Steam & Excursion > SPS700 Derailed

The SPS700 ran a Winter Steam Special today (http://www.sps700.org/) beginning at Oaks Park near Portland, OR. On the return portion of its maiden voyage, the SPS700 put five wheels on the ground. The passengers that were aboard had the option of walking back to their cars (about a mile walk) or they could wait for the speeders that were shuffling passengers between the 700 and their cars.

Following are a couple of pictures that were taken today after the SPS700 derailed.

---

---

---

didn't the same sort of thing happen last year?

That's a shame....heavy engine, small rail and rotten ties....

The question is, how far was this from last years derailment? Last years occurnce doesnt surprise me as 4449 and 700 were doubleheading on rail that prolly wasnt good for one of the two running by themselves let alone the afforementioned doubleheaders.

> Last year's occurnce doesnt surprise me
> as 4449 and 700 were doubleheading...


Not related to this year's problem, but I was thinking about that before, and I just couldn't really figure out any reason that doubleheading would cause any more strain than just one engine. Yes, obviously two engines weigh more than one, but we're talking about regular track here, not a bridge. It doesn't seem to me that the load on any individual piece of rail would be any more than it is with a single engine. I guess maybe the repeatead application of heavy loads would have some effect, I don't know...

Sorry to hear that...

The fact that something similar happened last year AND it
was still permitted to run again is amazing - hopefully the
group will not run into any insurance issues due to a, pardon
me, a track record.

How does the group recuperate from the expense of re-railing
such a heavy engine? In the world where the slightest little
thing can be foreboding... I can't imagine the expense of a
last minute re-rail. Does insurance cover that? Or is it best
not to have it covered?

Best of luck to the group, maybe it's time to send them a Holiday
donation!

/Mitch

Although i really dont know much about the physics involved with rails and trains. This is my guess about the doubleheader thing.

Ok, you have one rail, be it welded jointed, whatever. You have that kind of weight in close proximety, add old rotted ties. Now, once again, i dont know that much about the physics involved and i could very well be quite wrong, but with that kind of weight in close proximity, on the same rail, its like having double the weight on one spot. But rail doesnt just break and roll over (one would hope) when it rolls over, it seems to tend to roll over in a section. Take for instance, the 700 and 4449 are double heading, one of the two locos causes a piece of rail to roll over in the area the weight is distributed, but the other is so close, and with things now weakened, the rest is going to roll over as well.

Not sure how much sense that made, but maybe you get the idea.

Todays derailment ocurred just north of where the last years mishap ocurred. The Oregon Pacific had just installed several hundred new hardwood ties and this derailment happened right inbetween two sections of new ties and surfacing. The SP&S 700 was rerailed in a little over three hours and was back in Brooklyn Yard shortly afterwards. Minor track damage was repaired by gauging and spiking.

The fact that both the SP4449 and SP&S 700 made a total of over 50 round trips the previous two weekends to benefit ORHF may have contributed to some spread gauge given the long wheelbases of the engines.

Future steam operations over the OPR should not be affected; as OPR owner Dick Samuels fully supports preservation and shrugs these things off as just a part of railroading.

CDTX Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The question is, how far was this from last years
> derailment?



Quite close, to me looked to be no more than 30 yards. Perhaps closer. I didn't see any fractured rail this time, but did see where some sort of clamping device was being used to hold the rails in gauge (a clamp was affixed to one rail, then a chain stretched over to another clamp on the opposite rai). Apparently used to keep the rails from spreading further apart. I was present as they used cribbing to re-rail the locomotive. Fascinating to see how effective a low-tech solution using a few blocks of wood can be. Obviously due to the expertise of those present.



Nickatnight

---

---

[img::]https://cdn.trainorders.com/attachments/thumbs/172000/Dec 2006 xpress (10) 2.JPG[/img]

---

[img::]https://cdn.trainorders.com/attachments/thumbs/172000/Dec 2006 xpress (20) 2.JPG[/img]

EMDSW-1 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Future steam operations over the OPR should not be
> affected; as OPR owner Dick Samuels fully supports
> preservation and shrugs these things off as just a
> part of railroading.

Shrugs - I'm glad that word is still in use!
That's great to hear...

Who ends up footing the cost of the re-railing?

engine3420 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> That's a shame....heavy engine, small rail and
> rotten ties....

Where you there to inspect the ties? I was. I was running one of the speeders that ferried passengers back to Oaks Park. The ties where in good shape and the rail is plenty heavy. Indeed many main line tracks in steam days used even lighter rail. It is not clear what happened so lets wait for a professional opinion before casting aspersions about a well run railroad.

As for the questions of re-railing costs the 700 crew and Dick Samuels did it all with wooden re-railing wedges and the help of one of his diesel engines. It took them around 4 hours.

