NTSB report on East Palestine accident

[BaltACD]

Euclid

... 

Also, I think it is fair to say that all burned off axles cause a derailment, but they don’t always cause a pileup. 

Critical element in whether there is a pile up of one variety or another - what was the speed of the train when the offending car 'hit the ground'.  The irregular nature of the the under car profile makes it more likely than not that 'something' will 'snag' something in the track structure and that snag will create forces unsettling the car in one more planes and that car becomes the 'stopping power' upon which the trailing tonnage at whatever speed is acting against - I feel certain an engineer with lots of time and computer power could create a model of the stresses of each car each second until all the tonnage dissapates its kinetic energy and the entire train comes to a stop.

If the speed is low and the trailing tonnage is negligible then the likelyhood of a major pile up is low.  If the speeds and tonnages are high, the general pile up is highly likely.  If the grade is descending the pile up will tend to be worse than if the grade is ascending or level - the basic physics of mass are at play.

Euc, you need to get away from the keyboard and spend some time on the ground investigating the various aspects of derailments.

[tree68]

Euclid

The NTSB is not presenting anything as conjecture, so why do you think it is conjecture?

Because everything about an incident such as this is most often a "most likely" case.  No one saw the axle actually fail - all we have is some heat readings and  doorbell cams.  

Certain  things can come awfully close - they may well have found the spot where the failed truck most likely "dug in," causing the pile-up.  But there are no witnesses that can provide specifics.  No one to say that the axle actually failed right behind Johnson's Hardware Store (fictitious - for sake of discussion).

It's a shame you weren't part of the investigation team.  Expertise such as yours is hard to find...

[Euclid]

BaltACD

/https://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/AccidentReports/Reports/RIR2405.pdf

Page 49 - Figures 18 & 19 tell you all you need to know about the cause.

Everything else is conjecture about how it got to that state and what happened after.

 

The NTSB is not presenting anything as conjecture, so why do you think it is conjecture?

 

I have been looking at Page 49, fig. 18 & 19, and other information in that general area.  In the preliminary details that were being collected, there were all of those photos that are shown here, plus other photos that have been omitted from this final report. 

 

For instance, in that earlier display of photos, there was a photo of the axle with one journal burned off and appearing as burned off axles normally do, almost as if having been cut off with a lathe.  Unless I am missing something, the NTSB now says that the failing bearing, eventually burned the axle off and that began the derailment.  So where is the burned off axle that was shown in those earlier photos a few months ago?

 

In that earlier collection of photos, there also 2 or more photos showing wet grease leaking from bad bearing seals and wetting some of the outside of various metal parts such as the bearing and truck side frame.  Clearly the point was that worn and leaking seals had not been replaced as they should have been.  Therefore, they contributed to the bearing failure. But these photos of leaking grease were on railcars that were in service and not damaged as one would expect if they had been recovered from the East Palestine wreck.  They were close up photos of the trucks with wheels on the rails.  This raises the questions:  Were those photos showing the actual hopper car that derailed in the wreck, but were taken at some time prior to the wreck?

 

Or were these wheels just inserted into this NTSB report as a generic example, just to show what the leaking seals look like?  The same question could be asked about the photo of the burned off axle.  Was this actually from the East Palestine wreck or were the photos just examples unrelated to East Palestine, and illustrating what a burned off axle typically looks like?  Why aren’t there photos of all the truck parts in the exact locations in which they were found right after the train finished piling up?

 

Also, I think it is fair to say that all burned off axles cause a derailment, but they don’t always cause a pileup. 

[BaltACD]

/https://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/AccidentReports/Reports/RIR2405.pdf

Page 49 - Figures 18 & 19 tell you all you need to know about the cause.

Everything else is conjecture about how it got to that state and what happened after.

[BaltACD]

adkrr64

 

BaltACD

The Euclid Mind Derailer. 

Sure, blame it on EMD....

[adkrr64]

BaltACD

The Euclid Mind Derailer.

 

Sure, blame it on EMD....

[BaltACD]

Euclid

... 

And also, if the derailed/dragging cars did not cause the pileup, what did?

The Euclid Mind Derailer.

[Euclid]

It seems to me that the report is conveying this impression:

 

The detector issued a hot bearing warning to stop.

 

The axle burned off and this initiated the derailment. 

 

The Undesired Emergency (U.D.E.) application of the air brakes occurred as an indication that the train had begun to buckle and pile up. 

 

However, in the report, we are told that the derailment began at least 1,400 feet before any of the above occurred; and during that time, the derailed cars involved were all running in line with the rails, apparently being guided by the rails, but not being borne by them.  So 1,400 feet of cars were running derailed, but not developing any pileup.   

 

Since the burning off of the axle is said to have caused the whole derailment and pileup, where was the axle in this progression when it burned off?

 

If the axle burned off when it was within that initial 1,400 feet of derailed and dragging, or upon first entering that 1,400 foot zone; then it would not have caused the pileup that began after that 1,440 foot zone had been passed.  So then what caused the pileup?

 

And if the axle burned off after passing through the 1,400 foot zone, and then began the pileup, what caused the cars to be dragging on the ground while passing through the 1,400 foot zone when they were derailed, but not piling up?

 

Without clarity on this point, we don’t know what caused the pileup.  We don’t know that it was caused by the hot bearing.  If we don’t know that, then we don’t know what may have prevented the pileup and consequently left the incident confined to just a matter of derailed and dragging.  If there had not been a pileup, there would have been no cost associated with the pileup.  If there had just been enough time left to stop the train, the pileup could have been prevented. 

 

Even though the detector was warning of an impending derailment, we don’t know how much time would have passed before the derailment happened.  All the time that was needed was perhaps another 30-40 seconds to get the train stopped.

 

And also, if the derailed/dragging cars did not cause the pileup, what did?

[Euclid]

I have not yet read the report, but I will be looking for a detailed explanation of each step of the process leading right up to the buckling and piling up of railcars.  This wrecking process is typically referred to as a “derailment,” but derailment is just the first wheel to go on the ground.  It has a cause. 

 

But there is also a process in which the train buckles from rising buff force, and begins a process of jackknifing railcars in a destructive cascade. I call that a pileup. It also has a cause.

 

There can be a long distance between the initiation of the derailment and the onset of the pileup.  The two events can be miles apart, and each having their own cause.  If a train is stopped in time, there may never be a pileup even though the derailment occurred and has run the train on the ground for a long distance. 

[BaltACD]

daveklepper

After receiving the report from the third detector, the3 engineer nbegan slowingv the vtrain, intending to stop, using only dynamic breaking. Why not blended braking for a faster, non-emergency, service stop?  Probably because he cdecided tread braking would heat the wheel even more.

Thanks, Overmod, and comment, please?

Using air brakes on freight cars provides a single point of force against the wheel tread - what makes the brake effective is that the force is acting against the axle of the wheel.  If the axle is, in fact, overheated - the brake application can be the force that causes the axle to snap.  As a engineer, he doesn't know the exact condition of the suspected axle, and thus doesn't want to provide additional force against the axle by using the air brakes.

[daveklepper]

After receiving the report from the third detector, the3 engineer began slowing the train, intending to stop, using only dynamic breaking. Why not blended braking for a faster, non-emergency, service stop?  Probably because he decided tread braking would heat the wheel even more.

Thanks, Overmod, and comment, please?

[Overmod]

https://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/AccidentReports/Reports/RIR2405.pdf