Fairly good picture of the derailed equipment showing the crossover vault and the temporary track on the left for single track operation.
https://www.foxnews.com/world/derailment-damages-close-worlds-longest-rail-tunnel-next-septemberAccording to the article the closure will be significantly longer than originally anticipated.
High points in the article:
......The rail tunnel won't be fully reopened to train traffic until next September,
......Damage was much more significant than first imagined.
......Rail tracks need to be entirely replaced over 4.2 miles. (6.8 km)
......Cost of the repairs is expected to be 100 to 130 million Swiss francs (about US$110 to $140 million).
......Limited passenger and cargo train traffic through the tunnel is continuing.
A couple of comments from looking at the picture:
First, if there was ever a door between tracks here, where was it and how was it mounted? No evidence in the picture of there ever being one.
Second, for those unfamiliar, and I am sure Jis is not one of those, note the coupling system on the end of the freight car. It has the buffers at the corners and the hook and screw system in the middle. This sort of coupling was outlawed in the US by the Railway Safety Appliance Act of 1895 (or there abouts. Not sure of the exact year, but pre 1900.) It operates by placing a link on the end of one car over a hook on the end of the adjacent car. Applying the hook can be done by a pole from outside the car, or else someone has to step between cars to set the link, and of course hook up the air brake line. To hook up the air brake line also requires stepping between cars with the AAR style knuckle coupler, but at least you do not have to dunk under the buffers to get in and out. Either way, someone has to step in to spin the threads in the link to get the buffers to stay in contact. A large buff force can make the link pop off the hook, thereby separating the train. This and the general weakness of the system is why a 30 car train is probably at or near the maximum in most of Europe. (I recall a number of years ago reading a discussion in Railway Gazette International about one of the European systems studying the possibility of operating 5,000 tonne freight trains. My first thought was, what is this? 1900?)
Thirdly, look at the tunnel size in relation to the equipment size. My first thought in looking at this is that they have violated what to me is the first rule in setting clearance standards: DON'T SHRINK WRAP THE EQUIPMENT!!!!!! There are several reasons for this. First and foremost, a close clearance section in tunnels increases operating costs because it increases train resistance as there is a smaller area for air to go around the train. This is significant, particularly as speeds increase and length of tunnel increases. Second, you have precluded yourself from ever running larger equipment. Large clearances in the US go back to at least the 1920's, mostly to 22 feet vertical and 8 feet horizontal from track centers. Thus, for most of the country outside the northeast first piggyback and then tri-level auto carriers and then double stacks could be operated with minimal work on structures. I go on for a while here, but I think I will shut up now.
