 

Glad to hear nobody was killed. As far as the Truck driver, Yes he is at fault for fouling the main. 

The "blast doors" probably save the engineer, road foreman / conductors lives.

 

I understand it takes a while to stop a train like that but at what point does the engineer see the obstruction and slow down as a defensive driver?

Generally, as soon as the Engineer recognizes the obstruction, he puts the brakes into emergency.

I thought TX also has a number posted on each highway grade crossing on the crossbuck  that you can call.  It is a number to TX DOT, and the grade crossing ID is with the sign.  Exception are those on Houston Metrorail, which sends the call to METRO DS.

I have been a commercial driver for more than 26 years now, but have never hauled Over-size loads. From what I have heard , extreme over-size loads like that have their routing dictated with the permit, the driver does NOT get to choose the route, and deviating from the permitted route would be akin to a rail worker passing an absolute red, or being on duty for 14 hours instead of 12, time to duck and run for cover.

 

 I don't know WHO is responsible for verifying the clearances on the permitted route, but obviously someone screwed up big time.

 

 I see on a daily basis the average auto driver making more stupid mistakes around trucks, and the results can be, and some times are, Horrifically Disastrous. I am SURE that NOBODY here is guilty of doing ANYTHING Stupid behind the wheel, EVER.

 

An unfortunate truth is Humans make mistakes, sometimes with Terrible results.

 

 Let He who is without Sin cast the first stone.

 

Doug 

"I was running BN #21 a piggyback train at 60 mph coming into Wyola, Montana"

 

Wyhog, what was your power?

ANY time you see  a leaking tanker, be it a tank car or whatever, its time to get out of Dodge! Let the experts worry about what is leaking. The people shooting the video were indeed lucky. And they were not necessarily out of harm's way, initially. That much argon is hazardous. I don't care if it is an inert gas. Granted it is not reactive, but is it heavier than air, and will readily push O2 out of the way, making it an asphyxiant. So even "safe" stuff can kill.

 

Bottom line: You see a wreck, don't hang around! Call 911 and GO!

 

Chris

LVHR

 

You always notice one thing about videos like this..almost never, and there wasn't as far as I could see in this particular video, any comments about the safety of the locomotive crews.

It is amazing those fellows survived that crash.

 

Ed

What is laying in the road in front of the camera vehicle? It almost looks like street lamps are something?

Those were the flashing amber traffic lights that got knocked down.  They're hard to see in the video because the rear view mirror blocked them except very briefly.

 

Stuart

 

Now is not a good time to find out your insurance was cancelled  or premium wasn't paid and lapsed!!

Well, there's no doubt about it, Doug -- any of us who drive an automobile, or even rides a bicycle, has made a few blunders.  Usually, an accident does not happen, and we learn from the mistake and get to be better drivers.  Mistakes made while driving commercial vehicles, however, are less forgiving, and are more likely to result in damage to the vehicle or to property, or collision with another vehicle or object.

 

To paraphrase another passage of scripture, to those to whom much has been given, much is expected.  I think any of us who are licensed to drive large vehicles should expect to do more to drive safely.  The size of the equipment demands that it be driven differently than an automobile.  So people reasonably expect commercial vehicle drivers to be more prudent and better skilled drivers overall.

 

In this case, there's no evidence that the truck driver did anything wrong.  For some yet undetermined reason, the trailer got high-centered on the crossing, and the train approached before the situation was remediated. Those are the only facts that we on the Forum can rely on.   All we see is the collision.  We do not know:

• whether the trailer had developed a structural or mechanical defect en route which lowered its clearance
• whether the trailer was rated to carry the weight of the crane, was properly loaded, and had been inspected after loading and at intervals en route
• whether the driver was on his permitted route
• whether the grade crossing was in compliance with roadway and track requirements
• whether there was enough time to take effective measures that could have allowed the train to be stopped
• whether anybody took any action to alert the railroad to stop the train

• whether, if any action was taken, it was the appropriate action and whether the process set into place worked as intended

Only after a full investigation, can the root cause and the contributing causes be determined.  The truck driver. if negligent, should be severely penalized only if the negligence was severe.  Mere contributory negligence should have a less severe penalty, designed to correct behavior rather than punish.  And the driver should be presumed to be without blame unless investigation proves otherwise.  Facts developed by investigation should be used to improve the safe movement of oversize loads by highway, and prevent any future incidents like this one.  Finger-pointing won't fix anything, but responsibility has to be assessed and changes may need to be made to vehicle codes, commercial driver license examinations, internal railroad and highway department processes, grade crossing maintenance, or other factors.

