98.6 F = 37 C
Faranheit set up his scale who knows why 32 F = freezing and 180 degrees higher 212 F is boiling temp at a standard atmosphere of 29.92 inches. ( 1013.2 mill bars )
0 F = ~ -17.6 C
BaltACDNot to belittle your operation tree...
No offense taken. I know there will be problems with cold, and the bigger the train, the bigger the potential for problems.
Our Polar trains are 12 cars with a locomotive at each end - still the biggest trains we routinely run, and the only ones that encounter true winter weather.
But the cars all spend all there time in the same area, and are captive on our line, so are not as likely to have the problems that were mentioned. As Shadow noted, things are done differently in areas that are normally moderate than in areas where extremes occur.
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...
Balt we routinely have trailers that have been in warmer areas come north in the winter and end up with frozen brake valves the rigging freezes the shoes freeze right to the drums at times. It isn't just the moisture in the air that can be a problem the stuff that's on the parts can be worse. Also greases have different solid points. We switch to what we call our winter grease in September. It stays flexible to -30 Fahrenheit. Our summer stuff is a brick at zero degrees. It makes a difference.
tree68 SD70Dude Such conditions can expose and magnify pre-existing problems (minor air leaks become major, etc) that would not otherwise have been noticeable. I would suggest that may be a strong factor. It's not unusual for our Polar Express trains to operate in temperatures ranging from the 50's to near zero fahrenheight, sometimes within the span of a week. They aren't 50 car coal or ore trains, but in my experience there is never any real difference. Snow and ice can be factors, but the cold by itself not so much.
SD70Dude Such conditions can expose and magnify pre-existing problems (minor air leaks become major, etc) that would not otherwise have been noticeable.
I would suggest that may be a strong factor. It's not unusual for our Polar Express trains to operate in temperatures ranging from the 50's to near zero fahrenheight, sometimes within the span of a week.
They aren't 50 car coal or ore trains, but in my experience there is never any real difference. Snow and ice can be factors, but the cold by itself not so much.
Not to belittle your operation tree - but you aren't handling 30 - 50 - 100 car or more trains. Extreme cold at the very least makes air hose gaskets hard and brittle and subject to more leakage than at more temperate times. Metal in the trainlines, connectisons and air brake valves will also shrink in the cold and if any connections are the least bit loose also become points of leakage.
Back in the day, alcahol was added at the locomotive air compressor to act as anti-freeze for the trainline. In today's railroads that practice has been outlawed. The air compressors on today's locomotives take the process of drying the air they compress seriously so as to remove virtually any moisture in the braking trainline and thus minimize the potential of moisture freezing in the trainline or brake valves.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
SD70DudeSuch conditions can expose and magnify pre-existing problems (minor air leaks become major, etc) that would not otherwise have been noticeable.
BaltACD Do the cars used in Western Canada have any 'SPECIAL' construction or air brake differences from cars that are AAR legal? Are the cars used in the area of these runaways given any SPECIAL maintenance beyond what is necessary to keep the equipment operating 'legally'?
Do the cars used in Western Canada have any 'SPECIAL' construction or air brake differences from cars that are AAR legal? Are the cars used in the area of these runaways given any SPECIAL maintenance beyond what is necessary to keep the equipment operating 'legally'?
One would have to ask Mechanical personnel about that, I am not sure. But the coal sets out here are generally considered to brake quite well compared to other trains, and are inspected by Mechanical personnel once per round trip (normally when the empty trainset arrives in Kamloops or Prince George, BC). I would not know if anything special is done beyond the standard No. 1 air brake test.
CN does not use any technology like the CP automatic retainer/straight air system NDG mentioned, but for a time after the 2008 runaway crews were instructed to charge trains to 110 PSI instead of 90 prior to departing Luscar, to give additional braking effort. By the time I began working there that practice had been discontinued.
Both this runaway and the 2008 one involved trainsets recently imported from a warmer region, and both took place in extremely cold temperatures. Such conditions can expose and magnify pre-existing problems (minor air leaks become major, etc) that would not otherwise have been noticeable.
I should be hearing more details of the runaway in the next few days.
Greetings from Alberta
-an Articulate Malcontent
SD70DudeI am not hearing the information first-hand, but the references to this particular trainset seem to indicate that "it came up from Memphis" and that it "will be sent back to Memphis". Perhaps Memphis is just the interchange point, and the cars have a different final destination. I am not very familiar with current operations on the ex-IC lines, but I do know that a substantial amount of coal moves from Illinois mines to ports on or near the Gulf coast. Memphis is the largest yard on CN south of Chicago, perhaps it is the maintenance base (home shop) for trainsets handling this traffic? The 2008 Luscar runaway also involved a trainset that was recently imported from down south, and that set was also sent back to where it came from, never to return to Western Canada.
