Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

MicaelS

(8,747 posts)
19. I don't think so, there's more to this story.
Tue Jul 9, 2013, 10:59 AM
Jul 2013

There had to have been multiple failures.

As a former brakeman / conductor we never chocked wheels on a main line, or in a siding. I never saw chocks anywhere except in a dedicated car maintenance / repair facility or at a business where they might release the handbrakes and bleed the air off the cars. Chocks can hold 1 or 2 cars, but not a whole train. If a train were just chocked, with enough weight, cars can climb chocks or chocks become dislodged. We always applied the engine air brakes, the train line air brakes, and the hand brakes on each locomotive plus handbrakes on enough cars to hold the train, which could be as many as 50% of the total number of freight cars on the train.

Why weren't the train air brakes fully applied? Why weren't enough handbrakes applied? Even if the train line air went into emergency, the emergency air should have been enough to hold the train unless it was on a terrific downgrade.

Unless some maniac knew what they were doing, and caused this horrific tragedy by deliberately releasing all the brakes.

I'm beginning to think only the engine brakes were applied, no train line air brakes or handbrakes. When they engine brakes bled off because of loss of air, the train rolled away.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Let us police ourselves, they said. It will be safe, they said. CaliforniaPeggy Jul 2013 #1
And then Aerows Jul 2013 #12
And I bet he has his company organized in such a way exboyfil Jul 2013 #2
The rising use of only one person operating and on these trains is a shockingly bad practice cali Jul 2013 #3
This could have all been avoided if B2G Jul 2013 #4
not enough is known yet. and honestly cali Jul 2013 #5
I understand all of that, but B2G Jul 2013 #6
maybe. I still think we don't know enough cali Jul 2013 #7
Absolutely. When you operate so a single-point failure can cause a massive tragedy... Jerry442 Jul 2013 #9
+1000 B2G Jul 2013 #11
At first glance this all looks unbelievably stupid. thucythucy Jul 2013 #13
nothing is yet established, but there's a whole lot of stupid apparently. cali Jul 2013 #14
The fire department didn't leave the train unattended pinboy3niner Jul 2013 #15
But didn't the MMA then leave the train unattended? thucythucy Jul 2013 #16
Really. Are we supposed to believe the MMA people watched the train roll silently away... Jerry442 Jul 2013 #17
I believe that the train began to roll after the MMA people left FarCenter Jul 2013 #18
The chief of the Nantes Fire Dept. (that put out the earlier locomotive fire) is worried pinboy3niner Jul 2013 #8
I don't think so, there's more to this story. MicaelS Jul 2013 #19
A technical question: Jerry442 Jul 2013 #20
Correct, a derail would have done that. MicaelS Jul 2013 #21
TY. Very informative. nt Jerry442 Jul 2013 #22
Disaster should prompt state to examine rail regs bluedigger Jul 2013 #10
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Runaway Quebec Train's Ow...»Reply #19