Train hits car carrier at full speed.

[y_p_w]

Never saw a train lose that battle, they were undefeated during my 25yrs

This one got T-boned by a semi. Didn't directly hit the locomotive though, but right in the middle of one of the passenger cars. The driver locked up his brakes too late, and you can see that the rail got bent. The driver didn't even have severe injuries. This was in California's Central Valley where there's California Highway Patrol and local police at the scene.

Not sure how long it took to rebuild, but the earliest photo on this site after the derailment was about 5 months later in upstate NY.

http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/locopicture.aspx?id=18178&Page=4

 

[dlundblad]

The excavation company that put in mom and dads pond had a similarly thing happen with one of their semi trailers. Thankfully the machine was off the trailer before the train hit it.

 

[ARCOgraphite]

I love the idiot standing on the tracks trying to get the attention of the train, lol...

They don't know how this transportation system works, I wouldn't call them an idiot for trying.
I would assume it was the car hauler truck driver.
I do agree he should have got out of the way SOONER than he did. That train was crankin' !

 

[64bawagon]

This one got T-boned by a semi. Didn't directly hit the locomotive though, but right in the middle of one of the passenger cars. The driver locked up his brakes too late, and you can see that the rail got bent. The driver didn't even have severe injuries. This was in California's Central Valley where there's California Highway Patrol and local police at the scene.

Not sure how long it took to rebuild, but the earliest photo on this site after the derailment was about 5 months later in upstate NY.

http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/locopicture.aspx?id=18178&Page=4

That was an expensive mistake, hopefully no one was hurt. Apparently some folks dont realize that the train always follows a predictable path, they rarely swerve

 

[y_p_w]

That was an expensive mistake, hopefully no one was hurt. Apparently some folks dont realize that the train always follows a predictable path, they rarely swerve

Certainly not when a truck hits the side of a passenger train.

There's video of all sorts of these collisions. Freight trains take even longer to stop. Passenger trains (especially these short consists with single locomotives) stop on a dime compared to freight trains. They still can't stop immediately.

 

[bunnspecial]

From Operation Lifesaver, I remember hearing the analogy that a fully loaded freight train hitting a car is roughly the equivalent of your vehicle hitting a coke can at 70mph. I haven't verified the math, but a 100+ car freight train weighs A LOT.

Also, never actually spent time behind the control stand, but I have been a life long railfan. First of all, someone above mentioned the 800 number posted at EVERY crossing. If you are stuck, use it. The more advance notice they have, the more likely they are to be able to stop.

Second, someone mentioned above their suspicious as to whether or not a train can "actually" stop that quickly. A couple of things:

Trains today(in the US) still operate on a variant of the over 100 year old Westinghouse air brake system. In this system, each car contains an air reservoir which is used to apply the brake shoes to the wheels. There is an air line running the entire length of the train that is controlled from the locomotive. When the pressure in the line(~90psi) is equal to the pressure inside the air tank on each car, the brakes are completely off. When the pressure in the line drops below the pressure in tank, the brakes are applied proportionally to the drop in pressure(and releasing works the opposite).

If the pressure in the brake line drops to zero, that signals an "emergency" application, which I believe on modern designs opens a secondary valve to speed the application of the brake shoes to the wheels and I seem to recall also taps a separate "emergency reservoir." This is something of a fail safe design, as if a train separates, for example, the separated cars will self-apply their brakes.

In any case, let's say the engineer seen an obstruction a few hundred feet ahead on the track. They throw the brake stand lever into "emergency", which promptly opens a valve to start releasing the pressure in the line. The problem is on a 100 car freight train, the brake line is over a mile long. As each car senses emergency, I THINK it also opens a valve that helps vent the line down to zero(don't hold me to that one) but it's going to take a LONG time for the emergency signal to propogate through brake line, then each car in turn to apply its brakes.

Once they're on, we have steel on steel, and very quickly the wheels can brake way and start sliding rather than turning. It's MUCH easier for this to happen than on asphalt with rubber tires.

That's not to mention-think of how many thousands of tons are behind that locomotive.

It doesn't matter how many tricks are used-that train is still going to take a long time to stop, and throwing it into emergency carries its own issues like the potential for derailment.

 

[y_p_w]

From Operation Lifesaver, I remember hearing the analogy that a fully loaded freight train hitting a car is roughly the equivalent of your vehicle hitting a coke can at 70mph. I haven't verified the math, but a 100+ car freight train weighs A LOT.

Also, never actually spent time behind the control stand, but I have been a life long railfan. First of all, someone above mentioned the 800 number posted at EVERY crossing. If you are stuck, use it. The more advance notice they have, the more likely they are to be able to stop.

