Edit post

Edit your reply below.

Post Body
Enter your post below.
Rule 112 overrides the special instructions by requiring push-pull proof; and the special instructions override Rule 112 by calling for a minimum number of hand brakes; even if that minimum number is greater than what the push-pull test calls for.  Therefore, in an odd way, the special instructions are a safety factor for the Rule 112 with its push-pull test; and rule 112 is a safety factor for the special instructions.    I agree that it would be essential to make it clear that special instructions cannot supplant GROR rules established by Transport Canada, even though the special instructions can override the results of the push-pull test of Rule 112 as explained above.  But how this clarification might be stipulated I don’t know.  Logically it would be stipulated in the special instructions and not in GROR because it goes without saying that GROR simply means what it says.  There is no need to additionally stipulate that GROR must not be preempted by something else. Therefore, the place to restate the supremacy of the GROR is in the special instructions.  Without that clarification, the special instructions might be assumed to be the sole authority.  The special instructions set the minimum performance and GROR either confirms that minimum is adequate or calls for a higher number until the push-pull test is satisfied.  The danger is that Rule 112 is ignored because the special instructions are interpreted to be adequate; due to the fact that the term minimum implies adequate.  One might wonder why they would have special instructions calling for a minimum number of handbrakes if that minimum is likely to be overridden by the push-pull test required in Rule 112, which calls for more than the minimum.  Why not just let Rule 112 govern alone?  The only plausible explanation that I can see for that is that the minimum set in the special instructions is intended to be a number higher than the number established by a push-pull test.  That way, the minimum includes a safety factor for the push-pull test.  So, in other words, you might find that a push-pull test shows the train secured with 10 handbrakes applied, and yet the special instructions call for 15 minimum.  That would provide a safety factor of 5 extra handbrakes.     However, knowing the minimum requirement of 15, a person would not stop at 10 and perform a push-pull test.  It would be pointless.  A person would set 15 handbrakes because that is the minimum required by the special instructions.  But then knowing that 15 is intended to be more than enough, it would be easy to rationalize that once 15 handbrakes had been set, no push-pull test would be required because the minimum number of 15 has been designed to exceed the requirement of the push-pull test.  That reasoning could seem logical and adequate even though it is against the rules.  It would be like a high wire act performing without a net. If crews became accustomed to that flawed reasoning, they might routinely ignore the push-pull test and rely on the minimum number of handbrakes called for in the special instructions.  But that number varies according to tonnage and grade.  Error might creep into that calculation.  Error might also enter because some of the handbrakes are not working properly.  Then without the confirmation of the push-pull test, the error might go undiscovered, leaving the train on the razor’s edge of securement.  Then just a little thermal expansion or contraction might break the inertia and start the train rolling.
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