.
greyhounds OK, can we please just bury Mr. Burkhardt? I believe he didn't handle this well. I don't know if anyone could have handled this well. He's gone. Destroyed. The MM&A is also gone and destroyed. And my personal belief is that negligence was involved all the way up from the engineer who allegedly didn't set the handbrakes properly to Mr. Burkhardt who knew, or should have known, that the train consisted of out of date tank cars handling something that could kill. Normal procedures were not enough. Do a safety audit. Identify the weak points. Reinforce them. It doesn't seem that that happened. I'll guess that Burkhardt first went in to denial. He's human. I think that this will eventually kill him. Maybe not soon, but it will haunt him forever and he'll eventually seek solace in his own death. He's not a bad guy, but he shoulders the ultimate responsibility for this terrible event. He was in charge when this happened. Just my opinion. You can delegate authority, but you cannot delegate responsibility. I think Burkhardt understands that. And, in time, this will kill him. Again, just my opinion. So let's just quit beating a walking corpse.
OK, can we please just bury Mr. Burkhardt?
I believe he didn't handle this well. I don't know if anyone could have handled this well. He's gone. Destroyed. The MM&A is also gone and destroyed. And my personal belief is that negligence was involved all the way up from the engineer who allegedly didn't set the handbrakes properly to Mr. Burkhardt who knew, or should have known, that the train consisted of out of date tank cars handling something that could kill. Normal procedures were not enough.
Do a safety audit. Identify the weak points. Reinforce them. It doesn't seem that that happened.
I'll guess that Burkhardt first went in to denial. He's human. I think that this will eventually kill him. Maybe not soon, but it will haunt him forever and he'll eventually seek solace in his own death. He's not a bad guy, but he shoulders the ultimate responsibility for this terrible event. He was in charge when this happened. Just my opinion.
You can delegate authority, but you cannot delegate responsibility. I think Burkhardt understands that. And, in time, this will kill him. Again, just my opinion.
So let's just quit beating a walking corpse.
Well, I am not so sure what will become of Mr. Burkhardt. We really do not know what caused this catastrophe yet. So far, there is no plausible explanation of how the air brakes got released in a way that the release completed after everyone had left the scene.
We certainly don’t know whether the engineer set hand brakes or not. It is only Mr. Burkhardt who has accused the engineer of failing to set hand brakes, and he has clearly demonstrated his willingness to falsely accuse others of causing this disaster when he blamed the fire department. And just this morning, Burkhardt called the engineer a hero for making a last ditch effort and preventing some of the tank cars from running away.
There is a real possibility that this was a criminal act of sabotage by one or more people who have not been apprehended. It sounds like the police are definitely leaving that door open. If that turns out to be what happened, Mr. Burkhardt and the engineer will be completely vindicated because they will have had nothing to do with causing the wreck. Their railroading careers will go on. So I am not ready to jump to any conclusions about the fate of Mr. Burkhardt.
Ulrich Probably not a bad guy. His inability to communicate properly probably makes a bad situation that much worse. Now we know why the top guys make the big bucks: they are ultimately responsible for everything that goes on in their organizations. So many people bemoan the fact that the CEO makes far too much in relation to what they make, but they fail to realize that the CEO is being compensated , in large measure, for taking on the responsibility of the entire organization. That's why Burkhardt is facing the music now and not the dingaling(s) who caused the accident. Being a leader has its downside. At any moment a twit can bring you and your entire organization down around your ears.
Probably not a bad guy. His inability to communicate properly probably makes a bad situation that much worse. Now we know why the top guys make the big bucks: they are ultimately responsible for everything that goes on in their organizations. So many people bemoan the fact that the CEO makes far too much in relation to what they make, but they fail to realize that the CEO is being compensated , in large measure, for taking on the responsibility of the entire organization. That's why Burkhardt is facing the music now and not the dingaling(s) who caused the accident. Being a leader has its downside. At any moment a twit can bring you and your entire organization down around your ears.