I am not very familiar with current operations on the ex-IC lines, but I do know that a substantial amount of coal moves from Illinois mines to ports on or near the Gulf coast. Memphis is the largest yard on CN south of Chicago, perhaps it is the maintenance base (home shop) for trainsets handling this traffic?
The 2008 Luscar runaway also involved a trainset that was recently imported from down south, and that set was also sent back to where it came from, never to return to Western Canada.
I am not hearing the information first-hand, but the references to this particular trainset seem to indicate that "it came up from Memphis" and that it "will be sent back to Memphis". Perhaps Memphis is just the interchange point, and the cars have a different final destination.
Eerie reminder of the earlier runaway, with more tragic results, caused by very similar neglect of parts of the brake system on a trainset that, I believe, was also brought up from the United States.
Interesting that they say this set (and presumably others to cover the original 'lane') was based out of Memphis; I thought I was fairly familiar with the coal trains on BNSF (ex-Frisco) and NS (ex-Southern, some of which exchange off ex-IC CN going south to east) but didn't know of anything based here either for maintenance or storage for Citirail or anyone else. Will have to look into this. Someone who knows, please give me details.
"Stay with her Wes". He sure did. What a wild ride, thank goodness the engines just skidded to a stop on their sides and were not crushed.
Some facts are slowly starting to filter out about the Luscar runaway, such as the history of the train involved. This trainset (composed of CITX 500000 series cars) had first arrived in Western Canada in early December, as part of CN's search for additional cars to handle increased coal traffic out here. It had previously been in service in the Southern U.S, based out of Memphis. It made one trip in mild weather to Coal Valley (the other Alberta Coal Branch mine, not Luscar) and was then placed in service to Tumbler Ridge, that line has a maximum descending grade of 1.5%. Steep, but not killing.
The incident trip was this trainset's first time on a 3% grade, and in -25°C weather to boot. It seems that the cars' brakes simply did not work as well as they should have, and this was made worse by the cold. The cars were extensively examined by Mechanical personnel before being brought down the rest of the Coal Branch, and I am told even after that the train required heavier than normal brake applications to bring it safely back to the mainline.
After being unloaded this trainset is to be sent back to the Southern U.S, away from cold weather.
More to come.
Thank You.
Thank You Again, Sir, for the update.
I have a copy of "Oh, the Coal Branch" at home, it is an excellent read. Not just for the railroad parts, it gives real insight into what life was like in all the remote, small towns back then.
But I did especially enjoy the photos of the steam engine on its side in the McLeod River, and of the burning caboose.
Cassiar suffered the same fate as Mountain Park, Cadomin, Luscar and so many other formerly booming mining towns. And for all the money the province poured in, rails never did reach Dease Lake or Cassiar.
Retainers are still used every day on the Cadomin rock train, but only while the mine is loading it. Going "over the top" is long since in the past (thank goodness).
Still waiting for more details to emerge about this latest runaway, but I can confirm that the crew did everything right.
NDG Too many runaways.
Too many runaways.
Another runaway on the Coal Branch comes to mind, this one happened around 1980, with Inland Cement's Cadomin rock train. The train still runs today, hauling limestone from a quarry just south of Cadomin to the big cement plant on the west end of Edmonton. The quarry is located on a 2% grade, and Inland personnel load the train themselves, rolling it downhill one car length at a time with their own air system. They have been operating like this ever since the quarry opened around 1960.
The Cadomin area is known for its odd weather, in addition to the horribly strong winds the can be quick, massive temperature changes when a Chinook blows over the mountain. I have seen it go from -30°C (-22°F ) to above freezing in less than a day, and the temperature can vary by just as much between valleys, this being the edge of the Rocky Mountains.
To cope with the cold the quarry uses antifreeze in their air system. At the time they were using what was found to be a substandard type (can't recall the name offhand), which would freeze sooner than it should have. On this day a Chinook was blowing in, and at the quarry it was fairly warm. Like always, during the process of loading the train quite a bit of this "antifreeze" ended up in the cars' brake systems.
The crew picked up the train and departed the quarry, the train behaving normally and no problems apparent. The proceeded away from Cadomin, and like always the Engineer set the air properly to descend the next 2% grade. But by this time they had re-entered the deep freeze, and the so-called antifreeze gummed up and stuck the cars' control valves, preventing the brakes from applying.
The train proceeded to run away down the grade, and derailed at 50+ mph on two tight curves with a wooden trestle between them. Miraculously no one was badly hurt, as the locomotives, last car and caboose did not derail. Everything else piled up in the bush and destroyed the trestle.
After that the quarry started buying better air brake antifreeze, I believe the stuff they use now is rated to something like -50°C (-58°F).
