My partners dad was a long term train engineer when she was a kid, so she was telling me a few 'red flag' things that her dad had told her as a child. For instance (and this is back in the 60's and 70's) he became bitter over the rail-ties lack of maintenance whereby ties were not properly monitored and replaced, and he had said to her that in the future, if this continues, you will see a lot of train wrecks. He also, apparently, said crashes often involve the compression and collapse of three ties in succession that fail; and then the train is gone. He had talked about freight train stacking (heights we often see now) and the centers of gravity related, including domino effects. I asked what domino meant exactly in this situation and it was said that the term (as her dad had described it) relates to car profiles. So you need to arrange the cars so that you never have cars of the same type over a certain span i.e. if you have twenty five cattle cars in a row, this is a bad combination, they need to be mixed for better overall balancing.
Anyway, we watched the following documentary '
Why Trains Crash' a 2017 Documentary on The Passionate Eye http://www.cbc.ca/passionateeye/episodes/why-trains-crash
In the aftermath of the 2013 rail disaster in Lac Megantic, Que., a coroner’s report called the deaths of 47 people “violent” and “unavoidable.” A runaway freight train carrying 72 cars of crude oil derailed and exploded in the heart of the tiny town.
But what happened in Lac Megantic was far from unique. Derailments, head-on collisions, and accidents at road crossings involving freight and passenger trains claim many lives each year across North America. Often, the cause is human error combined with high speed.
Why Trains Crash examines the cause of recent deadly rail accidents, using detailed computerized re-enactments and emotional eyewitness accounts. At the same time, the film highlights the difficult work by investigators and safety experts seeking answers and determined to prevent future tragedies.
What’s at stake is a global mode of transportation poised for huge advancements. With examples like Japan’s super efficient bullet trains, the film looks ahead to a future in which train travel everywhere is fast, efficient and — above all else — safe.
For more information regarding the status of train control technologies in Canada, read the Final Report of the Advisory Council on Railway Safety’s Train Control Working Group.
You can read a copy from the working group here (pdf) http://www.tc.gc.ca/media/documents/railsafety/train-control-working-group-final-report.pdf and here is the full investigation report (pdf) http://www.tsb.gc.ca/eng/rapports-reports/rail/2013/r13d0054/r13d0054.pdf
Some of this was focused on the Lac Megantic accident, yet some of the well know accidents in the U.S. are highlighted as to possible/probable causation.
After checking the film out, I started thinking about the trains around here - lot's of them on very dangerous mountain routes. Some of these trains pull coal-cars in the magnitude of up to over one hundred cars, and they are super heavy. The oil tanker cars (like at Lac Megantic) add the explosive flammability aspect that is subject to a lot of possible errors; chemical cars too are a high risk (liquid or gases). As for oil, I think this is why pipe lines makes more sense to me, even though they need to be constructed maximizing containment (another controversial subject indeed). Nevertheless, I've walked the tracks around here and seen degraded ties, yet I'm sure they are taking precautions, or maybe it's just hopeful thinking that they are doing this enough as they have had their fair share of train derailments, some nasty.
Back to this documentary though, and in reference to the Lac Megantic disaster, they take the viewer step by step through what happened in a reenactment. At around the 33:00 minute mark, after explaining how the engineer did not set enough breaks (two less than he should have) with a train sitting on an incline pointed in the direction of town. At one point he noticing a lot of smoke from the engine (and calling for a support conversations about it) whereby he (and whoever he consulted) was satisfied and left for his customary sleep off site. Watching this part, they then make mention of people passing by and phoning in to the fire department because they could see flames or sparks coming up from the engine exhaust, and thus the fire department was dispatched. They say in the film that at some point the fire department entered the train itself (the engine) and turned it off to arrest the flames. At first i was thinking, why would they do that, why would they enter a highly complex piece of machinery and not communicate with the engineer
or someone from the railway? Reading the investigation, however, indicated they did communicate, and who the railway sent was part of the problem, or so it seems.
This continues in description with the statement of the train being powered off and the compressor system shut down, eventually dissipating pressure to the breaks of the train. Other failures going back to the engineer are brought up too, such as improper setting of the breaks themselves while pressurized (much focuses on this in the actual investigation report).
Here is some of what was said in the final investigation report (see above for link):
The lead locomotive was left running to comply with United States air brake rules.
...
During this time, the LE also noted that the lead locomotive engine was producing excessive amounts of black and white smoke. This smoke was the result of engine oil that had
superheated after building up in the body of the turbocharger. The build -up was caused by failure of a non-standard engine repair. The LE discussed the smoke with the rail traffic controller (RTC) in Bangor, Maine. It was expected that the situation would improve and be dealt with in the morning.
Despite the engine repair, the train had other engines that could compensate.
Here is how the fire department responded to a reported fire and what happened:
At 2340, a 911 call was made to report a fire on a train at Nantes. The Nantes Fire Department responded to the call and extinguished the fire. To do so, the firefighters shut off the locomotive’s fuel supply, thus stopping the engine, and moved the electrical breakers inside the cab to the off position, which was in keeping with railway instruction. The employee who was dispatched by MMA to meet the firefighters was a track foreman with no locomotive operations background. As a result, another locomotive was not started. After notifying the RTC in Farnham, Quebec, of the train’s condition, this employee soon left the site with the firefighters.
One would have to read the full report details (191 pages), yet failures before and after the LE left for sleep was acute with errors:
Shortly after the LE departed by taxi for the hotel, the oil that had accumulated and superheated in the turbocharger caught fire. Neither the LE from MMA-001 or the LE from MMA-002 was called to return to Nantes, due to the impact that it would have on train departure time the following morning and due to mandatory rest provisions. Having to perform a No.1 brake test the next morning may have been an inconvenience, but avoiding in convenience was not a sufficient reason to bring the LE back to start another locomotive that night. Because another locomotive was not started, the pressure in the train’s independent brakes was not maintained.
The RTC, who had experience securing trains at Nantes, was aware that no locomotive was left running. However, he knew that train securement should not be dependent on a running locomotive, and assumed that the train had been adequately secured with sufficient hand brakes. Without a compelling cue to the contrary, the RTC did not consider that shutting down the locomotives would affect the securement of the train.
This continues in description with the statement that once the train was powered off the compressor system shut down, eventually dissipating pressure to the breaks of the train. Other failures going back to the engineer are brought up too, such as improper setting of the breaks themselves while pressurized.
So, it seems simple as to causation, yet wow, there was a great many missteps by other people and without solid protocols. Ultimately, the employer failed in so many ways and is responsible for all the procedural errors. So very sad and unnecessary.
The film ends with the whole subject of the Japanese rail system (even magnetic test trains at 375 miles an hour). At one point they discuss how, after the trains are shut down in the evening, three thousand workers head out to inspect and change everything that needs attention - that is some work crew. Their advanced systems technologies also does other sophisticated monitoring, so for now it seems to be successful. :/
You can find the documentary film also on youtube under Nova https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=42mgj51IJyw (it will not embed here)