Bucyrus greyhounds OK, can we please just bury Mr. Burkhardt? I believe he didn't handle this well. I don't know if anyone could have handled this well. He's gone. Destroyed. The MM&A is also gone and destroyed. And my personal belief is that negligence was involved all the way up from the engineer who allegedly didn't set the handbrakes properly to Mr. Burkhardt who knew, or should have known, that the train consisted of out of date tank cars handling something that could kill. Normal procedures were not enough. Do a safety audit. Identify the weak points. Reinforce them. It doesn't seem that that happened. I'll guess that Burkhardt first went in to denial. He's human. I think that this will eventually kill him. Maybe not soon, but it will haunt him forever and he'll eventually seek solace in his own death. He's not a bad guy, but he shoulders the ultimate responsibility for this terrible event. He was in charge when this happened. Just my opinion. You can delegate authority, but you cannot delegate responsibility. I think Burkhardt understands that. And, in time, this will kill him. Again, just my opinion. So let's just quit beating a walking corpse. Well, I am not so sure what will become of Mr. Burkhardt. We really do not know what caused this catastrophe yet. So far, there is no plausible explanation of how the air brakes got released in a way that the release completed after everyone had left the scene. We certainly don’t know whether the engineer set hand brakes or not. It is only Mr. Burkhardt who has accused the engineer of failing to set hand brakes, and he has clearly demonstrated his willingness to falsely accuse others of causing this disaster when he blamed the fire department. And just this morning, Burkhardt called the engineer a hero for making a last ditch effort and preventing some of the tank cars from running away. There is a real possibility that this was a criminal act of sabotage by one or more people who have not been apprehended. It sounds like the police are definitely leaving that door open. If that turns out to be what happened, Mr. Burkhardt and the engineer will be completely vindicated because they will have had nothing to do with causing the wreck. Their railroading careers will go on. So I am not ready to jump to any conclusions about the fate of Mr. Burkhardt.
The release of the air brakes, on the other hand, should not have caused this accident, if sufficient hand brakes were applied. I think that's the reason for Mr. Burkhardt's latest statement that the loco fire and its aftermath (the release of the air brakes) were a factor in the accident but not its cause.
As far as why the air brakes released, while I may have missed it, I haven't seen anything indicating how much time elapsed between the loco shutdown and the runaway. Without an air source, the brakes will eventually bleed off. They can also release for other reasons (anything that increases train line pressure in a car can set off a cascade of releases). In the U.S., FRA regulations specifically prohibit the use of a train's air brake to hold equipment standing unattended on a grade (49 CFR 232.103(n)), as this train was, presumably for these reasons.
Bucyrus The latest news is about the police having evidence that has caused them to open a criminal investigation, but they won’t say what that evidence is. One recent statement was made in the context of being an example of criminal evidence, is as follows: “Canadian federal officials said Tuesday the train in Nantes should not have moved, even it had lost air pressure to the brakes, prompting suspicion of unauthorized actions.” Once again, this indicates a misunderstanding of railroad air brakes. The statement is half true. It is true in that the engine was not needed to be running and pumping air into the trainline to hold the brakes on as Burkhardt had falsely asserted. As others have explained, that would actually release the brakes. However, if air pressure were lost from the brake cylinders, it would have indeed caused the train to move. And there are several possible scenarios whereby the air could have been released from the cylinders, either by mistake, legitiment intent, or by vandalism. So I don’t see the statement above leading to a certain conclusion that there had to be foul play. But here is another air brake question. I fully understand bleeding cars that have been cut off with their brakes dynamited. But if the air brakes were properly applied on that oil train (without hand brakes applied), what would happen if somebody walked the train and bled all the cars? I assume it would totally release the brakes, just like bleeding a standing cut of cars to switch them.
The latest news is about the police having evidence that has caused them to open a criminal investigation, but they won’t say what that evidence is. One recent statement was made in the context of being an example of criminal evidence, is as follows:
“Canadian federal officials said Tuesday the train in Nantes should not have moved, even it had lost air pressure to the brakes, prompting suspicion of unauthorized actions.”
Once again, this indicates a misunderstanding of railroad air brakes. The statement is half true. It is true in that the engine was not needed to be running and pumping air into the trainline to hold the brakes on as Burkhardt had falsely asserted. As others have explained, that would actually release the brakes.
However, if air pressure were lost from the brake cylinders, it would have indeed caused the train to move. And there are several possible scenarios whereby the air could have been released from the cylinders, either by mistake, legitiment intent, or by vandalism. So I don’t see the statement above leading to a certain conclusion that there had to be foul play.
But here is another air brake question. I fully understand bleeding cars that have been cut off with their brakes dynamited. But if the air brakes were properly applied on that oil train (without hand brakes applied), what would happen if somebody walked the train and bled all the cars? I assume it would totally release the brakes, just like bleeding a standing cut of cars to switch them.
Your statement about bleeding cars is correct. If someone walked along a train bleeding the cars, the air brakes would release. However, if sufficient hand brakes were applied to hold the train, the train would not move until the hand brakes had also been released.