The trestle was never rebuilt, the line was rerouted over a big fill instead, which also eliminated several tight curves. The wreck happened here:
https://www.google.com/maps/place/Yellowhead+County,+AB,+Canada/@53.0720842,-117.2544114,16z/data=!3m1!1e3!4m2!3m1!1s0x53a284349804c243:0x395535572dde608?force=lite
selector Knowing next to nothing about such things (so it's not a risible question), could some of the brakes have been weakened or inoperable in such conditions? What would be the one, two, or three most likely causes of this mishap?
Knowing next to nothing about such things (so it's not a risible question), could some of the brakes have been weakened or inoperable in such conditions? What would be the one, two, or three most likely causes of this mishap?
I do not know any specific facts yet, and have only briefly spoken to my two friends who were onboard. Keeping in mind what they had gone through I did not pry too much; CN, Transport Canada and the TSB will all be questioning them thoroughly in the course of the investigation.
They are both well experienced in mountain railroading, and the Engineer has run trains out of Luscar in every weather condition imaginable. I would be ASTOUNDED if they did anything wrong. So I would put "operator error" at the very bottom of the list of possible causes.
They had 3 GE locomotives, two ES44AC's (the 2870 and 2888) and a C44-9W (IC 2718). The dynamic braking system was not working on the 2718 but this by itself would not cause a runaway. Many trains have been run there with less dynamic braking capability than the two ES44AC's are capable of. Many others have been power braked down the hill without using dynamics at all. The 2888 was leading, and the ES44AC's are all in pretty good shape and quite reliable, so "locomotive problems" is not a likely cause.
The cold weather was likely a contributing factor, but again this by itself would not cause a runaway. Trains are run there year-round, sometimes in the worst cold imagineable, Luscar being halfway up a mountain.
If the track had not been plowed and snow was built up over the rail this would have severely impeded braking ability. But the Engineering forces are supposed to plow the track before a train departs to Luscar, and in the past crews (including this particular Engineer) have refused to leave the mine if the hill was not properly plowed. So I would also put "track condition" near the bottom of the possibility list.
I would say the most likely cause of this runaway is that something went wrong with the cars' air brakes. There are numerous possibilities, including:
- A complete or partial blockage of the brake pipe (snow/ice/dirt buildup, closed angle cock, etc) could mean that not all the brakes would apply when the Engineer set the air. But he would still have been able to put the train into emergency from the tail end, by using the EOT. The investigators should be able to tell from the black box download whether this was a factor or not.
- A unintentional release of the air brakes occurred. This can happen without warning if a car starts leaking back into the brake pipe after the air brakes are set, or for several other reasons, and may not be immediately apparent to the Engineer until the train starts accelerating unexpectedly. Again, the investigators should be able to tell if this happened from the download.
- The load/empty adjustment feature on the cars were not working properly, which could have caused the cars to only apply a light brake that would not skid wheels on empties, when in reality they were loaded. This was a major cause of the other major runaway that happened on the Luscar spur, that train got up to 52 mph in 2008.
- The cars' brakes were working properly, but something else impeded braking. The de-icing and latex sprays this mine applies to the inside of the cars (and again to the top of the coal load) come to mind, if the spray bar is not turned off between cars the wheels will become coated in the slippery liquid. But they spray every train, so this should not be the sole cause.
Or something else went wrong with the cars' control valves, and these cars were simply not capable of providing enough braking force to hold the train back on a 3% grade. I am not a carman so cannot speak to all the detailed possibilities.
Thank You, Sir.
I hope the crew of the runaway had a clean pair of underwear handy. Going 53 MPH doen a 3 percent grade with all of those curves would make me mess my pants.
Back on topic:
VerMontanan What would be the (ultimate) destination of this coal? Prince Rupert? And given that the train was only 5369 tons, a midget in CN terms, would this cut of cars eventually be put together with others to form a much longer train?
What would be the (ultimate) destination of this coal? Prince Rupert? And given that the train was only 5369 tons, a midget in CN terms, would this cut of cars eventually be put together with others to form a much longer train?
The coal is destined to either Prince Rupert or Vancouver for export. The Luscar mine mainly produces steelmaking coal.
The weight listed in the Transport Canada release I posted works out to a gross weight of around 94 tons per car. I believe this is inaccurate as the mines normally load very close to the 286,000 lb limit.
As for train operations and switching, the grades, curves and track layout at Luscar limit trains to a maximum of 58 cars. A full train from that mine is run at either 116 or 174 cars on the mainline and split into 2 or 3 cuts for loading. There are staging yards near Edson and Cadomin to leave the rest of the train in. Loading at the other Coal Branch mine (Coal Valley) works in a similar fashion, but with 2 longer cuts of up to 112 cars each due to the longer track layout there.
I am told that the trainset involved in the runaway had a total of 116 cars and had previously been in service to the Tumbler Ridge, BC mines northeast of Prince George. It had not been to Alberta for a significant amount of time (if ever).
