Let me see if I have this correct…You want to install a split point derail, on a main line, in dark territory?
23 17 46 11
edblysard Let me see if I have this correct…You want to install a split point derail, on a main line, in dark territory?
I don't know if that would be the right solution. I am only trying to clarify the point made by blue streak. I tend to think they would have been smart to not tie up oil trains at Nantes.
BaltACD Had you read the report - the Train was parked on the Main. Cars occupied the siding and there was a derail in place on the siding in the pictures that were shown.
Had you read the report - the Train was parked on the Main. Cars occupied the siding and there was a derail in place on the siding in the pictures that were shown.
The major shortcomings of the railroad were not having enough employees and having enough dependable motive power to keep the trains moving.
There is no real reason to just leave the train unattended overnight in the middle of the mainline, instead of getting the train to the destination.
Watch my videos on-line at https://www.youtube.com/user/AndrewNeilFalconer
Andrew Falconer The major shortcomings of the railroad were not having enough employees and having enough dependable motive power to keep the trains moving. There is no real reason to just leave the train unattended overnight in the middle of the mainline, instead of getting the train to the destination.
Reality happens in the land of utopia. Railroads are not utopian in their operations, especially a short line such as MMA. Manpower issues and motive power failures happen and have to be dealt with in the best possible way. One does not turn to the local employment agency and hire qualified locomotive engineers - and even if you can hire a qualified locomotive engineer - you still have to get them qualified on the territory they will be operating. Building a qualified workforce is not a overnight undertaking.
Operating a train is not like driving on the Interstate, as decisions for braking and power application have to be made before the need for them become visible to the engineer.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
Hi All
The tragedy of all of this is that 18 factors, combined in the way they were, appear to have caused the wreck caused the wreck.
Government regulation and government enforcement of regulations is defective in that regulation of those being regulated, read Maple Leaf (and Listeria outbreak) or the meat packing plant at Brooks, Alberta with the tainted beef three or so years ago, is being downloaded to those being regulated. In effect, the fox is being allowed to regulate the hen-house with some oversight on an occasional basis from the overseeing federal government agency. there will be a time, such as at Lac Megantic this will be an epic fail
Bottom line for me is that with the amount of downloading (in Canada at least) of such oversight, the potential for such tragedies in a variety of fora, may well increase.
Just saying......
Charlie
Chilliwack, BC
BaltACDReality happens in the land of utopia.
Are you serious?
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
Several reasons the cars might be in the siding, but the one that come to mind first is that they are there to be picked up by a through train, and it is better to have them in a siding than in the yard simply because it keeps that train from spending time in the yard, stopping the normal work that goes on there.
My carrier routinely builds up a train in the morning, and it is taken out to a siding and left for the night crew to spot in industries…keeps two yard tracks clear, and gets the cars closer to where they belong.
As for a split point derail in dark territory, on the down side of a hill…any putz with a sledge hammer can bust the lock, line the derail, and the through train crew climbing the hill on the other side will have no clue it is lined to derail them, and little chance to stop…remember, they have to pull hard getting up the hill, and use the force and inertia of the train to get them over the crest, and once headed down grade, stopping is a not so easy thing.
What if the crew crests the hill, sees the derail lined to the berm, puts the train in emergency and manages to get stopped in time, but still has most of the train hanging back down the backside of the hill?
Now, instead of being able to use the inertia of the train to “push” them over the hill, they have to try and start the train moving, from a dead stop, on an upgrade.
Derails are meant to keep cars in sidings and yards from rolling out and fouling a main.
Not too many Class 1s place them on mains, for the simple reason they are easy to sabotage, even in signaled or CTC territory.
They do have runaway tracks, but we are talking about a Class 2 with limited capital, and runaway tracks are expensive, plus they take a lot of real estate.
From all accounts, parking that train in that location on the main was standard operation procedure, weekly if not more often.
Parking a train here is not an operating issue; you are talking about single track dark territory operating under RTC and track warrants with scheduled movements and little or no opposing traffic, there is no reason to get it off the main because nothing is going to be coming towards it or from behind it, and we don’t know if it would have fit in the siding to begin with.
If it wouldn’t fit, then where you park it is a moot point, the main is still fouled.