A the present time, we can speculate as a "working hypothesis" that there was either deliberate mayhem or that a fireman made an error when he shut down the locomotive and somehow released the brakes at the same time. And that either there was deliberate mayhem or an insufficient number of handbrakes were applied (or none at all) to hold the train without airbrakes.
But again, either the engineer should have been awakened or a responsible official gotten to the train as soon as possble.
Regarding Ed Burkhardt, we are all human and in the press of horror can make mistakes. His "crime" in my book is not any greater than some of elected officials, and you can decide who they are and we may have differing opinions, and basically he is a decent and honest human being. If I were in his position, with the wealth he now commands, before he loses some of it, I would announce that I would be dedicating the rest of my life and fortune to helping the stricken community and act accordingly. I think there is a good chance he will do just that!
I imagine some of our Canadian forum members would know more about this, but I am under the impression that criminal negligence laws are different in that Country than in the U.S and the Criminal investigation is focused on whether or not the M,M,& A (in the person of the engineer and possibly mangement (even Mr. Burkhardt)) commited any felonies.
I base this on the fact that there are police officials being quoted today as saying they do not believe there was any intentional sabotage.
Of course the investigation is far from over...
"I Often Dream of Trains"-From the Album of the Same Name by Robyn Hitchcock
Possibly my point of view is not shared by others and is appropriate for where I live and what close friends have been through. But to my way of thinking, if trains in the USA and Canada with loaded combustable material, not just material considered hazardous, but wood, coal, oil, gas, cerain plastics, etc., are regularly left unattended, accessable to any bystander who would be tresspassing, the both governments and the various railroad managements are guilty of criminal neglegence ---in a post 11 September 2001 environment. I do not see where the Canadian Police have the evidence to discount deliberate sabotogue.
I agree Dave... since 911 we've gone over the top with airport security yet anyone even today can approach a stopped train and find the cab unlocked, open and unattended. Even where no law exists to require crews to be in attendance, common sense should prevail.
It has been suggested that we are being unseemly for criticizing Mr. Burkhardt because he has had his reputation crushed forever and therefore, he is as good as dead.
My point about terrorism or vandalism is only that, until someone at least develops a plausible theory of how the air brakes got released, one cannot rule out terrorism or vandalism being a cause. And if that proves to be the case, Mr. Burkhardt will instantly be forgiven even if he is the top guy on the railroad. The top guy will not be blamed for the wreck if it was caused by a malicious act.
But in the meantime, that top guy deserves all the criticism he can get. Not only is he deflecting blame from himself, but he is also placing it on others who do not deserve it. And he is using the media spotlight to level those false accusations. Some people say he is actually a nice guy, and that it is just that he has lost perspective. Maybe so, but if that causes him to place false blame, and destroy the lives of others, he needs to be called on it regardless of what his future holds.
Now, Mr. Burkhardt is telling the world that he does not believe the engineer who claims to have set sufficient hand brakes. Based on what, does he not beieve the engineer? Even if no hand brakes were found set, that does not prove that none were set. And it also does not prove that set brakes were not released by someone other than the engineer.
I have no idea what the police mean when they say they have found evidence of a crime. But I don’t recall that they have ruled out terrorism or vandalism. And Mr. Burkhardt has also played a prominent role in the terrorism angle. He has said that he has evidence of tampering. And yet he has ruled out terrorism or a criminal act on several occasions.
Maybe this is just the fog of war, and the media are 100% wrong about everything to do with railroads. But, until this all plays out, I will work with what I have, and speculate to the best of my ability. I’ll bet that is what the people of Lac-Megantic are doing.
An act of sabotage perhaps, but the railroad would still be culpable to the extent it left the train unattended for some time.
