train derailment on kokanee9's route

[silver lab]

Originally Posted by Looper

"Seems like CP somehow manages to skirt safety when there's no other reason except it'll cost money."

I'm not sure where this comes from? I believe Lac Magantic was employees not following railway protocol.

The most recent event was brake failure due to extreme cold. The train lost air pressure.

Is there some other event CP Rail was involved in that supports that statement?

Looper

Was there a press release on the cause of this crash?

[Husty]

Originally Posted by Looper

"Seems like CP somehow manages to skirt safety when there's no other reason except it'll cost money."

I'm not sure where this comes from? I believe Lac Magantic was employees not following railway protocol.

The most recent event was brake failure due to extreme cold. The train lost air pressure.

Is there some other event CP Rail was involved in that supports that statement?

Looper

Is there temperature limits where CP Rail stops operating?

Edit: https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calga...atal-1.5011096

Looks like they reduce train sizes in cold events

[JB_AOL]

Originally Posted by Looper

"Seems like CP somehow manages to skirt safety when there's no other reason except it'll cost money."

oh right. I did say that, but I said CP which I meant as a company and it was intended to mean "rail companies" in general, not a specific person. Companies will only spend money on safety if required or mandated.

I'm not sure where this comes from

Employees have said "imagine how long that would take" if they had to apply all the parking brakes. CP's protocol is to apply the parking brakes on ~10% of their rail cars.

I believe Lac Magantic was employees not following railway protocol with applying the park brakes.

The most recent event was brake failure due to extreme cold. The train lost air pressure.

Fixed it for you

The Transportation Safety Board of Canada (TSB) launched an investigation into the accident. In its August 2014 report, the TSB identified 18 distinct causes and contributing factors, which included leaving the train unattended on a main line, failure to set enough hand brakes, the lack of a backup safety mechanism, poor maintenance on the locomotive and several failures of training and oversight.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lac-M%..._investigation

seems like there's a common theme.

[Looper]

Originally Posted by JB_AOL

oh right. I did say that, but I said CP which I meant as a company and it was intended to mean "rail companies" in general, not a specific person. Companies will only spend money on safety if required or mandated.




Employees have said "imagine how long that would take" if they had to apply all the parking brakes. CP's protocol is to apply the parking brakes on ~10% of their rail cars.



Fixed it for you



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lac-M%..._investigation

seems like there's a common theme.

In what instance would you expect all hand brakes to be applied? I don't work for a rail company but I am a shipper and I cannot think of one.

I deal with rail every week and my opinion is they are all about safety. I was just curious why you say they aren't.

Looper

[Looper]

Originally Posted by silver lab

Was there a press release on the cause of this crash?

I believe there was. The train had reported trouble earlier and had to stop early because the crew was houred out.

It was the fresh crew that was killed.

112 hopper cars and only 15 remained on the track.

Sorry I don't have a link.

Looper

[silver lab]

Originally Posted by Looper

I believe there was. The train had reported trouble earlier and had to stop early because the crew was houred out.

It was the fresh crew that was killed.

112 hopper cars and only 15 remained on the track.

Sorry I don't have a link.

Looper

I can’t find where Transport Canada has concluded there investigation.. All I can find is Transport Canada is still investigating and has ordered railways to use hand brakes on all emergency stops.
It’s hard for me to believe that we need Transport Canada to tell us to apply hand brakes to a train that is stopped for any reason... I guess common sense isn’t so common.

[JB_AOL]

Originally Posted by Looper

In what instance would you expect all hand brakes to be applied? I don't work for a rail company but I am a shipper and I cannot think of one.

Did u seriously just ask that? How about when it's parked.. do you leave your car in neutral when it's parked?

More specifically when you are at the top of a massive descent.

[Looper]

Originally Posted by JB_AOL

Did u seriously just ask that? How about when it's parked.. do you leave your car in neutral when it's parked?

More specifically when you are at the top of a massive descent.

Did you seriously just type that? Do you seriously think the train was left in neutral? Do you know anything about trains?

Nevermind.



Looper

[Looper]

Originally Posted by silver lab

I can’t find where Transport Canada has concluded there investigation.. All I can find is Transport Canada is still investigating and has ordered railways to use hand brakes on all emergency stops.
It’s hard for me to believe that we need Transport Canada to tell us to apply hand brakes to a train that is stopped for any reason... I guess common sense isn’t so common.

Every time a train stops someone should jump off and apply some hand brakes?

Ridiculous.

Looper

[silver lab]

Every time a train parks? YES! Apply hand brakes! If you think that is ridiculous take the time and ask the family’s of these three men if they think that would be ridiculous.....

[JB_AOL]

Originally Posted by Looper

Did you seriously just type that? Do you seriously think the train was left in neutral? Do you know anything about trains?

Nevermind.



