Another crossing accident

[Lovemymodelling]

Saw this on YouTube then did a google on it as I’ve not seen such a short train I did think it was a fakery loco top and tail On 2 superliners 

 

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.fox4news.com/news/4-hurt-after-amtrak-train-from-fort-worth-crashes-into-semi-in-oklahoma.amp

Edited October 16, 2021 by Lovemymodelling
Spelling

[F-UnitMad]

Authorities say a semi carrying cars somehow got stuck on the tracks and got hit by the oncoming train.

The semi "somehow" got stuck???!!!??? There's no 'somehow' about it - the crossing obviously isn't level in the accepted sense, rising up to the tracks & no doubt down again the other side; the trailer of the semi grounded in the middle enough to make the rig lose traction. It seems to happen often in the USA.

[Oldddudders]

31 minutes ago, F-UnitMad said:

 

 

The semi "somehow" got stuck???!!!??? There's no 'somehow' about it - the crossing obviously isn't level in the accepted sense, rising up to the tracks & no doubt down again the other side; the trailer of the semi grounded in the middle enough to make the rig lose traction. It seems to happen often in the USA.

I do wonder if this sort of thing is a victim of the introduction of CWR, raising the crossing above what may have been a more level intersection. Horrid event that we have actually watched, albeit no serious injuries or worse. 

[Michael Hodgson]

29 minutes ago, F-UnitMad said:

 

the crossing obviously isn't level in the accepted sense, rising up to the tracks & no doubt down again the other side; the trailer of the semi grounded in the middle enough to make the rig lose traction. It seems to happen often in the USA.

They don't have level crossings in the USA.  

They call them grade crossings - presumably because there is that steep grade either side of them.

 

It's not as though they don't have the space to get sensible vertical slopes over there; in most cases there is more than enough room on the approaches to build up the road approaches to the same level as the railway, but it's presumably a question of whose responsibility it is to pay for such work.  I'm sure what they've got was fine when everybody was using a horse and cart to move goods on minor roads to local farms etc, but the current arrangement is patently unsatisfactory. 

[pH]

The problem has been recognized and studied:

 

https://onlinepubs.trb.org/Onlinepubs/trr/1991/1327/1327-005.pdf

 

Many (most, in rural areas?) of these crossings were made when the vehicles crossing them were high-clearance horse-drawn carts. The fact that the crossings were hump-backed (for drainage and/or avoidance of snow drifting) didn’t matter. But now, with long, low articulated vehicles crossing, the risk of a ‘hang up’ are far higher. The cost of modifying all the crossings which need it in the USA would be massive.

 

(Typing while the previous two replies were being posted.)

[pH]

1 hour ago, Michael Hodgson said:

They don't have level crossings in the USA.  

They call them grade crossings - presumably because there is that steep grade either side of them.. 

 

Alternatively, because they are road crossings of railway grades.

 

Edit, having thought further - also, the road crossing is ‘at grade’, rather than ‘above grade’ (road overbridge) or ‘below grade’ (railroad overbridge).

 

This is Transport Canada’s definition:

 

What is a grade crossing?

A grade crossing is an intersection where a road, sidewalk, path or trail crosses railway tracks. Grade crossings are also known as level crossings, railway crossings or train crossings.

Edited October 16, 2021 by pH

[F-UnitMad]

1 hour ago, Michael Hodgson said:

They don't have level crossings in the USA.  

They call them grade crossings - presumably because there is that steep grade either side of them.

Well yeah - my avatar might indicate I know they're called Grade crossings over there, but they're all called grade crossings, and the same phrase is used when two railroads cross each other - "at grade".

I was just making the point that it quite obviously isn't level, in the literal sense - something the truck driver should have seen too in all honesty - & as an ex-HGV driver myself yes I think I can say that.

[alastairq]

Do they not have preceding road signs warning of a 'risk of grounding?' to lorry drivers?

 

Or are we seeing a prevalence of sat-nav-directed collisions?

[Grizz]

Luckily no one was hurt…through yet more f ing incompetence.

[Oldddudders]

Hixon comes to mind, more than 50 years ago, which changed the culture of BR AHB installations. 

[Michael Hodgson]

24 minutes ago, Oldddudders said:

Hixon comes to mind, more than 50 years ago, which changed the culture of BR AHB installations. 

I don't think that had grounded - I thought they adjusted they height to get enough ground clearance but not so high as to foul the OHLE?

Wasn't it just too slow to cross within the interval between the strike-in and arrival of the train?  

 

It wasn't an ordinary HGV - it was so big and heavy it needed its route approved in advance and a police escort = neither the police nor the Ministry covered themselves in glory on that trip.  If I remember correctly the Guard was the only one to emerge with any credit by protecting the line in both directions unusually quickly

[F-UnitMad]

1 hour ago, Grizz said:

Luckily no one was hurt…through yet more f ing incompetence.