Bucyrus It has been suggested that we are being unseemly for criticizing Mr. Burkhardt because he has had his reputation crushed forever and therefore, he is as good as dead. My point about terrorism or vandalism is only that, until someone at least develops a plausible theory of how the air brakes got released, one cannot rule out terrorism or vandalism being a cause. And if that proves to be the case, Mr. Burkhardt will instantly be forgiven even if he is the top guy on the railroad. The top guy will not be blamed for the wreck if it was caused by a malicious act. But in the meantime, that top guy deserves all the criticism he can get. Not only is he deflecting blame from himself, but he is also placing it on others who do not deserve it. And he is using the media spotlight to level those false accusations. Some people say he is actually a nice guy, and that it is just that he has lost perspective. Maybe so, but if that causes him to place false blame, and destroy the lives of others, he needs to be called on it regardless of what his future holds. Now, Mr. Burkhardt is telling the world that he does not believe the engineer who claims to have set sufficient hand brakes. Based on what, does he not beieve the engineer? Even if no hand brakes were found set, that does not prove that none were set. And it also does not prove that set brakes were not released by someone other than the engineer. I have no idea what the police mean when they say they have found evidence of a crime. But I don’t recall that they have ruled out terrorism or vandalism. And Mr. Burkhardt has also played a prominent role in the terrorism angle. He has said that he has evidence of tampering. And yet he has ruled out terrorism or a criminal act on several occasions. Maybe this is just the fog of war, and the media are 100% wrong about everything to do with railroads. But, until this all plays out, I will work with what I have, and speculate to the best of my ability. I’ll bet that is what the people of Lac-Megantic are doing.
I completely agree with you that Ed Burkhardt has badly mishandled communicating M,M & A's position on this accident, poor reporting or not. His latest statements do seem to indicate that he has changed his mind about the cause.
I also am sure that nothing has been completely ruled out as there is a very long way to go in the investigation and it would be negligent of both law enforcement and the transportation safety to not look at all evidence and possibilities.
My point was that there have been some statements from the investigators to the effect that so far they have not uncovered anything pointing to sabotage/terrorism and the current "working theory" would seem to be that this was not a deliberate act.
Time will tell...
Falcon48but I believe that modern locos have a pressure maintaining feature, which would result in maintaining a reduced pressure in the train line even though the brakes are set (
These were not "modern" locomotives. They may not have been so equipped.
The Route of the Broadway Lion The Largest Subway Layout in North Dakota.
Here there be cats. LIONS with CAMERAS
BroadwayLion Falcon48but I believe that modern locos have a pressure maintaining feature, which would result in maintaining a reduced pressure in the train line even though the brakes are set ( These were not "modern" locomotives. They may not have been so equipped.
According to explanations here by our air brake experts, the pressure maintaining feature would not have played a role in this incident if the brakes were properly set. If they were properly set, the train line would be 100% exhausted and open to atmosphere. The brake cylinders would have been fully presurized and holding the brakes fully applied.
Therefore, it would be impossible for the brakes to release due to a slow and unintended pressurization of the train line. Being open to atmosphere, the train line could not possibly be pressurized.
So the only way the brakes could release on their own, would be for the pressuized cylinders to leak off, or for someone to walk the train and pull all the bleed rods. If the cylinders were to simply leak off, it would not have happend in just a matter of an hour or so. Most likely, it would have taken several days minimum.
BucyrusAccording to explanations here by our air brake experts, the pressure maintaining feature would not have played a role in this incident if the brakes were properly set. If they were properly set, the train line would be 100% exhausted and open to atmosphere. The brake cylinders would have been fully presurized and holding the brakes fully applied.
Aye! But here is the rub... The train line was NOT opened to the atmosphere. Apparently they wanted to be able to get under way more quickly in the morning with out starting the brakes from zero. If that was the case, heaven help that crew and the railroad.
LION was under the impression (right or wrong) that there was no relief crew for this job. They tied up and went to a motel and to bed, in the morning they intended to come back and continue their journey. It is a job that called for a caboose, but of course they do not use those things any more. They should have had a caboose. The Engineer should have shut down his engines, set the hand brakes on the engines and on the proper number of cars and then made him self comfortable in the caboose for the night.
BTW: Do not some train crews simply tie up their trains and take a lunch break somewhere?
Newer subway trains in New York City no longer have hand brakes. (Too many kids playing with them?).
They now have parking brakes, and they are automatically set. LION is not sure of the details (details are at the other end of de cats) but anyway, they are automatic and seem like a good thing.
ROAR
QUOTE FROM ED BURKHARDT:
The engineer on the runaway train that leveled much of a Quebec town with a deadly blast apparently didn’t properly set the hand brakes.
“It’s very questionable whether the hand brakes were properly applied on this train,” Edward Burkhardt, head honcho of the Montreal, Maine & Atlantic Railway, said Wednesday. “As a matter of fact, I’ll say they weren’t; otherwise, we wouldn’t have had this incident.”
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Oh really? If it is very questionable, how do you come to a “matter of fact” conclusion?
Burkhardt concludes that if the hand brakes were applied, the runaway would not have occurred. Sure, that is 100% true. But how do you conclude that the engineer failed to properly apply hand brakes when there is a possibility that someone else released them after the engineer applied them?
