Edit post

Edit your reply below.

Post Body
Enter your post below.
[quote user="edblysard"]Well, the original starting post for this thread actually didn’t contain a question at all, it simply was a platform for the poster to present his “conclusion”.[/quote] Ed, My original post was not intended to ask a specific question.  It was just to lay out a basis (a platform) for a discussion.  My point was that I could see several complications that have not yet been explained in the other big thread or in any of the news articles.  I did actually ask two questions, but there are several other questions implied in what I said, and they should be fairly obvious.  One question is to ask why Burkhardt continually refers to a requirement to set 11 handbrakes.  Apparently, that is the MM&A guideline or minimum number.  He applies that number with the assurance that it would be enough without any additional proviso that the engineer must set enough handbrakes brakes to hold the train, and that number might actually be higher than the specified 11 handbrakes.  So I asked specific questions to see if someone would confirm or clarify my basic understanding that 11 handbrakes cannot just be a so-called “magic number” known in advance and applied without further question.  Burkhardt has never mentioned applying handbrakes and then using the push-pull test to see if they hold. Then I mentioned Rule 112, which does indeed require that enough handbrakes be applied to prevent the train from moving.  I mentioned the push-pull test as being the practical and accepted method of determining whether enough handbrakes are applied to prevent movement.  Next, I brought up the quote from the TSB of Canada that says: “it is impossible to verify hand-brake effectiveness by pulling or pushing cars on high grades (so) locomotive engineers cannot accurately know that management’s expectations have been met every time cars are secured.” This raises some questions:  If it is impossible to obtain a useful result from the push-pull test, how are you supposed to know that you have set enough brakes to hold the train?  Why hasn’t Burkhardt mentioned the push-pull test or confirmed that it is not used because it is worthless?  And most of all; why does the TSB conclude that it is impossible to verify handbrake effectiveness with the push-pull test on high grades? At the end of this first post, I did come to a conclusion: “I conclude that even if the investigation shows that the engineer did not set enough handbrakes, or did not set them tight enough, a large part of the blame is going to be placed on the MM&A Ry, and on the Canadian regulations.” That conclusion still seems reasonable.  It is somewhat confirmed by the fact that the TSB is moving at lightning speed to make several policy changes that go far beyond what the engineer of the oil train did.  In any case, it is only my personal conclusion.  Later in the thread, I was personally attacked for presenting a conclusion which I insisted was the only possible conclusion, and then challenging everybody to agree with my conclusion.  I don’t see where I did any such thing.  The beauty of the forum is that threads are a running transcript of record.  If there is any disagreement about who said what, all you have to do is go back and look at what was said.
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