Looper

Did I say that it was left in neutral? No.. you need to learn to read. I was giving a comparison. But that was over your head.

But maybe you can explain how a 115 car loaded train somehow has its brakes fail but the engine also didn't hold it. Hmm.

Ftr I'm not making light of the current situation at all. Hell, I work in the most regulated industry in the world. I'm surprised you are so lax about it.

You're right. I know nothing about trains. But sometime it takes an outsider to notice how ludicrously stuck in the 40's rail safety is.

[JB_AOL]

Originally Posted by silver lab

Every time a train parks? YES! Apply hand brakes! If you think that is ridiculous take the time and ask the family’s of these three men if they think that would be ridiculous.....

Exactly.. or they could use a semi style system and push one button. All wheels locked. Done.

[silver lab]

Originally Posted by JB_AOL

Exactly.. or they could use a semi style system and push one button. All wheels locked. Done.

To make a long story short. Rail car brake systems are far more complicated then semi trucks. They need to be able to perform different tasks. They have what are called “portions” service and emergency along with resivours for air storage and resivours for different braking applications eg: load sensors. These do a lot of things to help the train crews navigate different terrain. At the end of the day they all have something in common...... a hand brake.

[Bigwoodsman]

Originally Posted by silver lab

To make a long story short. Rail car brake systems are far more complicated then semi trucks. They need to be able to perform different tasks. They have what are called “portions” service and emergency along with resivours for air storage and resivours for different braking applications eg: load sensors. These do a lot of things to help the train crews navigate different terrain. At the end of the day they all have something in common...... a hand brake.

So they’re just like any modern air brake system on a tractor semi trailer configuration.

BW

[silver lab]

Originally Posted by Bigwoodsman

So they’re just like any modern air brake system on a tractor semi trailer configuration.

BW

Haha! They could be, but a train and a truck are very different in there own applications. If your truck can sense when your loaded or not and adjust the brake application accordingly then yes, if you can make a 3psi brake application then yes. If you can flick a switch and have your brake application stay on for extended periods and automatically slowly release then yes, These are just a couple of many simple task a rail car brake system can do that make trucks and train very different.

[Bigwoodsman]

Originally Posted by silver lab

Haha! They could be, but a train and a truck are very different in there own applications. If your truck can sense when your loaded or not and adjust the brake application accordingly then yes, if you can make a 3psi brake application then yes. If you can flick a switch and have your brake application stay on for extended periods and automatically slowly release then yes, These are just a couple of many simple task a rail car brake system can do that make trucks and train very different.

So they can do all that yet rely on a hand brake to hold the train while parked. Seems to me something is wrong with that. Especially with the needless loss of life.

BW

[silver lab]

Originally Posted by Bigwoodsman

So they can do all that yet rely on a hand brake to hold the train while parked. Seems to me something is wrong with that. Especially with the needless loss of life.

BW

Yup, I agree!

[JB_AOL]

Originally Posted by silver lab

Yup, I agree!

Thanks silver lab. I appreciate the information. You can see the disconnect I'm seeing (or assuming in my case).

[owlhoot]

The derailment at Field. I have seen almost nothing on the news about that so far. But there was one sentence that said the train started moving on its own just as the train crew got on. I looked up the location online and found out that the ruling grade there (the steepest grade) is 2.2%. That is very steep for a train! But i don't know if the train was parked on that section or not. It may have been on a flatter section of track. I am also assuming the crew may have been doing a "hot" crew switch. That would be when the train arrives at the terminal and the incoming crew stops the train and gets off and the departing crew gets on. In other words, the train would not be parked for some time. If it were parked, the crew leaving it would have to secure it with a number of handbrakes and do whatever is necessary to prevent it from moving if it is on a grade. On a "hot" switch, there could be a number of factors which will have to be considered. If the train was on level ground (ie the entire train), in a hot switch, the departing crew could have possibly left just the engine brakes on. That should hold a train on the level. However, take that same scenario and modify it just slightly. Suppose the tail end of the train was uphill of the rest of the train on the flat. And it was wanting to push down onto the flat. If you had some black ice on the brake shoes of the engines, those loaded cars at the tail end of the train might have enough weight to push the rest of the train ahead. And if there was a downhill slope just ahead of where it was parked, it would pick up speed.

So if you consider a good depletion of air from the tanks to begin with in getting the train stopped at Field for the crew switch, then when the new crew gets on the train starts moving right away. It starts picking up speed.

When you have full tanks on a train at 90 psi and you do a 20 psi brake set, you theoretically have a strong brake application. Once you release the brake, it takes a very long time to recharge the train to get a strong brake again. If you need to make another brake application again too soon after the first one, your brake will be very weak and, if you are on a stretch of track with a high grade, it will be extremely ineffective. Here is an estimate of brake performance for 3 subsequent brake applications on a FLAT Grade:
Time 0: 20 psi application - 100% effective brake
Time 5 mins later: 20 psi application - ~60% effective
Time 5 mins later: 20 psi application - ~20% effective

If you were on a very steep grade, and you did the same thing, forget it! You are in deep trouble!