After all, it was Mr. Burkhardt that earlier, when he was trying to blame the fire department, made a point of telling us that the engineer was “NOT THE LAST PERSON TO TOUCH THAT TRAIN.”
And it was Mr. Burkhardt who has told us that he has evidence that the train was “tampered with.”
So now he says that his investigation concludes that hand brakes were not set on the cars. Yeah right. I’ll bet it does. [subtle sarcasm]
Would someone who can reach Burkhardt give him some good advice?
If the engineer said he set the handbrakes properly, I believe he did so. Because intense investigation of the wreckage by qualified people could verify that fact or prove otherwise.
Again, I have long felt that both the Canadian government and certainly the Obama administration have long underestimated the threat of terror. They go overboard on security on some matters, and then completely neglect others. Frisking boarding passengers at stations and then let combustable product loaded trains sit unmanned?
While Mr. Burkhardt's statements have made him a poster child on how not to lead in a crisis, he does seem sincere in stating that the most recent information he has indicates that the handbrakes were not properly set by the M,M & A crewman. He certainly does not have much to gain personally or professionally by making the statement (in fact he may well have made things worse for his company legally).
As far as the veracity of the engineer's story, I have no way to evaluate it based on anything I have read or watched. Even Honest, competent people sometimes make huge errors in judgement and then try to cover it up (even in situations were they know that their explanation of events will be carefully scrutinized). The investigation, I'm certain, will uncover what he actually did or didn't do.
I find it interesting that while most of the folks on this discussion thread agree that Burkhardt has mishandled things,some of the same posters cite some of his earlier contradictory statements as "possible proof" that this was a terrorist attack.....
However, DaveKlepper and others point about lax security on parked Haz-mat trains is well made and that may well be a "lesson learned" here, whatever the cause.
I run a late 1950's locomotive with pressure maintaining.
If the engineer made a service application, there would still be pressure in the brake pipe.
One thing to consider about the handbrakes is that there's applied, and then there's applied.
It's possible that an appropriate number of handbrakes were applied, but only in a cursory manner - perhaps just until resistance was felt. If that were the case, the brakes would have been applied, but not properly. If that were the case, then anything that compromised whatever was holding the train would allow it to begin moving.
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...
carnej1 I find it interesting that while most of the folks on this discussion thread agree that Burkhardt has mishandled things,some of the same posters cite some of his earlier contradictory statements as "possible proof" that this was a terrorist attack.....
I am not sure what your point is in saying that. Burkhardt has earlier claimed there was nothing to suggest it was a terrorist attack. And he has claimed that he has evidence that the train was "tampered with."
If trains never moved if all securing procedures were followed then focus on prevention is all that is needed. However Murphy is always around the corner and the mitigation of any runaways whatever the cause is of the upmost importance. That can be manned or unmaned trains or just a cut of cars.. Stop any runaway a quickly as possible with a sufficient PREVENTION SYSTEM ! Of course no system can be fool proof.
tree68 One thing to consider about the handbrakes is that there's applied, and then there's applied. It's possible that an appropriate number of handbrakes were applied, but only in a cursory manner - perhaps just until resistance was felt. If that were the case, the brakes would have been applied, but not properly. If that were the case, then anything that compromised whatever was holding the train would allow it to begin moving.
it seems like there are a number of scenarios that could absolve the engineer.
1. he could, for example, have "applied" the hand brakes, performed a quick test by releasing the air brakes, and when the train didn't move - re applied the air, and left. anyone that has ever come back to a parking lot to find their car not in park and on the other side of the lot can imagine why the train could roll in this scenario. sometimes it just takes a bit for things to get going, esp when they have a little resistance.
2. what was the cause of the fire on the locomotive? could it have been arson? did the arsonist come back later on to finish what he started? it doesn't exactly take a scientist to release a hand brake (or bleed the air). Finding those hand brakes not set wouldn't exactly prove anything as far as the engineer is concerned.
daveklepper Again, I have long felt that both the Canadian government and certainly the Obama administration have long underestimated the threat of terror. They go overboard on security on some matters, and then completely neglect others. Frisking boarding passengers at stations and then let combustable product loaded trains sit unmanned?
zardozWhich is why it is always best to apply the handbrakes AFTER the car has been put in emergency, or at least full service.
Yep.
Mr. Burkhardt, CEO of Rail World Inc. and the MM&A made a serious blunder after he arrived in Quebec. The business language of Quebec is French, and Mr. Burkhardt talked in English, and did not bring any translators. This naturally caused outrage in Quebec, and even the Prime Minister was upset about this.
