charlie hebdoWhat makes you so special?
It's not a snob or privilege thing; had he contradicted my opinion by simply saying I disagree with that view of the FRA because [reasons] -- and of course there might be; I don't know what he was going to say -- there would have been no trouble.
charlie hebdoAnd what precisely is your experience with the FRA? In what capacity?
My problem with Rahm Emanuel is more of a gut feeling than anything carefully reasoned that says he is a polarizing figure who will not get things done. I'm certainly not going to defend Elaine Chao in any particular respect, and I thought Sarah Feinberg did a reasonably good job -- she seemed willing to listen and learn, and delegate to reasonable people when necessary, and I think she has done the same at MTA or whatever the agency calls itself now. So it isn't that it's hopeless, and it's certainly not that Mr. Emanuel doesn't have the organizing skills to run the Department. It's really more like Teller said about Oppenheimer, that I would prefer to see the upcoming transportation actions 'in hands which I understand better ... and trust more'.
My distinctive competence, or lack of the same, is immaterial. I'm not a candidate for Secretary of Transportation.
You brought up RyPN. It is irrelevant on here, only a distraction.
You don't need to answer my pointed and simple questions but they are relevant to your high-handed responses to Zugmann. Somehow, however, I doubt if you will because "that would be telling" in more ways than one.
Taking a final project exam project for a Master's level class at Columbia hardly makes you some final arbiter of how impartial a regulator of the railroads themselves FRA is, especially as to how well it is a caretaker of the well-being of rail employees versus management desires.
charlie hebdoYou brought up RyPN. It is irrelevant on here, only a distraction.
charlie hebdoYou don't need to answer my pointed and simple questions but they are relevant to your high-handed responses to Zugmann.
I will, on the other hand, apologize to Zug for both the high-handed tone and for making more out of my own impression of what he said than I think he meant to put there. That doesn't help the situation, but at least I make the offer.
The pictures and expert reports found in that RYPN thread speak for themselves.
The dumpster is now being inflamed by an individual who seems to be completely ignorant of the Streisand Effect.
It's an interesting read if you have the time.
Greetings from Alberta
-an Articulate Malcontent
SD70DudeIt's an interesting read if you have the time.
I did try to get the one poster to avoid the Streisand Effect, but he apparently couldn't stand being baited. It will be interesting to see how this finally ends up, although nothing we might say here is any more 'conclusive' (or less premature) than what's being said over there.
Overmod The problem is that most of it is either needless or needs better explanation than it will get.
The problem is that most of it is either needless or needs better explanation than it will get.
I'm no expert, but there are several actual steam and railroad experts in that thread. They've given some pretty good explanations and analysis.
You just have to sift through the tit-for-tat exchanges and Rimmasch doing his best Trump impression......
Overmod SD70Dude It's an interesting read if you have the time. The problem is that most of it is either needless or needs better explanation than it will get. I did try to get the one poster to avoid the Streisand Effect, but he apparently couldn't stand being baited. It will be interesting to see how this finally ends up, although nothing we might say here is any more 'conclusive' (or less premature) than what's being said over there.
SD70Dude It's an interesting read if you have the time.
I glanced at it. No real controversy is apparent. It appears a very poor job was performed by Wasatch, confirmed by the FRA inspectors, and damages were awarded, to be paid by Wasatch.
charlie hebdoI glanced at it. No real controversy is apparent.
The pictures are not from the FRA inspection and some of them are visibly not of the #14 locomotive, btw.
In my opinion Wasatch was responsible for carefully and thoroughly documenting all the weirdnesses they encountered when starting -- that doesn't take MBA-grade wisdom; anyone who has rented a New York apartment knows the importance of doing so ... and the likely consequences if they don't.
It is also my opinion that Wasatch should have raised far more objection, regularly and perhaps in annoying repetitive detail, whenever any strange volunteer activity or performance, or interference from the 'owner', was encountered. Not in-their-face confrontation, just 'documented and done'.
The present problem Wasatch has, again in my opinion and I'm neither a lawyer nor an arbitration expert, is that issues with reporting, expert-witness testimony, and a number of issues now being expressed privately as concerns needed to be brought up timely, during the arbitration hearing. Evidently they were not.