Parking a train on a grade is not an unusual occurrence, it is done all the time, every day, that’s why we have the securement rule and test…odds are you would be hard pressed to find very much mainline railroad track that is flat and level to begin with, it almost all has some grade to it, the geography of the planet is not really very flat, and even on a slight grade, one you can’t see with your eyes, trust me, if you don’t secure the train or the cars, they will roll away…maybe not all that fast, but gravity works every time.
Were these people either burned-out and exhausted from all the problems or were they scared to lose their job if they made an emergency call about of a seriously malfunctioning diesel engine in a locomotive?
edblysard As for a split point derail in dark territory, on the down side of a hill…any putz with a sledge hammer can bust the lock, line the derail, and the through train crew climbing the hill on the other side will have no clue it is lined to derail them, and little chance to stop
As for a split point derail in dark territory, on the down side of a hill…any putz with a sledge hammer can bust the lock, line the derail, and the through train crew climbing the hill on the other side will have no clue it is lined to derail them, and little chance to stop
I imagine any putz with a sledge hammer can bust a lock on the siding's switch as well. What's so special about derail locks?
Patrick Boylan
Free yacht rides, 27' sailboat, zip code 19114 Delaware River, get great Delair bridge photos from the river. Send me a private message
Andrew Falconer Were these people either burned-out and exhausted from all the problems or were they scared to lose their job if they made an emergency call about of a seriously malfunctioning diesel engine in a locomotive?
Dave H. Painted side goes up. My website : wnbranch.com
gardendance edblysard As for a split point derail in dark territory, on the down side of a hill…any putz with a sledge hammer can bust the lock, line the derail, and the through train crew climbing the hill on the other side will have no clue it is lined to derail them, and little chance to stop I imagine any putz with a sledge hammer can bust a lock on the siding's switch as well. What's so special about derail locks?
Normal position for all derails is in the derailing position. Put a derail on the Main track, every train would have to stop, line the derail for the non-derailing position, move the train, stop and restore the derail to the derailing position and then continue. Not conducive for fluid rail movements.
To the question of why the train was parked at Nantes. Report states that the train rolled over 13 road crossings in it's 7 mile downhill trip from Nantes to Lac-Magnetic with Lac-Magnetic being at the bottom of grades in both directions. By choice, when trains are parked, they are parked where they can remain coupled in their entirety without the necessity of cutting road crossings and requiring a Class 1 brake test on the portion that was off air for 4 or more hours.
dehusman Andrew Falconer Were these people either burned-out and exhausted from all the problems or were they scared to lose their job if they made an emergency call about of a seriously malfunctioning diesel engine in a locomotive? Do you call 911 if you see a car will blue exhaust driving down the road or drops of oil on your driveway? Why would expect them to make an emergency call about an engine with an oil leak? All railroads have methods of reporting engine problems. Nobody is going to go out and rebuild an engine block at a siding in the middle of nowhere. Even if they report it, they would let the engine go to destination, if the shop was behind them they would even haul the engine back on the return trip to get it to the shop.
You ask if one would call 911 upon seeing blue exhaust coming from an automobile, or an “oil leak” leaving a few drops in the driveway. I don’t think you can compare that locomotive malfunction to blue exhaust or an “oil leak.” Did you see that photo of the malfunctioning locomotive? At least one passerby did indeed call 911 or its equivalent to summon the fire department.
Certainly that locomotive was in a critical emergency, and should have been properly dealt with by the MM&A. If nobody had called the fire department and if the locomotive continued to run in its precarious condition as the MM&A intended; there is a good chance that it would have eventually shut down on its own.
It was bad enough to violate Rule 112 by relying on a running locomotive to maintain the independent brakes to secure the train. It was doubly bad to rely on a running locomotive that was having a problem that might have caused it to stop running. These two decisions were made even before the fire department arrived and shut down the engine. And then it was astoundingly bad judgment to leave the train with uncertain securement once the one running engine had been shut down.