So with a "hot" crew change, and if the train was on a slope, it may have been something like:
Time 0: "hot" change - brakes released after departing crew stopped train and got off (The departing crew may have left all train brakes on if the train was on a grade. Or if the train was "supposedly" on a flat area, they may have released the train brakes but left the engine brakes on. The new crew would want to do a brake test on the entire train itself before departing.) - possibly black ice on brake shoes on engine - ~60% effective brake on train due to usage in stopping the train at Field just prior to crew change - not possible to do a brake test done when train started rolling out of station
Time 1 min: 20 psi application - ~20% effective - train picking up speed
Time 1.5 mins: "emergency" application - ~0% effective - speed increasing

Possibly another Lac Megantic. I don't know the area at Field. Level? Inclined? Something had to get that train into motion. Had to be a difference in elevation someplace and brakes off or ineffectual. Brakes can be neutralized by black ice or air depletion.

Coleman

[Big Grey Wolf]

Owlhoot, excellent explanation of possible things that happened. From what I understand train was parked on 1-2% slope, probably steeper grades just past Field as well. I was tought in industry 2-3 things usually come together to cause most accidents.

[Bigwoodsman]

Originally Posted by owlhoot

The derailment at Field. I have seen almost nothing on the news about that so far. But there was one sentence that said the train started moving on its own just as the train crew got on. I looked up the location online and found out that the ruling grade there (the steepest grade) is 2.2%. That is very steep for a train! But i don't know if the train was parked on that section or not. It may have been on a flatter section of track. I am also assuming the crew may have been doing a "hot" crew switch. That would be when the train arrives at the terminal and the incoming crew stops the train and gets off and the departing crew gets on. In other words, the train would not be parked for some time. If it were parked, the crew leaving it would have to secure it with a number of handbrakes and do whatever is necessary to prevent it from moving if it is on a grade. On a "hot" switch, there could be a number of factors which will have to be considered. If the train was on level ground (ie the entire train), in a hot switch, the departing crew could have possibly left just the engine brakes on. That should hold a train on the level. However, take that same scenario and modify it just slightly. Suppose the tail end of the train was uphill of the rest of the train on the flat. And it was wanting to push down onto the flat. If you had some black ice on the brake shoes of the engines, those loaded cars at the tail end of the train might have enough weight to push the rest of the train ahead. And if there was a downhill slope just ahead of where it was parked, it would pick up speed.

So if you consider a good depletion of air from the tanks to begin with in getting the train stopped at Field for the crew switch, then when the new crew gets on the train starts moving right away. It starts picking up speed.

When you have full tanks on a train at 90 psi and you do a 20 psi brake set, you theoretically have a strong brake application. Once you release the brake, it takes a very long time to recharge the train to get a strong brake again. If you need to make another brake application again too soon after the first one, your brake will be very weak and, if you are on a stretch of track with a high grade, it will be extremely ineffective. Here is an estimate of brake performance for 3 subsequent brake applications on a FLAT Grade:
Time 0: 20 psi application - 100% effective brake
Time 5 mins later: 20 psi application - ~60% effective
Time 5 mins later: 20 psi application - ~20% effective

If you were on a very steep grade, and you did the same thing, forget it! You are in deep trouble!

So with a "hot" crew change, and if the train was on a slope, it may have been something like:
Time 0: "hot" change - brakes released after departing crew stopped train and got off (The departing crew may have left all train brakes on if the train was on a grade. Or if the train was "supposedly" on a flat area, they may have released the train brakes but left the engine brakes on. The new crew would want to do a brake test on the entire train itself before departing.) - possibly black ice on brake shoes on engine - ~60% effective brake on train due to usage in stopping the train at Field just prior to crew change - not possible to do a brake test done when train started rolling out of station
Time 1 min: 20 psi application - ~20% effective - train picking up speed
Time 1.5 mins: "emergency" application - ~0% effective - speed increasing

Possibly another Lac Megantic. I don't know the area at Field. Level? Inclined? Something had to get that train into motion. Had to be a difference in elevation someplace and brakes off or ineffectual. Brakes can be neutralized by black ice or air depletion.

Coleman

Thank you for this explanation. Very logical and makes a heck of a lot of sense!

Is it time for CP rail to re think that section of track and the spiral tunnels? With trains ever getting larger and heavier, maybe it’s time to either mandate shorter trains through that section. Or is there a reroute that can be built?

BW

[JB_AOL]

Looks like applying the parking brake is now required.

https://www.rmoutlook.com/article/ne...lment-20190214

Wouldn't be surprised if there's more changes.