Massive petroleum train crash in Canada

[fsmr]

Similar story says the Engineer claimed to have set 11 hand brakes but the company despite originally believing the story no longer believes he set that amount if any.

Again, why if mechanical hand brakes were set would one of the locos need to be left running to maintain air pressure and thus air braking. It wouldn't as the procedure test is to release the air to show the train is held by the mechanical brakes

At the end of this if this is routine SOP , then that will have to change, how on earth could you ever leave an engine running unattended in any circumstances Anything could happen not to mention fire
Trying to prove if the brakes were set or then released maliciously after the event would be near impossible to prove otherwise. It would appear that the some more information has come to light after the sudden change of direction yesterday

 

[WatcherZero]

Theyve now declared the remaining missing presumed dead taking the fatalities to 50.

 

[Paul Kelly]

Interesting article here from last year, showing that there was concern in some places about the danger posed by these crude oil trains, but more about the potential environmental damage that would be caused by an oil spill.

In 2011, Montreal, Maine & Atlantic had a train accident rate of 10 accidents per million train miles throughout the company’s network, compared with a rate of 3.7 at Pan Am and a national average of 2.8 accidents per million train miles.

Over the past decade, Montreal, Maine & Atlantic has consistently had higher accident rates than Pan Am. But MMA president Robert Grindrod said the way the federal agency calculates accident rates — by per million train miles — inflates his company’s numbers because their trains only traveled 200,000 miles last year. So if MMA only had one reportable accident it would show up as five under the per-million-miles measurement, he said.

Instead, Grindrod pointed to the fact that MMA has not had any reportable accidents on its main line during the past three years. Both of MMA’s derailments last year happened in rail yards.

“It isn’t a problem,” Grindrod said of hauling potentially hazardous substances. “We follow very rigorous safety procedures regarding our track, regarding our trains and regarding the materials within our trains.”

Looks like he had some misplaced confidence.

 

[GB]

Again, why if mechanical hand brakes were set would one of the locos need to be left running to maintain air pressure and thus air braking.

Belts and braces.

At the end of this if this is routine SOP , then that will have to change, how on earth could you ever leave an engine running unattended in any circumstances Anything could happen not to mention fire

That's no different to over here in that respect, locos are frequently left running and unattended...even more so in cold weather.

 

[Peter Mugridge]

That's no different to over here in that respect, locos are frequently left running and unattended...even more so in cold weather.

Not usually with 7000+ tonnes of highly explosive goods attached, though...

 

[fsmr]

Belts and braces.



That's no different to over here in that respect, locos are frequently left running and unattended...even more so in cold weather.

probably in an siding within visual or earshot of the mess room or station but surely not with the train crew tucked up in bed in a hotel miles away. To the point that a fire crew attends without any railcrew present? AND shuts the loco down. Can you imagine the paperwork over here if a fireman had to shut a locos engine off:roll: even if they knew how

 

[OuterDistant]

They wouldn't have needed to shut it down- the engine could easily have tripped if there was a fire.

 

[edwin_m]

probably in an siding within visual or earshot of the mess room or station but surely not with the train crew tucked up in bed in a hotel miles away. To the point that a fire crew attends without any railcrew present? AND shuts the loco down. Can you imagine the paperwork over here if a fireman had to shut a locos engine off:roll: even if they knew how

The fire crew will do what they need to do to put the fire out, whether any rail crew are there or not, and answer any questions later. Especially so I imagine if the fire is on a train with several throusand tons of oil.

There are plenty of places where diesel engines run unattended in fixed generator type applications.

 

[talltim]

Again, why if mechanical hand brakes were set would one of the locos need to be left running to maintain air pressure and thus air braking. It wouldn't as the procedure test is to release the air to show the train is held by the mechanical brakes

At the end of this if this is routine SOP , then that will have to change, how on earth could you ever leave an engine running unattended in any circumstances Anything could happen not to mention fire
Trying to prove if the brakes were set or then released maliciously after the event would be near impossible to prove otherwise. It would appear that the some more information has come to light after the sudden change of direction yesterday

I would imagine the engine was left running to keep up the air pressure ready for the next crew. A train of that length, with no air could take an hour at least to get up to pressure from nothing. However having the air brakes on masks the lack of braking from the handbrakes.
I follow the goings on on PanAm, a simarly shoestring operation (although better now) and they have had complaints from residents about locos left parked and running for days on end, although in those cases I would imagine that it was in case they wouldn't start again

 

[edwin_m]

If the (single) train air pipe was pressurised than all the train brakes would be off. The engine running can only affect the loco brake, and also the brakes on the coupled locos if they use a reservoir pipe.

 

[GB]

If the (single) train air pipe was pressurised than all the train brakes would be off. The engine running can only affect the loco brake, and also the brakes on the coupled locos if they use a reservoir pipe.

Well that depends on the brake and how its being used.

The brake will release with the engine running if the brake pipe pressure reaches or exceeds the brake pressure release point which for our trains over here is 5 bar. Anything below 5 bar will cause the brake to apply at a force that relates to whatever the bar is...ie the lower the bar the higher the brake force up until a certain point.

If the brake has been applied to 3.5 bar (full service application) for example, then with the engine running, the compressor will continually feed the brake pipe at that pressure keeping the train brakes applied.

Now things may work differently over there but that's how our trains seem to work.

 

[WatcherZero]

The rail freight company has filed for bankruptcy now, they say they have assets of $50-100m and liabilities of $10m but since the crash their revenue has fallen to just $1m so they think they should wind up to get the most return for their shareholders before damage claims.

 

[pablo]

That's not bankrupcy. It's a voluntary dissolution.

 

[Zoidberg]

That's not bankrupcy. It's a voluntary dissolution.

Well, Bloomberg thinks it's bankruptcy at http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-...railway-files-for-bankruptcy-after-crash.html

Montreal, Maine & Atlantic Railway Ltd., the operator of the runaway oil train that exploded and killed 47 people in a Quebec town, said it was forced to file for bankruptcy because of potential liability from the crash.

Service will continue during the restructuring, the carrier said after yesterday’s filing in U.S. Bankruptcy Court in Bangor, Maine. An affiliated company, Montreal, Maine & Atlantic Canada Co., filed a petition in Canada, where the accident marked the country’s worst rail disaster since 1910.

Perhaps bankruptcy in the US and Canada has a meaning different to that which you understand.

 

[pablo]

"Under U.S. law, a bankruptcy filing by a company halts lawsuits by creditors seeking to collect on claims."

Presently the accident liabilities are not established and the company has an excess of assets over liabilities. It is not insolvent at present. In the US it would seem to be seeking Chapter 14 protection from its creditors. In Canada it appears to have filed a petition for re-arrangement.
That looks like it's trying to keep going under administration.

Journo saw 'bankrupcy court' and jumped to conclusion they were filing for bankrupcy. Believe journos if you wish.

 

[Zoidberg]

The latest is that the rail company's operating licence has been withdrawn.

From http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-23686321

Canada has suspended the operating licence of the rail firm involved in last month's Quebec fuel train disaster, officials say.

The Canadian Transportation Agency (CTA) says the company did not have enough third-party liability insurance.

The CTA's order covers both Montreal, Maine and Atlantic Railway (MM&A) and its Canadian subsidiary.

 

[HSTEd]

So do we have a proper report yet?

I thought Air Brakes on North American freight trains were fail safe using a single air pipe?
About the only way I can work out this causing a failure is if the reservoir pressure on multiple vehicles dropped below the main pipe and caused the brakes to release.....

But the locomotive can't supply additional air to the brakes while this is happening using only one air pipe, so it shouldn't matter if the locomotive was started or not as it should make no difference.

 

[edwin_m]

If no air supply is available the brakes will indeed leak off as the air pressure in the reservoirs is used to press the brake shoes against the wheels (or discs against pads etc). This can take an hour or so but can be much longer if the seals etc are in good condition. For this reason all railways have rules that forbid relying on the air brake to prevent an unattended train from rolling away.

I believe however that the brakes can still be kept applied when attached to the loco as for a non-emergency application the loco keeps some pressure in the pipe and this is enough to maintain the pressure in the system.