Which bit of "4 hurt" in the OP report did you miss?

 

[RFS]

Deleted - duplicated post

Edited October 17, 2021 by RFS

[Oldddudders]

2 hours ago, Michael Hodgson said:

I don't think that had grounded - I thought they adjusted they height to get enough ground clearance but not so high as to foul the OHLE?

Wasn't it just too slow to cross within the interval between the strike-in and arrival of the train?  

 

It wasn't an ordinary HGV - it was so big and heavy it needed its route approved in advance and a police escort = neither the police nor the Ministry covered themselves in glory on that trip.  If I remember correctly the Guard was the only one to emerge with any credit by protecting the line in both directions unusually quickly

You are right about those details. Nevertheless, the presence of a vehicle straddling a railway crossing, with the emergency lights flashing, and being struck by the hapless train, is pretty comparable. Some years ago I recall being driven through Hixon by the lady who is now my wife - and there was a bridge!

 

A year previously, 1967, I - as no-one's idea of a draughtsman! -  had been required to provide a number of basic drawings for the preliminary internal enquiry into a fatal accident which occurred at Yapton LC in what was then simply Sussex. That accident was all about the adequacy or otherwise of flags and pennants as a temporary expedient during AHB installation. Clearly lots of learning was going on, and Hixon caused considerably more, hence my remark about culture. 

[Metr0Land]

18 hours ago, Lovemymodelling said:

Saw this on YouTube then did a google on it as I’ve not seen such a short train I did think it was a fakery loco top and tail On 2 superliners 

 

 

 

I've filmed that working myself in early 2000's, can't recall if it was quite so short but def the shortest Amtrak I've seen in regular service.

[uax6]

19 minutes ago, Oldddudders said:

A year previously, 1967, I - as no-one's idea of a draughtsman! -  had been required to provide a number of basic drawings for the preliminary internal enquiry into a fatal accident which occurred at Yapton LC in what was then simply Sussex. That accident was all about the adequacy or otherwise of flags and pennants as a temporary expedient during AHB installation. Clearly lots of learning was going on, and Hixon caused considerably more, hence my remark about culture. 

 

Did you happen to keep a copy of the final report? The Railways Archive hasn't got the report on its site sadly...

 

Andy G

[Oldddudders]

3 minutes ago, uax6 said:

 

Did you happen to keep a copy of the final report? The Railways Archive hasn't got the report on its site sadly...

 

Andy G

The nature of things meant I had no further sight of papers of any sort, and indeed had probably moved on to other supernumerary duties in another office before the final report was published. A lady driver, possibly with passenger, had driven onto the crossing unaware that there were flags and pennants telling her to stop. She/they were fatally struck by a train. More than that I really can't recall. 

[Michael Hodgson]

28 minutes ago, uax6 said:

 

Did you happen to keep a copy of the final report? The Railways Archive hasn't got the report on its site sadly...

 

Andy G

Olddudders says it was an internal inquiry he was asked to provide info on.   Railway Archive is aware of the accident but says it doesn't think there was a formal report  published and they don't think there any news reports of it either.  If the inspectors thought it was simple error by a motorist (ie a road accident), it was't really relevant to the inspectors as their job was to look at railway accidents though they did usually look at the fatal ones; there is always a possibility of a derailment.  Olddudders says it was an internal inquiry he was asked to provide info on and the Inspectors were presumably happy that BR had done enough. 

 

The Hixon accident was unusual in that it was a public inquiry rather than an HMRI job - the first such since the Tay Bridge I think.  It effectively put a stop to new AHB conversions for several years as the technical requirements changed to make them a lot more expensive.  Public opinion was against them too, even though road users are held up a lot longer by conventional gates with signal protection.  Similar issues have subsequently been a problem with automatic open crossings too.

[melmerby]

There seems to be no plan to remove the humps on grade crossings in the US, even though they are a major cause of vehicle collisions due to grounding, as it seems any roadwork carried out either side of the crossing will be done to the same slope as before.

A prime example is the crossing at Folkston GA on Virtual Railfan, where there is an obvious hump.

The road was relaid a while back and I assumed incorrectly that it was to remove the hump.

I was wrong, the re-instated road surface was more or less at the same slope as before the work. It's still humped.

It was an ideal opportunity to remove a hump during the relaying of the road surface, but nothing was done.

Edited October 17, 2021 by melmerby

[mdvle]

21 hours ago, F-UnitMad said:

The semi "somehow" got stuck???!!!??? There's no 'somehow' about it

 

If any of the authorities give a definitive cause then they will get dragged into any court proceedings that result - so unless your job is specifically to determine the cause it is far better to not give a reason.

 

6 hours ago, Grizz said:

Luckily no one was hurt…through yet more f ing incompetence.

