Yes they can.....
New page, yes they can....Originally Posted by Lone Wolf
An article on the status of the HF bridge repairs.
Some highlights:
NPS owns the footbridge. They want a study on the structural integrity of the bridge before repairs. CSX says it's safe.
No timeline yet for repairs.
Shuttle service is being discussed.
Apparently people are using the railroad tracks to cross the bridge which is obviously very dangerous.
http://www.shepherdstownchronicle.co...cOI8TGJOrBsTq0
"Chainsaw" GA-ME 2011
I can't understand why csx won't just do the repairs, once determined structurally safe. Csx train derails and damages nps walkway . Why nps have to repair and see about reimbursement?as the article says it's a huge part of Hf that's what brings alot folks down there to access the c&o canal and Maryland heights. And the fact that sandy hook rd is to small and narrow for buses gives a lot of insight to people how dangerous this rd is. And the fact is right or wrong people are going to continue walking the railroad across. If something happens like a train hitting someone I know it's on them as they broke the law, but the longer this goes on well....
Does this mean, say I have house next to the railroad and a train derailed and totally destroyed my house they may or may not reimbursement me ? So frustrating!
Just to put this on the front page where it belongs. Some people ain't got nothing to add to threads but little 1 liners.
Just as I predicted WRT the analysis paralysis.
it would be per the contract that allows for the footbridge (on CSX property) - the price of repairs is nothing compared to the liability if a bunch of people were hit - no way the railroad would allow their bridge to be used if they were not "held harmless"
If this is me could you elaborate?
In an earlier post I suggested that while the actual repairs might be done quickly, the RR or NPS or some other authority might want to study the heck out things before signing off.
Analysis paralysis.
Seems like that is exactly what is happening.
If I understood the article correctly, the CSX was able to get trains running within 48 hours and affirmed that everything is structurally fine to begin reconstruction of the footpath.
But the NPS feels compelled to do more studies and analysis before doing anything.
And why not? If a hiker gets hit by a car along the roadside it’s no skin off the signatory’s nose, but if bridge that CSX says is perfectly sound crumbles into the river, he might be taken to task.
(But just wait until the CSX determines the curve of the track played a role in the derailment if you really want to see how long the repairs will get delayed)
Oh, ok gotcha. We're on the same page. Soooo frustrating just fix the damn thing csx!!
This was precisely the cause of TWO freight derailments at the Horseshoe Curve near Altoona, PA in 2019. Note the empty, lighter carriers directly behind the locomotives in each derailment.
Not the engineers' fault. The dispatcher who decides upon the consist (train term for which cars and in what order make up the train) should certainly know better. Especially in the 7/26 derailment, only three weeks after the 7/5 derailment.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lhdxlqAT2uE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FsE9mOohSB8
In a photo I saw of the HF derailment before the freight cars/locos were cleared, it did seem as if the cars (that were dangling) following the locos, were similar to what we can see at Horseshoe Curve in that they were empty carriers. It is also plausible that speed played a role, perhaps in combo with stringlining. NTSB will have to clarify. And they need to issue emergency safety alerts to every rail yard in existence not to create consists like this, regardless of findings in this particular derailment.
Thankfully no one died in any of these three incidents.
If faulty consist is the main factor at HF, how could anyone but CSX be found culpable? These likely won't be found to be true accidents, but derailments waiting to happen.
Yes, but consists properly made up at the yard could handle that curve in HF. Putting lightweight, empty cars at the front of a train, after the locos, is not supposed to happen. In the east, there are curves everywhere. Dispatchers should know that and not create situations like this.
after 1 derailment,if the pedestrian part is reopened it would definitely increase the liability if people were hit by a future train
- again, where is the upside for a decision maker? whether they are NPS or CSX - and a "hasty" choice would look the worst
- again, the ATC/NPS will say to pay for a shuttle, the actual hikers will walk across the narrow bridge
again, do you really think the CSX allowed the bridge to be used without being "held harmless"
so fault has no bearing
Do you really think 'held harmless' would have any value whatsoever in court if negligence was involved?