It remains to be seen how this plays out; it certainly doesn't reflect what I know of either John Rimmasch or Matt Janssen (via the ESC that among other things revived the ASME code for locomotive boilers a couple of years ago). On the other hand, the reported botched work by Gary Bensman and Scott Lindsey certainly doesn't reflect what I know of them, either.
As we keep saying in threads here: there is likely more to this than presented -- at least I hope there is.
If anyone wants to read the public records of the arbitration and judgment, or see Jason Sobczynski's company report, they are linked in the (now mercifully locked) RyPN threads, or PM me.
Overmod charlie hebdo I glanced at it. No real controversy is apparent. The controversy is in some aspects of the reported documentation, and in the quality of work done before Wasatch took the job and at times Wasatch was 'not supervising' for a variety of interesting reasons. The pictures are not from the FRA inspection and some of them are visibly not of the #14 locomotive, btw. In my opinion Wasatch was responsible for carefully and thoroughly documenting all the weirdnesses they encountered when starting -- that doesn't take MBA-grade wisdom; anyone who has rented a New York apartment knows the importance of doing so ... and the likely consequences if they don't. It is also my opinion that Wasatch should have raised far more objection, regularly and perhaps in annoying repetitive detail, whenever any strange volunteer activity or performance, or interference from the 'owner', was encountered. Not in-their-face confrontation, just 'documented and done'. The present problem Wasatch has, again in my opinion and I'm neither a lawyer nor an arbitration expert, is that issues with reporting, expert-witness testimony, and a number of issues now being expressed privately as concerns needed to be brought up timely, during the arbitration hearing. Evidently they were not. It remains to be seen how this plays out; it certainly doesn't reflect what I know of either John Rimmasch or Matt Janssen (via the ESC that among other things revived the ASME code for locomotive boilers a couple of years ago). On the other hand, the reported botched work by Gary Bensman and Scott Lindsey certainly doesn't reflect what I know of them, either. As we keep saying in threads here: there is likely more to this than presented -- at least I hope there is. If anyone wants to read the public records of the arbitration and judgment, or see Jason Sobczynski's company report, they are linked in the (now mercifully locked) RyPN threads, or PM me.
charlie hebdo I glanced at it. No real controversy is apparent.
The controversy is in some aspects of the reported documentation, and in the quality of work done before Wasatch took the job and at times Wasatch was 'not supervising' for a variety of interesting reasons.
Sounds like somebody has a dog in this fight.
charlie hebdoSounds like somebody has a dog in this fight.
A simple, declarative statement based entirely on your own remarks.
This is going to be my only statement on the issues over at that other site after reading that thread. If one of my mechanics repaired a tanker trailer like that so called expert contractor did that locomotive and it later had an accidential release of hazmat the DOT EPA and several other Alphabet agencies in both the Federal and State Government would have not only that mechanics rear end for lunch but have my bosses rear end in a sling my insurance carrier going PLEASE APPLY LUBE FIRST and we as a carrier would be looking at bankruptcy court to try and save what we could from the damage. That contractor could have killed people with their shoddy almost CRIMINAL work. Yet they were the same people that less than a decade ago where responsible for keeping the 844 and 3985 running for the UP. Now do you see why Ed Dickens brought all maintance operations in house for the UP Steam Fleet. It was because of work like this he found.
Overmod... If anyone wants to read the public records of the arbitration and judgment, or see Jason Sobczynski's company report, they are linked in the (now mercifully locked) RyPN threads, or PM me.
Final post has links to the FoIA obtained legal documents.
http://www.rypn.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=44909&start=45
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
Overmod The pictures are not from the FRA inspection and some of them are visibly not of the #14 locomotive, btw.
Which pictures are you referring to?
And for those of us who haven't seen K&T 14 in person, how can you tell?
charlie hebdoA simple, declarative statement based entirely on your own remarks.
BaltACDFinal post has links to the FoIA obtained legal documents.
The original Wasatch proposal for locomotive 14 is here.
Matt Austin provided links to Jason Sobczyski's report. As I received them, so shall I impart them:
Evaluation pp.1 to 11;
Evaluation pp.12 to 16;
Evaluation pp.17 to 22;
Evaluation pp.23 to 27;
Evaluation pp.28 to 31;
Evaluation pp.32 to 35.
Keep in mind that the chain of custody of these pictures hasn't been established; it may be a while, now that the judgment has been finalized, before Jason comments directly. While the issue of Wasatch's responsibility as contractor for this horror is difficult to explain (and as I said is not at all representative of what I would have done in a similar situation over a similar timeframe) it does need to be said that a great deal of the pictured 'details' is, to me, more likely representative of owners'-volunteer unsupervised "activity" rather than what someone directly from Wasatch would perform. Others can, and almost certainly will, disagree.
As I think any sort of 'appeal' from the arbitration and judgment is likely not to proceed on applicable legal grounds, there shouldn't be much time before counsel stops advising the parties to discuss the substantive issues. We may get a considerable more amount of 'heat not light' before the facts are established (and, at this point inevitable, blame laid and lessons-learned carefully documented) but I don't expect it to be that long, or for either stonewalling or carefully fabricated details to be exposed.
One thing that is certain: #14 deserved better than this for nearly the whole of this century.
Appalled doesn't even begin to describe my feelings about that quality of boiler work, regardless of who performed it.
If they had somehow gotten that thing to hold water and then fired it and brought it up to pressure, it would have resulted in a Gettysburg style disaster, perhaps worse depending on what failed first.
And just how much money has been spent butchering that poor engine over the last 20 years?
SD70DudeIf they had somehow gotten that thing to hold water and then fired it and brought it up to pressure, it would have resulted in a Gettysburg style disaster, perhaps worse depending on what failed first.
Of course, that's assuming that abortion would pass a hydro test in the first place; I don't see how it possibly could.
The all-thread stay provision, in particular, had that Mentor-like dancing-on-the-raw-edge-of-immediate-disaster that a crown eroded to under 1/16 has. So does incomplete-pen welding into torch-cut ... enlarged ... holes. The thing is that this isn't amateur hour -- you'd have to work hard, for a considerable time, to get that level of abortive achievement without anybody stopping the idiot parade.
And apparently exactly the same level of competence was observed before Wasatch took this contract. It takes a special kind of crew to cut and install tubes and flues into the wrong, non-corresponding holes ... and then weld over the vacant holes and apparently hope no one will notice or comment! [EDIT: it now appears that what Gary's crew did was install a few tubes into the rear tubesheet, before the front tubesheet was restored, and "somebody" didn't line things up correctly thereafter -- still long before Wasatch. It will be interesting to see how this timeline firms up going forward...]
I don't know much about pressure vessel construction, that being said - using commercial grade all thread through oxy-acetylene flame cut holes in the crown sheet is a self made bomb.
Apparently the contractor either had no knowledge of all the applicable requirements that apply to boiler construction/maintenance of any kind, let alone the railroad requirements - or they did not care. My guess tends to the later option.
One of my memories of my track troll days at OERM was using a proper rail saw to cut off the ends of rail with flame cut bolt holes. New bolt holes would then be drilled. Don't want to think of the bad things that can happen in a boiler shelll with that kind of nonsense.
If any of you are interested in the documentation, drop what you're doing and download it now. The respective threads have been entirely deleted (causing its own kerfuffle both among the mods and in some of the membership) and I doubt it will be long before someone notices the cached resources too.
Ironically, John Rimmasch complained about being censored by the RYPN mods on several occasions.
I downloaded all that stuff as soon as it was posted.
Erik - We also have a bunch of rail with similar holes, and it indeed considered a defect. Most of our torch holes were made when folks tried to bolt two rails from different manufacturers together, and decided to 'make them fit' (Algoma and Dofasco spaced their holes a little bit differently).
I believe that back in the day 'trainwrecking' was a capital offense in many states punishable by the death penalty. These wackos are trying to stop oil trains.
I read every post in those threads, but I did not get right down to diagraming the logic and implications of everything that was said. The photos do show atrocious work for a steam boiler. Of that, there is no doubt.
But generally, it seemed to me that Wasatch was being blamed for every workmanship defect shown in all the photos. But, by several comments, it was not clear to me that they were responsible for every flaw shown. I perceived that as a point of confusion, but I did not put the effort into unraveling all those details.
It just seemed like the threads took on a life of their own, and based on every photo and every comment, found Wasatch guilty of it all, and blamed them for the most horrible workmanship possible; and that was the only conclusion to the controversy.
Also, those threads were put back on the forum shortly after having been removed. I assume they are still there to read, but they did remain locked even though they were re-posted due to all the criticism of the moderators for removing them in the first place.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.