Euclid dehusman Andrew Falconer Were these people either burned-out and exhausted from all the problems or were they scared to lose their job if they made an emergency call about of a seriously malfunctioning diesel engine in a locomotive? Do you call 911 if you see a car will blue exhaust driving down the road or drops of oil on your driveway? Why would expect them to make an emergency call about an engine with an oil leak? All railroads have methods of reporting engine problems. Nobody is going to go out and rebuild an engine block at a siding in the middle of nowhere. Even if they report it, they would let the engine go to destination, if the shop was behind them they would even haul the engine back on the return trip to get it to the shop. You ask if one would call 911 upon seeing blue exhaust coming from an automobile, or an “oil leak” leaving a few drops in the driveway. I don’t think you can compare that locomotive malfunction to blue exhaust or an “oil leak.” Did you see that photo of the malfunctioning locomotive? At least one passerby did indeed call 911 or its equivalent to summon the fire department. Certainly that locomotive was in a critical emergency, and should have been properly dealt with by the MM&A. If nobody had called the fire department and if the locomotive continued to run in its precarious condition as the MM&A intended; there is a good chance that it would have eventually shut down on its own. It was bad enough to violate Rule 112 by relying on a running locomotive to maintain the independent brakes to secure the train. It was doubly bad to rely on a running locomotive that was having a problem that might have caused it to stop running. These two decisions were made even before the fire department arrived and shut down the engine. And then it was astoundingly bad judgment to leave the train with uncertain securement once the one running engine had been shut down.
The report contains a picture of the train from during daylight hours prior to the incident. The lead locomotive is smoking more than the following units, however, it is well within the normal range of all locomotives. The LE reported surging during operations as well as excessive oil out the stack when he tied up the train with the RTC. Fire came later.
In utopia, everything works properly. The real world is somewhat different. Hindsight highlights the bad judgment of relying on the locomotive consist for the bulk of the hand brakes, rather than the car brakes for the securement of the train.
BaltACD Euclid dehusman Andrew Falconer Were these people either burned-out and exhausted from all the problems or were they scared to lose their job if they made an emergency call about of a seriously malfunctioning diesel engine in a locomotive? Do you call 911 if you see a car will blue exhaust driving down the road or drops of oil on your driveway? Why would expect them to make an emergency call about an engine with an oil leak? All railroads have methods of reporting engine problems. Nobody is going to go out and rebuild an engine block at a siding in the middle of nowhere. Even if they report it, they would let the engine go to destination, if the shop was behind them they would even haul the engine back on the return trip to get it to the shop. You ask if one would call 911 upon seeing blue exhaust coming from an automobile, or an “oil leak” leaving a few drops in the driveway. I don’t think you can compare that locomotive malfunction to blue exhaust or an “oil leak.” Did you see that photo of the malfunctioning locomotive? At least one passerby did indeed call 911 or its equivalent to summon the fire department. Certainly that locomotive was in a critical emergency, and should have been properly dealt with by the MM&A. If nobody had called the fire department and if the locomotive continued to run in its precarious condition as the MM&A intended; there is a good chance that it would have eventually shut down on its own. It was bad enough to violate Rule 112 by relying on a running locomotive to maintain the independent brakes to secure the train. It was doubly bad to rely on a running locomotive that was having a problem that might have caused it to stop running. These two decisions were made even before the fire department arrived and shut down the engine. And then it was astoundingly bad judgment to leave the train with uncertain securement once the one running engine had been shut down. The report contains a picture of the train from during daylight hours prior to the incident. The lead locomotive is smoking more than the following units, however, it is well within the normal range of all locomotives. The LE reported surging during operations as well as excessive oil out the stack when he tied up the train with the RTC. Fire came later. In utopia, everything works properly. The real world is somewhat different. Hindsight highlights the bad judgment of relying on the locomotive consist for the bulk of the hand brakes, rather than the car brakes for the securement of the train.
I am referring to photo 13 of the locomotive fire in this section:
1.15.1 Engine repair and fire on locomotive MMA 5017
I think it is a real stretch to dismiss the judgment of the engineer and his supervisors simply because foresight is not always 20/20.
Euclid I am referring to photo 13 of the locomotive fire in this section: 1.15.1 Engine repair and fire on locomotive MMA 5017 I think it is a real stretch to dismiss the judgment of the engineer and his supervisors simply because foresight is not always 20/20.
dehusman Well duh, if the locomotive is on fire you call the fire department. But the locomotive wasn't on fire when the engineer left. The only thing the engine had was an oil leak. That's not an "emergency". You don't call the fire department if an engine has an oil leak (unless the oil is literally pouring out of the engine, then its a hazmat issue.)
Well duh, if the locomotive is on fire you call the fire department.
Nobody is suggesting that the company should have torn down the engine and rebuilt it at Nantes. I have no issue with the routines that would be followed to fix the locomotive. My only point is that there were two obvious red flag issues. One was with initially leaving a locomotive to pump air with a malfunction that calls into question whether the locomotive can be relied on to pump air. You seem to dismiss this risk by comparing it to nuisance oil leak. You may be correct that the engineer had not seen fire before he left the locomotive running and departed from the scene.
