Collision with injuries - Fall Foliage Train on the A&M

diningcartim · **Joined:** Fri Sep 20, 2013 2:34 pm **Posts:** 197

http://www.nwahomepage.com/fulltext-news/d/story/new-info-freight-train-collides-with-passenger-tra/40804/AwdwSSJx7E-fjiB-Y_oV2w

It is too early to figure out what exactly happened, but obviously not good.

rock island lines · **Joined:** Mon Feb 17, 2014 4:20 pm **Posts:** 487

"A&M" = Arkansas and Missouri Railroad.

Alan Walker · **Posted:** Thu Oct 16, 2014 5:22 pm

Initial report and the photographs indicate that it was a rear end collision. News report indicates that the passenger train had stalled for some reason and that the following train was supposed to act as a pusher. If you look carefully at the photograph showing the rear of the passenger train, it appears evident that the following train hit with a good amount of force.

Bobharbison · **Joined:** Fri Dec 03, 2004 9:42 pm **Posts:** 3010

The linked story states that both trains derailed and 300 gallons of diesel fuel were spilled. If those reports were accurate, that would tend to confirm the "good deal of force".

Lincoln Penn · **Joined:** Wed Feb 02, 2011 9:40 pm **Posts:** 841

Yes, it would. Obviously a misunderstanding/miscommunication between the two trains
as to exactly where the rear end of the stopped train was.

Anybody who runs tourist train or excursions can expect to see yet another panic and huge rate increase in liability insurance costs. Plus, it will be much harder to get, at any price.

etalcos · **Posted:** Thu Oct 16, 2014 10:19 pm

It was a locomotive to locomotive hit, not a locomotive to coach hit. It sounds like the crews may have had the worst injuries. Bet the passenger crew was glad they were running long hood forward...

As Mr. Penn points out -- miscommunication or misunderstanding.

John E. Rimmasch · **Joined:** Sun Aug 22, 2004 8:35 pm **Posts:** 374

More news clips;

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/10/16/35 ... latestnews

cood101 · **Joined:** Tue Jul 05, 2011 1:18 am **Posts:** 198

Very bad week for the A&M. Their three SD70ACes flipped into a river earlier this week. Now this. How many ALCOs does the A&M have still?

Alexander D. Mitchell IV · **Posted:** Thu Oct 16, 2014 10:38 pm

http://5newsonline.com/2014/10/16/washi ... erailment/

Emmo213 · **Posted:** Fri Oct 17, 2014 8:59 am

I wish the news would spend time to get the facts straight. I have a hard time believing that of the 44 people on the train 44 of them were injured.

boilerwash · **Posted:** Fri Oct 17, 2014 9:26 am

So to recap the info provided so far in the news reports. The A&M excursion train was heading south and upgrade when it hit wet leaves and rail causing it to stall on the grade. The locomotives from a freight train that was heading north and downgrade came down to assist and the locomotives somehow came together in what looks like a pretty hard collision.

Quote:

I wish the news would spend time to get the facts straight. I have a hard time believing that of the 44 people on the train 44 of them were injured.

In this instance thats actually not too far fetched. Take a look at the photos provided in the link in diningcartim's original post. The leaf springs from the trucks of that blue heavyweight coach are laying on the ground in a pile next to the excursion engine that was pulling it. This would suggest that this was the original position of the coach when the train stalled.

That means when the collision happened it occured with enough force to crush the vestibule against the collision bulkhead and LIFT THE WHOLE COACH enough that the leaf springs fell out of the trucks and the couplers no longer engaged. Plus the force was enough to buck the whole consist backwards something that looks like 20 or so yards from the photos.

If you're milling around on a standing train that suddenly bucks around with that kinda force you're gonna get banged around no matter where you are on the train.

Alexander D. Mitchell IV · **Posted:** Fri Oct 17, 2014 9:53 am

http://www.nwahomepage.com/fulltext-new ... k.facebook

Quote:

UPDATE 6:28PM: On Thursday night, the NTSB held a press conference to detail its investigation into Thursday's train derailment in Washington County.