Second, someone mentioned above their suspicious as to whether or not a train can "actually" stop that quickly. A couple of things:

Trains today(in the US) still operate on a variant of the over 100 year old Westinghouse air brake system. In this system, each car contains an air reservoir which is used to apply the brake shoes to the wheels. There is an air line running the entire length of the train that is controlled from the locomotive. When the pressure in the line(~90psi) is equal to the pressure inside the air tank on each car, the brakes are completely off. When the pressure in the line drops below the pressure in tank, the brakes are applied proportionally to the drop in pressure(and releasing works the opposite).

If the pressure in the brake line drops to zero, that signals an "emergency" application, which I believe on modern designs opens a secondary valve to speed the application of the brake shoes to the wheels and I seem to recall also taps a separate "emergency reservoir." This is something of a fail safe design, as if a train separates, for example, the separated cars will self-apply their brakes.

In any case, let's say the engineer seen an obstruction a few hundred feet ahead on the track. They throw the brake stand lever into "emergency", which promptly opens a valve to start releasing the pressure in the line. The problem is on a 100 car freight train, the brake line is over a mile long. As each car senses emergency, I THINK it also opens a valve that helps vent the line down to zero(don't hold me to that one) but it's going to take a LONG time for the emergency signal to propogate through brake line, then each car in turn to apply its brakes.

Once they're on, we have steel on steel, and very quickly the wheels can brake way and start sliding rather than turning. It's MUCH easier for this to happen than on asphalt with rubber tires.

That's not to mention-think of how many thousands of tons are behind that locomotive.

It doesn't matter how many tricks are used-that train is still going to take a long time to stop, and throwing it into emergency carries its own issues like the potential for derailment.

In this case it was the Heartland Flyer. Not sure what the deal is, but they typically have 3-4 passengers cars and a locomotive on both ends. In this case the photos show they used single-level cars. This can stop way faster than a freight train with 100+ cars, but typically will go faster - near the speed limits. Even then, if a vehicle is stuck on the tracks and it's not in the line of sight, there might not be enough time to stop even with maximum braking. And maximum braking is only for emergencies, as it damages the rail and might require resurfacing/replacing the rails.

 

[bunnspecial]

In this case it was the Heartland Flyer. Not sure what the deal is, but they typically have 3-4 passengers cars and a locomotive on both ends. In this case the photos show they used single-level cars. This can stop way faster than a freight train with 100+ cars, but typically will go faster - near the speed limits. Even then, if a vehicle is stuck on the tracks and it's not in the line of sight, there might not be enough time to stop even with maximum braking. And maximum braking is only for emergencies, as it damages the rail and might require resurfacing/replacing the rails.

Okay, skipped over the passenger part, but yeah.

Emergency really is emergency.

Wheels skidding on rail as you mentioned can damage rails and also flat spot wheels.

Some mornings on my way to work, I get stopped at a crossing by the Amtrak "Lincoln Service" St. Louis-Chicago train, which runs daily(I think) and is usually 6-8 cars. It's definitely flying. This particular crossing is actually both KCS and CN track, although I THINK Amtrak runs on the KCS line. I don't know and can't find the class rating of that section, but the track is very well maintained and I'd not be surprised if Amtrak is at 79mph through there. Of course, the(huge) couple times a day Intermodals on both the CN and KCS lines move slow, but they're easily in the 100 car range.

Regardless, though, too with throwing into emergency you do risk a derailment or other nastiness as brakes slam on through the train. I suspect any freight train running at those kinds of speeds uses an EOT that is capable of dumping the air from the rear, but depending on just how weight is distributed and so forth that can conceivably pull the train apart.

I have been on a light excursion that was 6 cars, a pair of FP-7s at one end, and a GP-9 at the other end. It was not going fast, needless to say, but a truck pulling a trailer decided it could beat. The truck did, the trailer didn't. Even from ~10mph, the emergency stop wasn't the gentlest thing in the world. I was glad also that the rather...utilitarian GP-9 took that blow rather than one of the FP-7s. I have the photos somewhere still. It was a 5th wheel flatbed trailer , and more or less wrapped around the front. I think the truck got pulled off the road in the process, but fortunately the driver was shaken up but otherwise not hurt.

I think the moral to the story is trains can do a lot of damage, and yes they really can't stop.

 

[4WD]

Those are very low to the ground anyway

I’m thinking of that reporter who took the bait over the Asiana names …

 

[y_p_w]

Okay, skipped over the passenger part, but yeah.

Emergency really is emergency.

Wheels skidding on rail as you mentioned can damage rails and also flat spot wheels.

Some mornings on my way to work, I get stopped at a crossing by the Amtrak "Lincoln Service" St. Louis-Chicago train, which runs daily(I think) and is usually 6-8 cars. It's definitely flying. This particular crossing is actually both KCS and CN track, although I THINK Amtrak runs on the KCS line. I don't know and can't find the class rating of that section, but the track is very well maintained and I'd not be surprised if Amtrak is at 79mph through there. Of course, the(huge) couple times a day Intermodals on both the CN and KCS lines move slow, but they're easily in the 100 car range.