 

I think we should avoid at this time suggesting that those on the scene are in some way primarily responsible for this accident.  There is the issue of administrative shortcomings, and it is by no means possible to say who that would have been.  That probably will always be a matter of opinion.

It can be said that there are Federal funds available for necessary crossing improvement.  Where that is the case, there is a political reluctance do other than wait for them.  That's just a fact of life.  But even so, various other parties may be making contributions in money or kind.  I would not be surprised to find that UP provided the apparently new crossing protection.  The 6-inch out-of-face lift did occur; contrary to what I had thought, the approach is tangent and second track from the south (right), and also lifted out of face, rejoins at a switch immediately before this crossing.  It is not a second main, as far as I can tell; it was not used by this train in any case.

With no superelevation in the track, otherwise a major complication, it still cannot be said that adjustment of the road surface (to the out-of-face raise) was an inexpensive task.  It is possible the parties had administratively provided for this cost.  We do not (now) know that Federal government may have abruptly suspended indefinitely (remember the sequester? ...it's still in effect) any promised share, either State-wide, or to specific crossings.  Federal funds (for crossings) are specific, IIRC, but might force the State to reprogram.

I do know this roadway geometry is lacking , because in the last two years, 3 or 4 trucks grounded and stalled on this crossing (per the police chief of Mer Rouge).  Each prior time, the dispatcher was called, and alerted to the situation.

I do know that there is a business that provides lowboys, including large ones, located to the right over the crossing, in at least 3 of the first 4 blocks between the first street to the right and the railroad.  Unknown if this truck was bound there.

I do know, from the crane being carried, that this was a heavy-duty construction lowboy.  This one had 3-axles in the rear, plus a booster axle at a short distance. 
This usually (but not always) indicates an overload, which would require a permit, although the conditions of permits vary by State.  A portion of such trailers have air suspension; of these some, perhaps all, can lower the back of the bed to the ground for loading.

Such lowboys can be obtained with 6 or 6-1/2 inch ground clearance (loaded).  Trucks with clearance as low as 5 inches exist (TRB report, 2002).  I have been unable to find any examples other than auto-carriers, but I have noticed quite a few of these on the road.  You have to consider that the the normal spring travel of 18-wheelers is 2" down in compression, 2" unweighed in rebound (just the same as railroad cars).  But a slow-moving lowboy (at a crossing) with more axles is unlikely to see this motion reflected to the same extent at the bed.  This crossing is operated as a 3-lane roadway, two eastbound.  The lowboy was in the center lane, where the clearance could be expected to be best.  The driver reduced the impact to the train by moving the hauling tractor away.

Some HD lowboys can be raised above the mentioned minimums.  There is little discussion of this.  Neither manufacturers nor drivers seem to talk in any detail about clearance, but there are a few exceptions.

I do know that the new UP crossing protection does conform to standards, plus it has the overhead lights on gantries.  Two arms are standard (to avoid trapping cars on crossings.  I don't know if the standard of having the gates fully down 20 seconds before arrival of the train is accurate here (or different for some reason).  This avoid the feeling of being trapped on the tracks-- it is not apparent that the gate arms are easily broken (deliberately so).  The photographer of the video said that the train arrived within 2 minutes of the lowboy stalling, but the film does not catch the lights turning on, nor the gates in motion.

I do know that TRB (Transportation Research Board) in 2002 published a report that recommended that roadway design at crossings provide for 7" of underclearance.  The report saw this "85th percentile" provision as a limit recognizing limits on expenditure.  The report noted at this time that there were trucks with clearances as low as 5".  (I'm not making this up.)  I believe there is a more recent agreement between AASHTO (States and Canadian provinces) and Federal Highway on the one hand, and the AAR (ARA?).  In this case, that would govern.  I know the horizontal and overhead clearances from memory through half a century of change, but I don't recall much if any mention of underclearance of long vehicles.

It's the crews that suffer from the lack of attention this matter has had in past.  Once built, things tend to remain for long years.  I encountered a pair of main tracks in the NEC at 12'-2" centers once (1906 PRR standard, 70 years on).  I have to leave it here for the moment.

--Frank