NTSB member Mark Rosekind said the excursion train, consisting of one locomotive and 4 cars, stalled for unknown reasons on the track. The maximum speed for the portion of track this occurred on was 35mph.

The rescue train struck stalled train head on. Rosekind said there was no fire, no fuel leak during the accident.

The investigation will look at several pieces of information, including front facing video recorders on both trains and communication over radios. They will also be setting up interviews with the crews involved in the train collision.

Rosekind said he expects investigators to be on scene for 5 to seven days, collecting and documenting evidence.

There will be a press conference to update the investigation Friday.

WASHINGTON COUNTY -- The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) has launched a go-team to examine Thursday's freight and passenger train collision. The investigation is in the beginning stages and is expected to last a couple of days.

The accident happened when a passenger train carrying around 50 people was awaiting help after sliding on the tracks. The train sent to help was not able to stop before reaching the passenger cars and the two trains collided. Dozens were injured.

Railroad investigator Jim Southworth is leading the team as investigator-in-charge. Board Member Mark R. Rosekind is accompanying the team and will serve as the principal spokesman during the on-scene phase of the investigation.

Alan Walker · **Posted:** Fri Oct 17, 2014 1:27 pm

boilerwash wrote:

That means when the collision happened it occured with enough force to crush the vestibule against the collision bulkhead and LIFT THE WHOLE COACH enough that the leaf springs fell out of the trucks and the couplers no longer engaged. Plus the force was enough to buck the whole consist backwards something that looks like 20 or so yards from the photos.

If you're milling around on a standing train that suddenly bucks around with that kinda force you're gonna get banged around no matter where you are on the train.

Yes. And a very graphic reminder of why (from a safety point of view) allowing passengers to stand in the vestibule while the train is in motion is not really a smart or safe practice. When trains are involved, there is no such thing as a "minor" collision.

etalcos · **Posted:** Fri Oct 17, 2014 10:38 pm

boilerwash wrote:

Quote:

I wish the news would spend time to get the facts straight. I have a hard time believing that of the 44 people on the train 44 of them were injured.

In this instance thats actually not too far fetched. Take a look at the photos provided in the link in diningcartim's original post. The leaf springs from the trucks of that blue heavyweight coach are laying on the ground in a pile next to the excursion engine that was pulling it. This would suggest that this was the original position of the coach when the train stalled.

That means when the collision happened it occured with enough force to crush the vestibule against the collision bulkhead and LIFT THE WHOLE COACH enough that the leaf springs fell out of the trucks and the couplers no longer engaged. Plus the force was enough to buck the whole consist backwards something that looks like 20 or so yards from the photos.

If you're milling around on a standing train that suddenly bucks around with that kinda force you're gonna get banged around no matter where you are on the train.

Lets do a little fact check. The leaf springs lying on the ground are out of 68's long hood truck, not the coach.

Yes the vestibule would have been a bad place to be in this accident. Where do you suggest being on this train to avoid injury? Perhaps in your seat with the lap belt fastened and tray table in the upright position. The reality is that in most serious passenger train accidents it doesn't matter where you are. How many of the 44 injured were in the vestibule? Restroom? Seated? Standing? Passing between cars? Looking out the OPEN coach window? If you want to avoid passenger injuries as a result of an accident, avoid the accident in the first place.

Frankly it looks like a good start to a nice telescoping type situation. Wonder what the end of the heavyweight would have looked like if both it and the 68 had been tightlock equipped...

I hate this for the folks at A&M -- good people...

ETA

robertjohndavis · **Joined:** Mon Aug 23, 2004 8:10 am **Posts:** 2499

While our thoughts are with the crew and passengers, there is also the matter of the equipment. #68 is an ex Lehigh Valley yellow jacket. Any idea of the pedigree of the coach?