But it was reported that the smoke was so heavy that it was hard to see well enough to drive on the parallel highway. It was also raining oil droplets out of the exhaust. The engineer did experience these symptoms while he was still there. Also, the engine had been surging and failing to produce constant power before arriving at Nantes. Any experience engineer will know that this is more of a problem than just an oil leak. The engineer even told the cab driver that he was not comfortable in leaving the locomotive running in that condition, and told him that he intended to re-contact his supervisors and ask them to reconsider the plan to leave the engine running.
Therefore, the engineer and his supervisors knew that there was a serious engine problem with the locomotive, and yet not only did they ignore that problem and leave the engine running, but they also relied on it to continue running in order to prevent what ultimately became the Lac Megantic disaster.
That is one of the obvious red flags. The second red flag is when the engineer and his supervisors learned that the fire department was called to put out an engine fire, and they shut down the engine. Just connecting a few simple dots at this point should tell anybody that the next step will be the Lac Megantic disaster.
If derails cannot be permanently installed on main lines why not carry portable derails ? Or maybe special instructions to only open a permanent derail when parking a train up hill of derail ?
Euclid But it was reported that the smoke was so heavy that it was hard to see well enough to drive on the parallel highway. It was also raining oil droplets out of the exhaust. The engineer did experience these symptoms while he was still there. Also, the engine had been surging and failing to produce constant power before arriving at Nantes. Any experience engineer will know that this is more of a problem than just an oil leak. The engineer even told the cab driver that he was not comfortable in leaving the locomotive running in that condition, and told him that he intended to re-contact his supervisors and ask them to reconsider the plan to leave the engine running.
I seem to have misplaced my leader dog. Can you cite the paragraph in the TSB report that mentions that?
Norm
As a retired professional railroader, I believe that this wreck has been discussed thoroughly. Hind site is always twenty twenty. The lax safety attitude started with the president on down to the track department laborers, etc.
I must share an incident on the BN Railroad at Northtown about 1985 that involves a personal injury I sustained at Northtown Diesel Shop. I was driving a fork lift on a four foot sidewalk (narrow) when the fork lift ran of the sidewalk and into a ditch. I jumped and suffered a slight back strain. After the accident a second four foot section of sidewalk was added to this area, making it about eight feet wide.
One question, did the MMA pay for any damages and why did they declare bankruptcy?
Ed Burns
Norm48327I seem to have misplaced my leader dog. Can you cite the paragraph in the TSB report that mentions that?
The source is news articles from last year. I have not read the entire TSB report yet.
Excerpt from The Canadian Press, Aug. 22, 2014:
In one conversation that took place about 30 minutes after the derailment, Harding can be heard telling a dispatcher that Lac-Megantic is on fire and that he can see flames shooting 60 metres into the air.
“It’s incredible, you can’t believe it here,” Harding says.
About two hours later, he gets the news that his train has been involved.
The following is the exchange between the two men:
Dispatch: “OK, but it’s worse than that, my friend.”
Harding: “Why?”
Dispatch: “It’s your train that rolled down.”
Harding: “No!”
Dispatch: “Yes, sir.
Harding: “No, RJ.”
Dispatch: “Yes, sir.”
Harding: “Holy f—. F—.
The audio recordings were supplied to The Canadian Press by Harding’s lawyer, Tom Walsh.
http://globalnews.ca/news/1521898/quebec-police-take-lac-megantic-probe-to-u-s/
Actually most of what I said above about the malfunction is in the report on the first page and then deeper where it discusses the malfunction cause in detail. It also offers this rule:
1.15.2 Abnormal engine conditions
MMA’s Safety Rule 9126 stated:
When there is an abnormal condition such as noise, smoke or odor coming from engine, the engine should be shut down. Employees must immediately leave the engine room and shut down the engine by emergency “shut down” button at the control stand, control panel or fueling location on either side of the locomotive.
According to that rule, the engine should have been shut down long before it got to Nantes; and it NEVER should have been left with the intention of securing a train by independent brakes when there was such an obvious abnormal condition.
Nothing, except a siding switch leads you into a siding with a chance to get stopped, a derail switch puts you in the dirt.
Why didn't the MMA locomotive shop repair the locomotive correctly?
Euclid Norm48327I seem to have misplaced my leader dog. Can you cite the paragraph in the TSB report that mentions that? The source is news articles from last year. I have not read the entire TSB report yet.
