How were the air brakes and hand brakes handled preparing to back up the train? The 2 locos in front could not push front cars back up hill. RED FLAG. That means locos in front could not hold train once bake line recharged. Did train start rolling forward when backing up failed? Another try? Time to either take front down hill or send helper to push front back up ?
Is it true that BNSF requires more HP / ton on its grade than UP uses here?
In the Trains Newswire article that reported the re-opening of the line, it had this:
The National Transportation Safety Board is not involved in the investigation.
Why is that? Just because there were no injuries or fatalities or hazmat involved? Seems like they might want to investigate how it came to be that an unmanned runaway train ended up going down a hill at a reported 118 MPH. Not sure I trust UP be entirely transparent about it on their own.
In all fairness, the NTSB doesn't have the manpower to investigate every rail, highway or air accident. Consequently, they have to select which accidents merit an investigation.
I'm going to give my wild guess (since everyone else here is...)
That the crew tried to recover the air on the first portion without enough handbrakes tied on.
PS... this is when you guys should start discussing ECP brakes.
It's been fun. But it isn't much fun anymore. Signing off for now.
The opinions expressed here represent my own and not those of my employer, any other railroad, company, or person.t fun any
zugmannPS... this is when you guys should start discussing ECP brakes.
Overmod zugmann PS... this is when you guys should start discussing ECP brakes. You mean like the ones that suddenly released without warning after a couple of hours because their batteries were running low?
zugmann PS... this is when you guys should start discussing ECP brakes.
You mean like the ones that suddenly released without warning after a couple of hours because their batteries were running low?
I was reading something about that incident over in Australia. It said the ECP brakes were dual control mode capable. That after a specified time period, the brakes tansitioned to conventional mode and that allowed the brakes to release.
I would think that in either mode, the fail safe would be to not allow the brake cylinders to release in either mode or whether the batteries in ECP mode became drained. Natural cylinder leakage is another matter.
Jeff
zugmannThat the crew tried to recover the air on the first portion without enough handbrakes tied on.
My reading was that they were trying to push the 55 cars back up the hill, so presumably they had air on that portion of the train. The two locos couldn't move the cars uphill, and, in fact, the train started downhill, overwhelming the locomotives.
One would presume that the engineer dumped the train before he bailed, but we don't know that.
Larry Resident Microferroequinologist (at least at my house) Everyone goes home; Safety begins with you My Opinion. Standard Disclaimers Apply. No Expiration Date Come ride the rails with me! There's one thing about humility - the moment you think you've got it, you've lost it...
zugmann I'm going to give my wild guess (since everyone else here is...) That the crew tried to recover the air on the first portion without enough handbrakes tied on. PS... this is when you guys should start discussing ECP brakes.
55 loads with two engines is probably somewhere in the ballpark of 1 HP / ton. You or someone else who runs trains can correct me, but that sounds like it should not be enough to ascend a 2.2% grade, or enough to descend a 2.2% grade using DB alone. But it should be enough to descend a 2.2% grade with working airbrakes. (Speaking of ECP brakes, the CP's test implementation was on trains that had a similar HP / ton and descended a 2.6% grade.)
So why didn't they have air? Your hypothesis makes sense: they tried to go uphill before the air recovered, and they went downhill instead.
Dan
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.