Edit post

Edit your reply below.

Post Body
Enter your post below.
[quote user="tree68"]My concern in the first Doon thread was the implication that the crew should have slowed down simply because the water level was judged to be high by a poster here. My entire point was that up until the crew actually saw the water was as high as it was (at 0430, in the dark), they had no reason to do so, as it appeared the railroad itself was not concerned.[/quote] I was the poster you mention here. And I presented the facts as they were available to the public, sic also to BNSF. But one needs to open the links and read them. Neither Euclid nor me said the railroaders needed to slow down (on sight). I said that BNSF should have issued a speed restriction. [quote user="tree68"]Why the railroad was not concerned is a question in and of itself, as has also been discussed.[/quote] It has been discussed but never really answered. Some here even negated that it was an unusual high highwater, though there was the desaster declaration by the state of Iowa. So we disagree on the question is Rule 6.21 applicable or not. And here the circle-the-wagons mentality came into play. [quote user="tree68"]Again, the railroad apparently didn't feel the water level was a problem or they would have issued directives to that effect. To our knowledge, that was not done.[/quote] That doesn't naturally mean BNSF was right in its decision. If there was an accident one needs to question all decisions that might have led to it. Defending is not the way to go. [quote user="tree68"]Even now, as has been mentioned, it has not been established (to our knowledge) that the water level was even a factor. The asteroid idea is a little facetious, but a broken wheel/axle/bearing is not out of the question. It occurs to me that an overheated bearing suddenly being cooled might be problematic.[/quote] Euclid and me have both acknowledged that there are a lot of possible causes. Euclid came to his conclusion that liquefaction was the cause. I think it would have been appropriate for BNSF to issue a speed restriction based on rule 6.21. I haven't made up my mind regarding the causes. In the case of liquefaction I tried to help with facts. [quote user="tree68"]OTOH, unless the head end backed up, the fact that they travelled only as far as they did after the derailment suggests that they had already reduced speed, for whatever reason.[/quote] Looking at the pile-up of the tank cars I doubt it. [quote user="tree68"] VOLKER LANDWEHR A last point, you blamed for covering the bases Huh?[/quote] Sorry, the sentence read as follows: A last point, you blamed Euclid for covering the bases. Your post and my answer all are opinions. Some opinions are backed by facts others perhaps not. So where is the problem? Perhaps that we started to blame a railroad? Please, think about it. Regards, Volker
Tags (Optional)
Tags are keywords that get attached to your post. They are used to categorize your submission and make it easier to search for. To add tags to your post type a tag into the box below and click the "Add Tag" button.
Add Tag