dagblog - Comments for "DagTSB Report: Flight 214, Quebec Train Disaster"

That National Geographic

acanuck — Fri, 12 Jul 2013 03:51:45 +0000

That National Geographic article (your first link above) is a pretty good rundown of the issues that need to be addressed. Here's one that goes into more depth on the DOT-111 single-hulled tanker cars the MMA was pulling:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/09/dot-111-oil-tank-cars_n_3568287...

It's been recognized since 2009 that their puncture risk makes them unsuitable for dangerous substances. Double-hulled cars would obviously be safer, but DOT-111s constitute the bulk of North American tankers, and the rail industry balked at replacing them all.

The NTSB proposed retrofitting the DOT-111s to better withstand impacts, but the rail companies said that would cost $1 billion, so the compromise was that all new cars after 2011 had to be built to the safer standard. (Railways made $71 billion in profits last year, BTW.)

The killer train was transporting fracked crude oil from North Dakota shale to an Irving refinery in Saint John, New Brunswick. It was only today that I realized its most likely route was at least 90% on Canadian Pacific track that runs through my own city, as well as Ottawa and Winnipeg. Scary.

Thanks. The Canadian

NCD — Thu, 11 Jul 2013 23:23:11 +0000

In reply to Some background on railway

Thanks. The Canadian government just last year changed the rule requiring 2 engineers per train to one.

The company had received approval from Ottawa in 2012 to reduce staffing and operate with only one employee aboard a train, one of only two Canadian rail lines (the other is Quebec North Shore and Labrador Railway) okayed to run with solo engineers.

Also, an article said to apply hand brakes you must climb up each and every car and turn a wheel 40 times to lock the hand brake, and the engineer checked into the hotel 30 minutes after arriving at the station. Not likely he did too many, but, seems neither the government nor the company care, no rules on it.

A railroad safety expert in Arkansas thinking along my line from Reuters:

"I definitely think there should be a protocol ... that addresses where and how you're going to park a train that's loaded with hazardous material," said John Bentley, an accident reconstruction expert in Perryville, Arkansas.

At present, Canadian and U.S. regulations do not specify the number of handbrakes since factors like track grade, cargo weight and contents, weather and space between railcars can all have a bearing on how many brakes are needed to ensure safety.

Depending on where a train is parked, more or fewer handbrakes may be required, Canadian Transportation Safety Board investigator Ed Belkaloul said, adding that railroad companies are given some discretion to develop their own safety standard....

Died due to discretion of some guy on a train. Put it on their tombstones.

Another rail guy said they should have a 'check curve' before the town, to derail any out of control train before it hits the curve in town. Not going to happen, costs corporations profits.

50 dead is what happens when neither the government nor the industry have written standards, or even a written record of how many brakes were set, if they were set, and when and by whom. It's called self-regulation, and it is deadly.

Some background on railway

acanuck — Thu, 11 Jul 2013 21:02:09 +0000

In reply to DagTSB Report: Flight 214, Quebec Train Disaster

Some background on railway CEO Burkhardt and his MO: http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2013/07/11/lac_megantic_railways_hist...

Now they are saying the

NCD — Thu, 11 Jul 2013 00:49:13 +0000

In reply to As you might expect,

Now they are saying the engineer didn't set 'enough' brakes. Fantastic deduction!

Rail CEO:

"I think he did something wrong ... We think he applied some hand brakes but the question is did he apply enough of them," Burkhardt explained. "He said he applied 11 hand brakes we think that's not true. Initially we believed him but now we don't."

Note to CEO: When the engineer leaves the train, he fills out a 'Securing Train Form'.

It has a column for how many cars, total weight, station, slope of track and a simple formula gives the number of brakes necessary to secure the train. He enters in the number of brakes set. and the time set, signs it and gives it to the station master. For hazardous cargo someone else double checks the brakes and signs also.

Is this rocket science??

The problem being as I have read, there is no formula, no safety document and no checklist that, apparently, does the math on what 'enough' is when you are parking a huge bomb laden train uphill from a merry little town in the middle of the night.

It would seem it would not be left to the discretion of a sleepy employee, but would be in writing, and would also include some fail safe back-up.

Ergo, my suggestion they should by law require a 'rollback preventer', perhaps a recycled 'blowout preventer' from BP's Macondo well. A 50 ton thing on the track would certainly do it.

You dare to defy the blogger

Michael Wolraich — Wed, 10 Jul 2013 23:20:13 +0000

In reply to Michael, not to throw a

You dare to defy the blogger formerly known as the great and powerful Genghis! Now pipe down before I make you (Acting) Director of My Ass.

Yes there are specific rules.

Tom — Wed, 10 Jul 2013 22:41:50 +0000

In reply to Congratulations on your

Yes there are specific rules. They do not list grades vs weight but do specify the minimum acceptable. You cannot even leave an engine standing alone on zero grade, running or not, without applying the handbrake.

Michael, not to throw a

NCD — Wed, 10 Jul 2013 22:19:56 +0000

In reply to AP: Railway company chief

Michael, not to throw a wrench in the works, but I'm not sure the rules allow me be replaced in the middle of not just one open investigation, but two.....?

As you might expect,

acanuck — Wed, 10 Jul 2013 21:42:12 +0000

In reply to DagTSB Report: Flight 214, Quebec Train Disaster

As you might expect, Quebecers are getting massive coverage of the Lac-Mégantic disaster. Montreal's English-language daily has devoted five to 10 pages a day to the story.

I've been slow to comment because so much of the info coming out is conflicting. Most of the blame for that goes to the U.S.-based company brass, who have changed their story virtually every day. They have zero credibility. At one point they claimed to have evidence brakes were tampered with; accident investigators say no such evidence was shared with them. So I take their blaming of the engineer with a big grain of salt.

Rail transport is a federal, not provincial, responsibility. Our Republican-lite government has been deregulating for years, and granting exemptions like the one last year allowing MMA to run single-operator trains. Canadian rules on use of double-hulled tanker cars lag behind even the U.S. A relative who used to drive light-rail trains (they need to learn the same set of rules) agreed an accident like this was bound to happen.

One thought about the provincial police declaring a crime scene: they were evasive about what crime they suspected until a reporter suggested criminal negligence. They then blocked off views of the site. I suspect their real task is to use their forensic skills to find some trace of the 40 or so people still unaccounted for, and the "crime scene" designation is a legal euphemism.

I believe that the standard

Michael Wolraich — Wed, 10 Jul 2013 18:23:20 +0000

In reply to Congratulations on your

I believe that the standard procedure is to ask a blogger with no industry experience to google the answer.

Congratulations on your

NCD — Wed, 10 Jul 2013 18:15:48 +0000

In reply to I didn't need to read the

Congratulations on your career in rail service.

It seems some rail employee, and company SOP protocols, which led to this accident may have been executed or produced by folks as self assured as you are, as to proper securing of trains.

In your 41 years of service, Tom, did you ever read a railroad company safety specification for securing a train of a given weight, on a given slope? Or does each employee just do what he figures will work?