Then it would not appear to be part of the TSB report.
Norm48327 Euclid But it was reported that the smoke was so heavy that it was hard to see well enough to drive on the parallel highway. It was also raining oil droplets out of the exhaust. The engineer did experience these symptoms while he was still there. Also, the engine had been surging and failing to produce constant power before arriving at Nantes. Any experience engineer will know that this is more of a problem than just an oil leak. The engineer even told the cab driver that he was not comfortable in leaving the locomotive running in that condition, and told him that he intended to re-contact his supervisors and ask them to reconsider the plan to leave the engine running. I seem to have misplaced my leader dog. Can you cite the paragraph in the TSB report that mentions that? Euclid The source is news articles from last year. I have not read the entire TSB report yet. Then it would not appear to be part of the TSB report.
You do not need to read very far. For a start, much of that is early in the summary.
"The LE then contacted the RTC in Bangor, Maine, who controlled movements of United States crews east of Megantic. During this conversation, the LE indicated that the lead locomotive had continued to experience mechanical difficulties throughout the trip and that excessive black and white smoke was now coming from its smoke stack. The LE expected that the condition would settle on its own. It was mutually agreed to leave the train as it was and that performance issues would be dealt with in the morning.
"A taxi was called to transport the LE to a local hotel. When the taxi arrived to pick up the LE at about 2330, the taxi driver noted the smoke and mentioned that oil droplets from the locomotive were landing on the taxi’s windshield. The driver questioned whether the locomotive should be left in this condition. The LE indicated that he had informed MMA about the locomotive’s condition, and it had been agreed upon to leave it that way. The LE was then taken to the hotel in Lac-Mégantic and reported off-duty."Even the taxi driver could see something was terribly wrong.
wanswheel Excerpt from The Canadian Press, Aug. 22, 2014: In one conversation that took place about 30 minutes after the derailment, Harding can be heard telling a dispatcher that Lac-Megantic is on fire and that he can see flames shooting 60 metres into the air. “It’s incredible, you can’t believe it here,” Harding says. About two hours later, he gets the news that his train has been involved. The following is the exchange between the two men: Dispatch: “OK, but it’s worse than that, my friend.” Harding: “Why?” Dispatch: “It’s your train that rolled down.” Harding: “No!” Dispatch: “Yes, sir. Harding: “No, RJ.” Dispatch: “Yes, sir.” Harding: “Holy f—. F—. The audio recordings were supplied to The Canadian Press by Harding’s lawyer, Tom Walsh. http://globalnews.ca/news/1521898/quebec-police-take-lac-megantic-probe-to-u-s/
This is haunting. But the time line seems amiss. The news reported that the pileup in Lac Megantic rocked the town, and immediately woke up engineer Harding who ran out the door realizing that his train had arrived to pile up in Lac Megantic.
I cannot imaging engineer Harding realizing that the town was on fire would not immediately associate that with his oil train left parked way up on the hill above town. You mean to tell me that Harding watched flames disappear into the sky for a half hour without thinking about what would cause such a horrendous fire?
Euclid I cannot imaging engineer Harding realizing that the town was on fire would not immediately associate that with his oil train left parked way up on the hill above town. You mean to tell me that Harding watched flames disappear into the sky for a half hour without thinking about what would cause such a horrendous fire?
Gee - there has NEVER been a gasoline tanker that caught on fire and caused a major conflagration! [/sarcasm]
blue streak 1 If derails cannot be permanently installed on main lines why not carry portable derails ? Or maybe special instructions to only open a permanent derail when parking a train up hill of derail ?
Portable derails sound a lot like the chocks I mentioned a few posts back.
edblysard gardendance edblysard As for a split point derail in dark territory, on the down side of a hill…any putz with a sledge hammer can bust the lock, line the derail, and the through train crew climbing the hill on the other side will have no clue it is lined to derail them, and little chance to stop I imagine any putz with a sledge hammer can bust a lock on the siding's switch as well. What's so special about derail locks? Nothing, except a siding switch leads you into a siding with a chance to get stopped, a derail switch puts you in the dirt.
Can we also add that the siding probably has a derail in a couple of car lengths that will lead you into the dirt, and that a siding switch's speed limit, when set for the siding, is probably less than your train's main line speed, so there's a chance it'll put you in the dirt before you get to the siding's derail?
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.