 

4 Amtrak passengers taken to hospital for minor injuries.

 

This article includes (at the bottom) 5 pictures you can cycle through showing one car wrapped onto the nose of the P42 and its associated damage, damage to the rear of the P42 and the first Superliner, and interior damage within the Superliner.

 

https://www.wfaa.com/article/news/local/4-injured-after-amtrak-train-from-fort-worth-crashes-into-semi-carrying-cars-in-oklahoma/287-1c7a6535-6ca6-4a79-93d6-0f4eef575d31

 

21 hours ago, Lovemymodelling said:

Saw this on YouTube then did a google on it as I’ve not seen such a short train I did think it was a fakery loco top and tail On 2 superliners

 

VIA, and I guess Amtrak, have (finally) started moving to an operational model of simply reversing trains instead of turning them on a lot of routes.  New equipment orders are specifying this operational need - hence Siemens going with push/pull with cab cars - but for now with old equipment that doesn't have cab cars (or a lack of cabbages for Amtrak) they do the top/tail.

[Regularity]

12 minutes ago, mdvle said:

This article includes (at the bottom) 5 pictures you can cycle through showing one car wrapped onto the nose of the P42 and its associated damage, damage to the rear of the P42 and the first Superliner, and interior damage within the Superliner.

It might do, but all I got was this:

[mdvle]

1 hour ago, melmerby said:

There seems to be no plan to remove the humps on grade crossings in the US, even though they are a major cause of vehicle collisions due to grounding, as it seems any roadwork carried out either side of the crossing will be done to the same slope as before.

 

Lack of money.  The US has a significant gap between what they should be spending to maintain infrastructure and what they actually spend, which results in either things don't get done or they get done in the cheapest way possible.

 

1 hour ago, melmerby said:

A prime example is the crossing at Folkston GA on Virtual Railfan, where there is an obvious hump.

The road was relaid a while back and I assumed incorrectly that it was to remove the hump.

I was wrong, the re-instated road surface was more or less at the same slope as before the work. It's still humped.

It was an ideal opportunity to remove a hump during the relaying of the road surface, but nothing was done.

 

Went to Google Maps.  There are intersecting roads close enough that they would require work as well as the intersections would need to be raised - thus increasing the cost.

 

But Folkston only has a population of 5,000 (est. on Wikipedia), meaning unless money was provided by a higher level of government that increased cost likely would have meant something else not getting done.

[mdvle]

2 minutes ago, Regularity said:

It might do, but all I got was this:

 

At a guess, given the link works for me in Canada, say hello to the gdpr.

 

Anyone willing to go to Facebook can try the fire departments Facebook page, which has 16 images of the accident, including showing the loco(?) had one truck leave the rails.

 

https://www.facebook.com/LoveCountyFireAssociation/

[barkingdigger]

2 hours ago, mdvle said:

VIA, and I guess Amtrak, have (finally) started moving to an operational model of simply reversing trains instead of turning them on a lot of routes.  New equipment orders are specifying this operational need - hence Siemens going with push/pull with cab cars - but for now with old equipment that doesn't have cab cars (or a lack of cabbages for Amtrak) they do the top/tail.

The Long Island Rail Road started doing that back in the '70s.  They realised it was cheaper to buy worn-out F and FA cab units to act as reversing control cabs than it was to order specially-built passenger cars with controls, and the added bonus (once the drive train was removed) was space for a diesel generator set to provide lights and heat to the passenger cars!  They were retired sometime around 2000 when the new fleet of locos and cars arrived.  The old cabs provide much better collision protection for the crew than those push-pull cars.

[dave1905]

On 16/10/2021 at 15:04, Michael Hodgson said:

It's not as though they don't have the space to get sensible vertical slopes over there; in most cases there is more than enough room on the approaches to build up the road approaches to the same level as the railway, but it's presumably a question of whose responsibility it is to pay for such work.  

Not that much of question.  The road owner (city, county, state, federal) is responsible for the approaches and the railroad is responsible for the portion on the tracks.  Having said that, there are many "private/public" partnerships to improve crossings.  Most of the time the public entity pays for initial construction and the railroad maintains it.

 

The only time in my experience that the railroad paid to level the crossings was when a railroad double tracked a portion of their line, by adding the 2nd track it made the approaches on that side much steeper.  The city councilman for that area held up the permits to cross the through the roadway for months until the railroad agreed to pay for regrading the approaches.  For months the railroad had a second main track, but couldn't use it because every couple miles there was a gap in the track where the track would have crossed the road.  There is a crossover in the line that was named after the councilman.

 

About the only other time a railroad might have to pay for regrading is if it substantially raises the line (to remove sags, to raise above flooding levels, etc.).  Otherwise most of the humped tracks have been there for 100 years.  Some have signs and trucks still get high centered.