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.
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...
"I Often Dream of Trains"-From the Album of the Same Name by Robyn Hitchcock
An act of sabotage perhaps, but the railroad would still be culpable to the extent it left the train unattended for some time.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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...
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!
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.
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.
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.
.
Hello Greyhounds,
I agree that the MMA will likely not survive this, and that Mr. Burkhardt didn't handle it well.
greyhoundsthat the train consisted of out of date tank cars handling something that could kill.
The issue is that 69% of the North American tank car fleet are the outdated DOT-111s. And, since terminals are sprouting so fast, the backlog of tank car orders is over 2 years. So, we will likely have a retirement mandate, but some may survive another couple decades until their AAR mandated retirement (40 years IIRC).
Here is what the NTSB says: http://www.ntsb.gov/news/events/2012/cherry_valley/presentations/Hazardous%20Materials%20Board%20Presentation%20508%20Completed.pdf
NW
seppburgh2Did the MM&A have authority to run one man crew? Though the min was engineer and conductor?
MMA does have authority to run with one man crews, but after this, it may be revoked...
The caboose in this train has RC equipment in it to move the train around in the yard with one person. Note the general appearance of track and locomotives: http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=434730&nseq=2
According to Train's New Wire (http://trn.trains.com/en/Railroad%20News/News%20Wire/2013/07/Burkhardt%20speaks%20out%20on%20Quebec%20derailment.aspx) the "The engineer is now in police custody." Did the MM&A have authority to run one man crew? Though the min was engineer and conductor?
Schuylkill and Susquehannathe dispatcher should have notified both train crews, and (unconfirmed) the dispatcher should have lined the switches in case the train rolled as the engineer asked.
This is a dark railroad, there are no signals, and I would not expect to find automatic switches there either.
ROAR
The Route of the Broadway Lion The Largest Subway Layout in North Dakota.
Here there be cats. LIONS with CAMERAS
UlrichLong live the "Short Line", whoever may come to own it.
I see someone else has pointed out that the toll has risen to 20 dead and 30 missing.
It made me sad to remember, that once upon a time, to CPR employees across the land it wasn't just a shortline or any shortline, but the Canadian Pacific Railway - International of Maine Division was known as "The Short Line"
Bruce
So shovel the coal, let this rattler roll.
"A Train is a Place Going Somewhere" CP Rail Public Timetable
"O. S. Irricana"
. . . __ . ______
Article about spectacular $27+ million WC accident which occurred when Burkhardt was CEO. Fortunately, no one was injured, but lots of press.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weyauwega,_Wisconsin_derailment
After destroying part of a town and killing 20-50 of its residents, one would think many people in that area would take a dim view of the MM&A, period.
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
Ironically that line was once upon a time the crown jewel in Canadian Pacific's network. Van Horne himself remarked that the line east of Sherbrooke to Saint John was of excellent engineering and construction. It remains the shortest rail link between central and eastern Canada. It would be a real shame to see it go down the tubes. Long live the "Short Line", whoever may come to own it.
lone geep I think this is the end of the MM&A. If the railroad can't afford to maintain its track and locomotives, the lawsuits will be the crippling blow to the regional. Even if they did survive, people would loudly protest the movement of crude oil through there towns.
I think this is the end of the MM&A. If the railroad can't afford to maintain its track and locomotives, the lawsuits will be the crippling blow to the regional. Even if they did survive, people would loudly protest the movement of crude oil through there towns.
I can't think of any accident like this (and there have been a number over the years) which resulted in a railroad being abandoned....
However, if by "the end" you are referring to a change in ownership/mangement then I would agree..
Lone Geep
\
Another detail that seems to have played a part in the derailment. The derailment took place near the wye (ex-Quebec Central) turnout. I suspect the locomotives were able to manage the curve and turnout because of their lower center of gravity but tank cars couldn't. The turnout was located in the curve too. You will see a few tank cars rans on the wye and fell on their side. Other cars just "accordioned" together.
Matt
Proudly modelling the Quebec Railway Light & Power Co since 1997.
http://www.hedley-junction.blogspot.com
http://www.harlem-station.blogspot.com
@LION, many website now host video from Bunkhardt interview, I think you'll get the first hand account you wanted to judge by yourself.