Regardless, though, too with throwing into emergency you do risk a derailment or other nastiness as brakes slam on through the train. I suspect any freight train running at those kinds of speeds uses an EOT that is capable of dumping the air from the rear, but depending on just how weight is distributed and so forth that can conceivably pull the train apart.

I have been on a light excursion that was 6 cars, a pair of FP-7s at one end, and a GP-9 at the other end. It was not going fast, needless to say, but a truck pulling a trailer decided it could beat. The truck did, the trailer didn't. Even from ~10mph, the emergency stop wasn't the gentlest thing in the world. I was glad also that the rather...utilitarian GP-9 took that blow rather than one of the FP-7s. I have the photos somewhere still. It was a 5th wheel flatbed trailer , and more or less wrapped around the front. I think the truck got pulled off the road in the process, but fortunately the driver was shaken up but otherwise not hurt.

I think the moral to the story is trains can do a lot of damage, and yes they really can't stop.

People have gotten in serious trouble for pulling the emergency stop when there was no emergency. Here's some railman video where someone caught the emergency brakes being pulled right out of the station. The guy who recorded it said that a woman and child jumped out after pulling it, and the conductor was wondering what happened. But this idiot got out without being identified.



I'm not sure what's up with the train that's the subject of the original post. I see the Heartland Flyer is usually two P42DC - one at each end - and bilevel Superliner cars. Two of those locomotives can easily pull a dozen cars, a baggage car, and even a few private railcars. I've ridden on local Amtrak service before, and they only use a single P42DC, F59PHI (owned by California), or I guess one of the new Siemens Chargers. In my rides I've seen a few cases where there was an emergency. One was a fatality which must have been brutal for the conductor. Another was a near miss with a pickup truck on the tracks, but an emergency stop.

 

[y_p_w]

I’m thinking of that reporter who took the bait over the Asiana names …

That was a disaster. I actually watched that reporter over the years and she was generally pretty professional.

 

[4WD]

I damaged a boat trailer on a crossing … later on I parked and looked closely at the crossing … must have been a hundred gouges/cracks from trailers etc dragging there …
Changed my route to use a better crossing …

 

[y_p_w]

I'd note that braking on a short passenger train is actually a lot faster than a long freight train, and not just because of the weight. I'm not 100% versed on how they work, but it's a pressure connection, and the brake system is pressurized and a loss of pressure applies the brakes.

With a passenger train with 2 locomotives and 3-4 cars it's pretty fast. The emergency brakes can be applied in any locomotive or car by "dumping" the air in the pressurized lines. But with 100+ cars in a freight train it's going to take a while before the pressure drops in the furthest car.

 

[bunnspecial]

With a passenger train with 2 locomotives and 3-4 cars it's pretty fast. The emergency brakes can be applied in any locomotive or car by "dumping" the air in the pressurized lines. But with 100+ cars in a freight train it's going to take a while before the pressure drops in the furthest car.

I mentioned this upthread.

There are a few things that speed it along. One is that the current generation of airbrake valves will, if it senses what would be considered an "emergency" pressure drop(down to zero or close to it quickly), each themselves open a valve from the brake line to atmosphere. That speeds the propogation of the emergency application through the train, but it still takes time.

The other side of it is that it can start happening from the back of the train also, as the emergency application can be communicated to the EOT device and it can start dumping the air from the back, letting the emergency application start forward also.

In either case, though, emergency really is emergency. As the brakes start to apply in the front, the back will continue to move at the same speed, which is one of those things that can cause a derailment. If they start applying from the rear, you can have the opposite situation and it has the potential to pull the train in half. Fortunately that would generally be a safe situation if it happened(the brakes would just start applying from both directions of the break) but you still have a lot of mass stopping VERY quickly....

 

[y_p_w]

I mentioned this upthread.

There are a few things that speed it along. One is that the current generation of airbrake valves will, if it senses what would be considered an "emergency" pressure drop(down to zero or close to it quickly), each themselves open a valve from the brake line to atmosphere. That speeds the propogation of the emergency application through the train, but it still takes time.

The other side of it is that it can start happening from the back of the train also, as the emergency application can be communicated to the EOT device and it can start dumping the air from the back, letting the emergency application start forward also.

In either case, though, emergency really is emergency. As the brakes start to apply in the front, the back will continue to move at the same speed, which is one of those things that can cause a derailment. If they start applying from the rear, you can have the opposite situation and it has the potential to pull the train in half. Fortunately that would generally be a safe situation if it happened(the brakes would just start applying from both directions of the break) but you still have a lot of mass stopping VERY quickly....

Push configuration has been blamed as a factor in some derailments that happened after hitting a large object on the tracks.

 

[spackard]

Not your typical freight e-stop, but:

More typical stopping distance: