Australian 57-mile runaway

[axlecounter]

How is this a feature?!

 

[AndrewE]

How is this a feature?!

How is what a feature (& of what?) It would help if you either replied to a specific post or quoted someone.

 

[Pakenhamtrain]

Not sure why the ATP system is involved here (reading the full document in the link). Surely the main issue is the need to secure the train using a handbrake on the locomotive - or at the very least a mechanical brake valve - before going trackside?

The ATP applies the brakes through the ECP.

 

[axlecounter]

I’m sorry, I meant how is this a feature:

ECP braking systems that comply with the American Association of Railroads standard AAR S-4200 have a software feature designed to preserve battery life on the ECP fitted wagons by releasing the electronic
brakes on a train in circumstances where:

An electronic brake is applied by the ECP system
There is no communications between the ECP system on board the lead locomotive and the end of
train; and
Sixty minutes has elapsed from the last communication

?

 

[LesS]

This issue is far more involved than contributors realise.
An initial warning has been issued to Operating Companies to act to prevent a recurrence.
There are many issue which still need to be answered; like why did the vigilance control system not work. The answers will come in time.
I have sought an answer to a consequent question. Majority of interstate heavy freight trains are 1500m long. Mostly it is containerised traffic, but not totally, many such trains have mixed loading. My question was, how long does it take once a train has been assembled for inspection and brake test? Remembering that every wagon needs to be inspected to ensure that all loading is adequately secured.
A friend who has recently worked in this area advised me that it was 55 minutes. It must be remembered that as in many work areas, methods are devised to spread the tasks over the loading and assembly period reducing the time needed for the final inspection and brake test. When all of the times utilised are added up they will still come to 55 minutes.

 

[edwin_m]

This issue is far more involved than contributors realise.
An initial warning has been issued to Operating Companies to act to prevent a recurrence.
There are many issue which still need to be answered; like why did the vigilance control system not work. The answers will come in time.
I have sought an answer to a consequent question. Majority of interstate heavy freight trains are 1500m long. Mostly it is containerised traffic, but not totally, many such trains have mixed loading. My question was, how long does it take once a train has been assembled for inspection and brake test? Remembering that every wagon needs to be inspected to ensure that all loading is adequately secured.
A friend who has recently worked in this area advised me that it was 55 minutes. It must be remembered that as in many work areas, methods are devised to spread the tasks over the loading and assembly period reducing the time needed for the final inspection and brake test. When all of the times utilised are added up they will still come to 55 minutes.

Is this an issue, so long as there are enough handbrakes applied?

I can't see why a static inspection needs the train to be held on air brakes. A brake continuity test only involves charging the pipe and must have enough handbrakes applied to hold the train otherwise it will roll away. If they actually need to see the brake blocks moving then they could do the test twice with handbrakes on different wagons. Also this activity would only be done on track that was level or nearly so. So they could just keep a batch of handbrakes applied near the front of the train and release these when ready to go.

Having said all that, the laws of physics indicate that if the available locomotive power can get the train moving, then brakes on the same set of wheels will keep it still. When locos are worked remotely by radio, does this include control over the parking brakes? This would probably be essential to hold the train while the wagon handbrakes were being released.

 

[big all]

Is this an issue, so long as there are enough handbrakes applied?

I can't see why a static inspection needs the train to be held on air brakes. A brake continuity test only involves charging the pipe and must have enough handbrakes applied to hold the train otherwise it will roll away. If they actually need to see the brake blocks moving then they could do the test twice with handbrakes on different wagons. Also this activity would only be done on track that was level or nearly so. So they could just keep a batch of handbrakes applied near the front of the train and release these when ready to go.

Having said all that, the laws of physics indicate that if the available locomotive power can get the train moving, then brakes on the same set of wheels will keep it still. When locos are worked remotely by radio, does this include control over the parking brakes? This would probably be essential to hold the train while the wagon handbrakes were being released.

well yes and no
the brakes on all the locos will hold the weight it can pull but thats on a static load as in 4000 tonnes is 4000 tones and perhaps 200 tonnes drawbar required to hold static the same train bunched up due to loco or other braking will have perhaps enough energy to momenteraly generate perhaps 600 or 800 tonnes pull "snatch" enough to get the train moving and as any driver knows the braking with rotating wheels far exceeds that off skidding wheels

 

[edwin_m]

well yes and no
the brakes on all the locos will hold the weight it can pull but thats on a static load as in 4000 tonnes is 4000 tones and perhaps 200 tonnes drawbar required to hold static the same train bunched up due to loco or other braking will have perhaps enough energy to momenteraly generate perhaps 600 or 800 tonnes pull "snatch" enough to get the train moving and as any driver knows the braking with rotating wheels far exceeds that off skidding wheels

Not sure I understand this - some punctuation would make it clearer. But I think you're saying that if the train is stopped on the air brakes with the couplings stretched, and parking brakes then applied, then if the air brakes are released (or leak off) then it would bunch up and possibly overcome those brakes. I can't say how likely this is, although I'd note that buckeye couplers probably have a lot less slack than what we use in the UK.

 

[big all]

the train must have been on quite a gradient which magnifies the weight through gravity even iff its only say 50mm slack per coupling pair with 250 wagons thats 125 metres or a metre for every 20 wagons

 

[edwin_m]

the train must have been on quite a gradient which magnifies the weight through gravity even iff its only say 50mm slack per coupling pair with 250 wagons thats 125 metres or a metre for every 20 wagons

It's only 12.5 metres.

 

[big all]

yes sorry decimal point and all that

 

[ac6000cw]

As far as I know, AAR couplers plus standard draft gear have a slack per coupler end of about 80mm (i.e. 160mm per wagon), so that's about 40 metres of slack for a 250 wagon train.

 

[themiller]

Even if the driver had applied sufficient brakes on wagons, before he’d released them, the train would have started moving out of control. In this case, he’d have needed a second man to ensure safety.

 

[LesS]

Some preliminary reliable information has now come to hand.

The train consisted of 268 loaded wagons. Two locomotives leading and 2 mid train. 120% ECP brake application was triggered when an inter-car connector become disconnected. The train came to a stand on a falling grade of 1 in 66. While the driver was locating the disconnection the ECP released after 60 minutes allowing the train to move off. Apparently neither the driver not train control were aware of this aspect of ECP. It was expected that the ATP would act at the next signal 1km away; but it did not. The train ran from the 211km point to the point of derailment at 120km. Distances are made from Port Hedland. It is believed that only 20 wagons remained on the track.

It would be unwise to speculate too far. It is best to wait for the final report from the rail safety regulator.

 

[big all]

thanks for the update
as said speculation would see maroline monroe driving a route master on sight seeing tours on the moon as the likley outcome