New pictures from the police. Click on image to see others. You can clearly a lot of cars burned where the yard was. Near the boxcar, it seems there's a whitish tank car. You can speculate as you want, but a least, it gives us a good idea of the general layout.
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=531513136897674&set=a.531512913564363.1073741832.529692030413118&type=1&theate
About Ed Bunkhardt, whatever he was in his "previous" life, his handling of this derailment is particularly pathetic. I'm first to agree journalists were pushy and most don't know their stuff about trains, but it doesn't excuse him from his attitude. He should have refrained to judge and point culprits. I'm seriously surprised to see a CEO acting this way. His own lawyers must rage hearing his big mouth, how to defend such an individual during the aftermath. He looks like a bad villain in Columbo, trying to do a job that isn't his. It's all about first impression and he messed up real bad, just like his train. A particular case study about bad public relation. I wouldn't be surprised to see this studied in school one day.
For those who never ventured on MMA recently, let me say it's the shadow of it's former self (talking about the ex-CPR part in Quebec). I was there a month or two ago and was struck by the general disrepair of track. I'm no specialist, but track sinking in mud puddles, ties without spikes and very bad drainage where commont occurence between Megantic and Cookshire. We had the chance to see an engine which had a fire too. The line is crippled by speed restriction, they had many "minor" derailments over this year. Oil was a pringboard toward a brighter future to them, but looks like they are going under at this very moment. Bunkhardt ran this company on a tight rope and what should happen, happened, only the incident claimed too many lives. You reap what you sow, even if it was legally sown.
They cut cost and to do so they cut security layers and personnel that would have protected them and the public from errors. That the odious part of the story.
In the end, MMA splash all the industry for its own mismanagement. Accident happens, but this is going to be a case of negligence. Bunkhardt gives the railway a bad name... especially to short lines across North America. It's my opinion, it's my perception, but once again, that's what makes people move on. Journalists stresses a lot about what was wrong. But they never cared to explain what are correct industry practices. So everything MMA did wrong is interpreted by media as some loop hole in regulation. Sad, but true.
There's was a lot of talk about reviving rail in the area near Megantic. Guess he totally ruined it.
I'll stop there because, with each day, it's getting harder to keep a cool head about those events when you don't leave so far from there and know MMA a little bit.
As for the brake problem, it's great to see all your speculations and some input from real railroader. We may be far from the real thing, but at least, it's far better than reading confusing news reports!
From another list:
"Ed Burkhardt, boss at Rail World, owner of the MM&A, says the incident is now likely at the company's insurance limits. "
It's hard to see that the railroad will keep operating if this is the case, and certainly, given that there will be numerous lawsuits that will drag on for years, it's not likely the company can remain solvent. Not that the loss of life is not the primary consideration here, but any speculation about the future of this line? CP says it is attempting to acquire regional railroads to bolster its route system. Would they be interested? (If not, they lose much of the haul on oil going to Saint John.) Or is this incident so major that no entity would even consider operating a railroad here again?
Mark Meyer
CNW 6000 TSB investigator Donald Ross said Canada's TSB has gone on record saying that it would like to see improvements on these tankers, though he acknowledged it's too early to say whether a different or modified tanker would have avoided this weekend's tragedy. The DOT-111 is a staple of the American freight rail fleet. But its flaws have been noted as far back as a 1991 safety study. Among other things, its steel shell is too thin to resist puncture in accidents, which almost guarantees the car will tear open in an accident, potentially spilling cargo that could catch fire, explode or contaminate the environment. Blame a "faulty" design now too?
TSB investigator Donald Ross said Canada's TSB has gone on record saying that it would like to see improvements on these tankers, though he acknowledged it's too early to say whether a different or modified tanker would have avoided this weekend's tragedy.
The DOT-111 is a staple of the American freight rail fleet. But its flaws have been noted as far back as a 1991 safety study. Among other things, its steel shell is too thin to resist puncture in accidents, which almost guarantees the car will tear open in an accident, potentially spilling cargo that could catch fire, explode or contaminate the environment.
Blame a "faulty" design now too?
I think there has long been a sort of tug of war between the concept of tank cars that cannot rupture and what is economical. This derailment will certainly reivive that debate; with the help of the anti-fossil fuel protesters. Just like the wreck that energized the PTC mandate, this oil train wreck is going to lead to new mandates.
The problem with making stronger tank cars is that every pound you add to the car structure is one less pound of oil that you can carry.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.