Miningman and CX500 are right about Canada's staged conversion to metric, and the continuing use of Imperial measurements by the railways.
I cannot speak for CP, but CN measures temperature in Celsius, not Fahrenheit. All our line side Hot Box Detectors broadcast readings in Celsius, and hot & cold weather restrictions are measured in Celsius too.
The only Fahrenheit reading am familiar with is the human body temperature of 98.6. I could not tell you offhand what it is in Celsius.
Otherwise I can think in both systems, owing to my metric schooling and employment on a railroad. But Celsius always has seemed more logical for temperature, 0 and 100 both being significant points for a universal substance we all encounter every day.
I know that 100°F was originally supposed to be the human body temperature, but what does 0°F stand for?
The United States is the only major country left still using the Fahrenheit system, everyone else has converted to Celsius.
I could always make everyone unhappy and start giving readings in Kelvin instead...
erikemKelvin comes up rather frequently in the electronics biz
And in the color of light dealing with light bulbs and photography.
_____________
"A stranger's just a friend you ain't met yet." --- Dave Gardner
Understood.
Kelvin comes up rather frequently in the electronics biz, as thermal noise is based on absolute temperature, and make frequent use of the Celsius to Kelvin conversion.
All I can say is that it has been many years since I worried about Kelvin.
Johnny
Deggesty Oh, why not use the Kelvin scale--at zero, everything is frozen, and water ice melts about 216.--and the water boils at 316?
Oh, why not use the Kelvin scale--at zero, everything is frozen, and water ice melts about 216.--and the water boils at 316?
Freezing point of water is 273K plus a bit of change.
373K (plus a bit of change) corresponds to where the vapor pressure of water is equal to standard atmospheric pressure.
IIRC, 0F corresponds to the lowest temperature acheiveable with ice and NaCl and 100F was set to be body temperature.
Of course, when we talk about body temperature, we really bear down of tenths of a degree.
IIRC, the person who establlblised average body temperature reported it as 37C, with the implication that individual body temperatures would vary from that point. 98.6F is 37C exactly.
For most of the work that I do with temperature, absolute scales are usually the way to go and conversion is trivial between Rankine and Kelvin. With the so-so exception of BTU and water, any conversion from energy input to temperature rise will require looking up the appropriate coefficient.
And there are 360 degrees around the world.
I am currently reading Sam Clemens(aka Mark Twain)'s work The Innocents Abroad, wherein he purportedly describes an excursion he, in company with about 149 other people, made to Europe and the Middle East in 1867. He mentions a young man from the Midwest who was greatly disturbed by the fact that noon came sooner every day as the ship went east--he had a new watch that seemed to be losing time no matter how much he advanced the regulator. I will see if there is comment on the young man's reaction as his watch seems to gain time at noon each day on the return across the Atlantic.
By the way, we here observe Denver time part of the year, and New Orleans time most of the year.
I looked the coin "florin" up--in England it was valued at two bob (shillings) at the end of its use; so a florin was valued at a little less than a half crown.
selector Semper Vaporo Maybe you frequently use "Centigrade" but what does a mispelling of one-hundredth of a Grad (an angular measure similar to Degrees, but 400 to a circle instead of 360) have to do with temperature? Centum = one hundred Gradus = gradient or step. Base ten, IOW. Degree = unit of temperature irrespective of scale. No hands, pounds, stones, feet, fahrenheits, sheep, pimples, or follicles harmed in this discussion.
Semper Vaporo Maybe you frequently use "Centigrade" but what does a mispelling of one-hundredth of a Grad (an angular measure similar to Degrees, but 400 to a circle instead of 360) have to do with temperature?
Maybe you frequently use "Centigrade" but what does a mispelling of one-hundredth of a Grad (an angular measure similar to Degrees, but 400 to a circle instead of 360) have to do with temperature?
Centum = one hundred
Gradus = gradient or step. Base ten, IOW.
Degree = unit of temperature irrespective of scale.
No hands, pounds, stones, feet, fahrenheits, sheep, pimples, or follicles harmed in this discussion.
HA! It went right past me that "degree" is an overloaded term.
Semper Vaporo
Pkgs.
Have discovered and understand that Guineas are still used in Horse Racing ( evident by the Queens Plate's purse ) and in the purchase and trading of Rams ( not the Dodge type), you know Bah bah, those Rams.
'Tis a lovely thing!
Paul of Covington cx500 Some overhead clearances on the highways are shown in both feet and metres All this quibbling over measurements is a waste of time. The real issue that's important is the spelling of "metres" instead of "meters"! Sorry about that.
cx500 Some overhead clearances on the highways are shown in both feet and metres
All this quibbling over measurements is a waste of time. The real issue that's important is the spelling of "metres" instead of "meters"!
Sorry about that.
cx500Some overhead clearances on the highways are shown in both feet and metres
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.