What is likely to happen here is the footbridge will be last on the list. First up will be a study of the structural integrity of the bridge, stone/concrete supports, and track elements. Then repairs will be scheduled as needed to the crossing and track. This will then be followed by, or possibly done concurrently with the crossing inspection process, an engineering analysis of the footbridge integrity will be completed along with repair/replacement recommendations. Estimating cost and duration of construction along with railroad impacts will need to occur, followed by specification development, bidding processes, contractor scheduling, and permitting. It may seem to some overkill, however things like this require heavy lifting to ensure there are no problems following repairs.
It must've been a heck of a feat to get the agreement with the railroad to attach a footbridge to their bridge in the first place so there may not be legal action on behalf of the NPS owned AT bridge crossing. Responsibly funding will likely be informal financial negotiations with CSX. If the footbridge study processes will follow the completion of the track/bridge/support repairs, it will add significantly to the time involved to complete those repairs. If NPS/CSX negotiations generate CSX funding for repairs, funds will likely be provided to the NPS who in turn will contract for the work to be done to keep CSX liability exposure minimized.
It's anyones guess how long this particular process will take, I would estimate at least a year before physical work starts on the footbridge repair which may be optimistic. It's hard to say if the footbridge would be reopened as is under a temporary permit until the RR repairs are completed. The safest route for CSX would be to keep the footbridge closed and vigorously enforce trespassing laws with RR police until repairs are fully completed, however the NPS/CSX partnership may allow some flexibility.
Last edited by Traveler; 01-17-2020 at 10:03.
sounds like the politics of todays world getting involved with ruining everything. More studies and everything else mentioned only = more $$ for someone and that's what it's about.
NoDoz
nobo 2018 March 10th - October 19th
-
I'm just one too many mornings and 1,000 miles behind
Yeah, it probably has nothing to do with transportation safety, environmental issues resulting from derailments in the future, and public health.
The bridge was reopened to RR traffic in my understanding. Most of the damage was to the footbridge when the cars derailed (due to stringlining across the curve as many have suggested?). See before and after photos:
I wouldn't dismiss it as "politics." It's more about engineering and public safety. The walkway sustained damage over a significant part of its length (about 1/3), some of it severe. Exactly who is taking responsibility for the repair, managing the project, and paying for that was not revealed - but it seems like it's falling at least partly on NPS at this point. If the repair falls on the shoulders of NPS, somewhere within NPS an engineer (and staff) is going to have to assess the scope of the repair project, sign off on the repair and process, a project manager (and staff) will have to get involved and do an RFP (request for proposal/bid) and then go out for bids, a contract will be awarded, a contractor is going to have to perform the work, etc. None of that has anything to do with "politics" or "more $$ for someone." If anything, the process is there to make sure the job gets done correctly and that some federal employee's brother-in-law doesn't get a taxpayer funded blank check. It will also require that NPS coordinate with CSX and unassociated third party experts, as NPS in-house people likely aren't experienced in designing walkways added to 100 year old railway bridges. CSX has reportedly declared an okay on the the structural integrity of the bridge itself and that the walkway repair can begin. Should we put 100% trust in that assessment, or practice what's known as due diligence?
Check out this video at the 6 minute mark to get a better idea of the severity of the damage to the pedestrian walkway structure https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wUh6...ature=youtu.be
Looking at it, there is severe damage to the decking, beams, and support structure. It looks like replacing sections of the walkway beam, fabricating and welding up some new iron trusses (the angled supports for the cantilevered walkway), and installing new treadway and fences. That in itself could take some significant time working next to active trains while elevated on a bridge structure and above water. But we can't see the other possible details, and NPS can't either without a thorough inspection. 25-30 ton (empty weight) rail cars were dragged across and over and through structural elements that have previously been carrying only the weight of pedestrian traffic. Obviously, the main structure is pretty sturdy, as there doesn't seem to be catastrophic failure to the bridge span itself. But given the weight of the rail cars and forces involved, at a minimum I'd want to inspect every attachment point of the support members, integrity of the deck, etc. And, yeah, that will likely take some time. Good, cheap, fast - choose any two.
Last edited by 4eyedbuzzard; 01-18-2020 at 13:51.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