ST2-K

You would be supprised the amount of volunteers that work on the engines and the many fields they come from. I think most of the work last year and this year was acomplished by feeding the crews pizza and drinks. These people are putting alot of time in to generate awareness among the public and city officials and are trying to find a new home for the engines and thus the reason for some of the runs today.

David

Thank you to everyone that runs the 4449 and the 700 as well as the other steam programs! I hope your efforts are rewarded for all that you do for the fans of this hobby. Without you folks, there would be no steam program to enjoy.

Even though it was a bummer that the 700 was put on the ground today and that my boys and I did not get to ride the train, we still had a great time hanging out and seeing the 700 decked out for the season. The blow-down was awesome too. :-)

Scott Kuhl
Keizer, OR

I'm sorry to hear that the 700 derailed. In the past three weekends, the 700 and 4449 have made some unforgettable memories for a whole bunch of people, myself included. The Holiday Express is a very popular event, and it would not be possible if it weren't for Dick Samuels and the Oregon Pacific RR. Not to mention all the other volunteers, but hey, it's Christmas, and all of those volunteers can smile, knowing what great experiences they created for children of all ages. Give thanks, otherwise these engines would be sitting cold, maybe back in the park again.

Sounds like nobody got their bowels in an uproar because the engine derailed. I'm just glad that nobody (apparently) did panic because of this. This is just another part of railroading.

JDE

Yes, sadly this is a part of railroading. Just seeing everyone happy and excited about the engines really makes all the hard work on any steam engine well worth it.

waykuhl Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> On the return portion of its
> maiden voyage, the SPS700 put five wheels on the
> ground.

Actually, Scott, it was the outbound portion of the trip. The first trip of the day was a VIP trip for customers and other invited guests of the Oregon Pacific Railroad. On the ground were the R1, R2, R6, R7 and R8. It occurred at 8 MPH on tangent track. The 700 was back on the rail at 4:03 PM and put to bed in the roundhouse at 6:45 PM. Amtrak #507 tooted at us with our Christmas lights shining brightly while on the turntable just before we moved into the house.

Many thanks to visiting tourist line rails Scott Gordon (MRSR) for running Dick Samuels' diesel for him so he could direct the movement and Will Pickering (BYCX) for gettin' down and dirty doing the grunt work of placing rail gauge tie chains and blocking for the wheels to climb. Many of our own PRPA members were also directly involved with the rerailing. We were blessed with having a rail joint located almost exactly midway between the engine trailer truck and the front tender truck. Disassembling the joint certainly made the rerailing a lot easier.

> but with that kind of weight in close proximity,
> on the same rail, its like having double the weight
> on one spot.

First of all, let me make it clear that I'm not sure
about my idea either, and not trying to argue, but to
figure out what the impact really is...

I agree that there's more load there, but when you
consider the length of the tender, which is lighter,
and spreads the main weight apart, I wonder how
much difference it makes. Would be interesting to
do some kind of testing to find out.

This reminds me of a discussion we once had about
running doubleheaders over a trestle. While at
first glance it seems obvious there's more weight,
our master mechanic argued that each bent carries
the weight for that short portion, and it doesn't see
any more load when there are two engines. I'm still
not certain whether he's correct or not, but his
idea does make sense...

Jim....glad to see her back and going again. Was great to get a call from the 700 before departing. She did look pretty nice sitting there lit up and steaming away in the night as we passed by the house. Hope to see you soon...GM

I'm sorry to read of 700's derailment and can only hope close inspection will reveal no material damage.

What I'm GLAD to read about is the "set-to" of those involved and the expeditious manner in which she was re-railed. VERY impressive.

Regarding insurance, I would guess it wise to say nothing in the sense of making claim under the policy unless the engine has damaged railroad or other property during her "off." Of course, if anyone's been hurt, even slightly, open a claim and let the insurer deal with the matter. If the cost to re-rail was not great I'd suggest not involving the insurer. Or, if the railroad doesn't experience some sort of "loss of business income" due to blockage of the line I'd also urge leaving the insurer out of it.

There is one element which could put a reverse spin on this. If it's felt that one of the crew or anyone riding the train might make future claim for injury of one sort or another it's wise to involve the insurer immediately because every policy stipulates "timely notice of loss" as a condition of coverage. When an individual or group purchases insurance they transfer their risk of monetary loss to another, in this case the insurer. A part of that contract is the insurer's obligation and RIGHT to settle losses. If their RIGHT (and therefore ability) to settle with claimants is impinged by failure to notify in a timely manner they may deny coverage.

So, these matters need to be considered carefully, and should probably be addressed by the board of directors of the group responsible for operation of the 700 (or any similar operation). This is another reason such groups need to spend the money for purchase of what's called Directors and Officers Liability insurance which protects not only the organization but also the directors personally in the event of certain kinds of suits. Given that the majority of not-for-profit operations such as the great bunch managing 700 have a board who serve without compensation it's only right that the group purchase an insurance policy to protect them.

Sorry to get off on this tangent!!!!

John