I would think that someone on Mr. Burkhardt's staff or one of his lawyers, etc. would have known that he should have spoken in French or had a translator with him. Perhaps he never got told, or it never made it up the chain of command.
S&S
Modeling the Pennsy and loving it!
I find it interesting that while most of the folks on this discussion thread agree that Burkhardt has mishandled things...
So, after twenty pages;
Why don't you wait until the TSB has done its job and reported their findings before you go and make bigger fools of yourselves?
BigJimjury by popular (uneducated) opinion
What was I thinking. Ok everyone, no more talking about the train related story on the train related forum until after there's nothing left to talk about.
After the TSB rules on the matter we can all just post "oh, ok."
I've got some updates on MMA from huffingtonpost.com and huffingtonpost.ca.
The engineer who was responsible for the train that derailed was involved in another incident not quite a year ago. On August 3, 2012, engineer Tom Harding operated a train that derailed in a Canadian National yard in Ste-Hyacinthe, Quebec. The CN spokesman wanted to make it very clear that Mr. Harding was a MMA employee at the time. http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2013/07/11/tom-harding-lac-megantic-explosion_n_3581552.html?utm_hp_ref=canada-business
20 people are now confirmed dead, and MMA and Rail World Inc. CEO Mr. Burkhardt said that "We think he applied some hand brakes, but the question is, did he apply enough of them? ... He said he applied 11 hand brakes. We think that's not true. Initially we believed him, but now we don't."
The article then takes a darker turn, where several MMA employees refer to several Quebec residents as a "------- frog" Here are some quotes from the article:
"In a sign of the tensions present, the Montreal Gazette reported Wednesday that an MMA employee from Illinois called a local resident a “------- frog” during a dispute over the taking of pictures. Gazette photographer John Kenney was taking pictures of parked MMA rail cars near Lac-Megantic Tuesday when an MMA employee, identifying himself only as an investigator from Illinois, “approached [Kenney] and screamed at him menacingly,” the newspaper reported."
"When a local resident, Alex Larabee, intervened in the dispute, he reportedly got an earful of abuse. “I asked him if [the rail cars] were leaking. I asked in French and he started swearing at me in English, calling me a ------- frog and all that,” Larabée said, as quoted at the Gazette. “It really shows their flagrant lack of respect for us (residents),” Larabee said."
"Quebec Premier Pauline Marois toured the devastated town Thursday, taking another opportunity to criticize MMA for its response to the crisis. Marois had earlier faulted Burkhardt for what she said was a slow response, and called the company's chief behaviour "deplorable'' and "unacceptable.'' She renewed some of the criticism Thursday."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/10/quebec-train-crash-brakes_n_3574564.html Link is R rated for language.
Another article said that engineer was torn up about the wreck. "An employee at the inn where Harding slept one or two nights per week says she specifically remembers the horrified expression on his face when he scrambled outside following a massive blast and saw the inferno engulfing the town." "Catherine Pomerleau-Pelletier doesn't remember hearing him utter a word amid the chaos, but she thinks she was looking into his eyes the instant he realized his unmanned, crude-oil-filled train had just slammed into the downtown core."
" "I saw him arrive, I looked at him and I didn't say a word or anything because he looked very, very, very shaken up," said Pomerleau-Pelletier, a barmaid and receptionist at the century-old l'Eau Berge inn.
"He didn't do anything, but his face was pretty descriptive."
"It said everything." "
In addition the article added this bit of information from Mr. Harding's taxi driver that night. I find it rather interesting:
"The taxi driver met Harding on Friday night at the spot where he parked the train before it roared into town. He said his regular customer seemed fine, with nothing out of the ordinary. However, Andre Turcotte did say that the idling train appeared to be belching out more smoke than usual, so much so that he recalled that oil droplets from the locomotive exhaust landed on his car. He said he asked Harding twice whether the puffs of smoke were particularly hazardous for the environment. Turcotte said his client calmly responded that he had followed company directives to deal with the issue. A short time after they left, the locomotive caught fire, a blaze that was extinguished by the local fire department."
http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2013/07/11/colette-roy-laroche-lac-megantic-mayor_n_3581615.html
Good people can make serious mistakes. No one meant for this to happen. Probably the best outcome at this point is a review of best practices and procedures to ensure this doesn't happen again. I'm all for rail moving more oil, but I'm also for improving the system to make sure that safety remains paramount. Too bad that it took an accident like this to make that happen.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.