Weekend Train and Plane Accidents (Quebec, Asiana Crash)

Fail: http://www.cnn.com/2013/07/08/us/asiana-airlines-crash/index.html?hpt=hp_t1




Epic Fail: http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/story/2013/07/08/lac-megantic-quebec-train-explosion.html

http://www.cnn.com/2013/07/08/world/americas/canada-runaway-train/index.html?hpt=hp_t2





So the Asiana Crash seems to be because they were coming in too steeply and too slowly and they stalled the plane just prior to landing and too low to recover it. That seems to be where things are pointing for now.

As to Lac Megantic all I can say is holy sh&*. The destruction is insane. It seems to be underreported too. I mean the whole downtown destroyed and maybe 45+ dead? And a big WTF with what happened with the train. The engineer just parked it and went in for his break at a hotel? There was no other crew on with him and nobody to relieve him? There was no other safety mechanism to prevent this? I'm not a railroad operator, but this sounds like amateur hour.

What have you heard? Thoughts?

That's crazy. A lot of finger pointing going on about the train, it seems. Firefighters pointing at maintenance guys, pointing at the engineer (who appears to have not been involved since handing the train over). If I were a conspiracy guy, and it was 25 years ago, I'd suspect an Earth First! kind of group.

Seems a littl knee-jerky to be making comments like "we shouldn't have trains this close to people," but the French guy heading up an environmentalist group probably can't help himself...

This is the first I heard of the train incident...

Death toll on the train incident is up to 13 with many more still missing.

Based on this timeline http://news.nationalpost.com/2013/07/07/graphic-timeline-of-key-events-in-quebec-train-disaster/ (if accurate), I'm not sure I place much blame with the train engineer. If anything the inspectors were at fault for not making sure the train was secure after the initial fire when it was parked 11KM outside of town. Then again, I know nothing about trains and if that fire had anything at all to do with whatever system secures the train failing.

Lot of sadness on this one and many questions will remain unanswered.

Prayers that all that are still missing are found safe. Doesn't look good though.

Also not knowing too much about train operations, that one seems really funky!

You've got by the looks of it 30 or so loaded tanker cars that suddenly broke free from an over night rest point and then rolled about 7 miles into the town before a derailment and massive bomb like explosion??

I'm guessing that the engineer wasn't ignorant enough and/or the railway operator ignorant enough to have a designated resting area be on a pitch, and then how exactly do all those cars decouple from the locomotives and then get enough of an initial "push" to get them rolling freely down the tracks without anyone hearing anything?? I suppose that it *could* happen by itself, but something seems a bit fishy with this one.

The 777 crash seems more and more like it was pilots error (sounds like the pilot incharge of the throttles and the pilot incharge of flying the plane weren't in communication until it was too late

Locomotive braking failure and fuel car decoupling happening at same place...all while lead person on break. Sounds like some questions for the other person(s) assuming responsibilites to answer.

drjeff said:

Also not knowing too much about train operations, that one seems really funky!

You've got by the looks of it 30 or so loaded tanker cars that suddenly broke free from an over night rest point and then rolled about 7 miles into the town before a derailment and massive bomb like explosion??

I'm guessing that the engineer wasn't ignorant enough and/or the railway operator ignorant enough to have a designated resting area be on a pitch, and then how exactly do all those cars decouple from the locomotives and then get enough of an initial "push" to get them rolling freely down the tracks without anyone hearing anything?? I suppose that it *could* happen by itself, but something seems a bit fishy with this one.

The 777 crash seems more and more like it was pilots error (sounds like the pilot incharge of the throttles and the pilot incharge of flying the plane weren't in communication until it was too late

Click to expand...

I must have missed the part where it says that tanker cars decoupled from the locomotives. I was under the impression that the whole train, locomotives included, is what ran away into town.

bvibert said:

I must have missed the part where it says that tanker cars decoupled from the locomotives. I was under the impression that the whole train, locomotives included, is what ran away into town.

Click to expand...

I haven't heard a diffinitive answer on that either.

And with all of the tar sand oil transport controversy swirling around, my first thought was Eco-terrorism as ctenidae mentioned above. Seems like a lot of measures had to fail for something like this to happen. Will this bring about the demand to reverse in flow of the Portland Pipeline to bring tar sand oil to tankers on the coast that protestors have been fighting (even though nothing of the sort had actually been planned)?

twinplanx said:

This is the first I heard of the train incident...

Click to expand...

shhhhhh.... oil companies don't need this in the world of pushing new pipelines..

bvibert said:

I must have missed the part where it says that tanker cars decoupled from the locomotives. I was under the impression that the whole train, locomotives included, is what ran away into town.

Click to expand...

from_the_NEK said:

I haven't heard a diffinitive answer on that either.

And with all of the tar sand oil transport controversy swirling around, my first thought was Eco-terrorism as ctenidae mentioned above. Seems like a lot of measures had to fail for something like this to happen. Will this bring about the demand to reverse in flow of the Portland Pipeline to bring tar sand oil to tankers on the coast that protestors have been fighting (even though nothing of the sort had actually been planned)?

Click to expand...

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2013/0...uebec-train-accident-have-history-puncturing/

It mentions in this article that "All but one of the train's 73 cars were carrying oil. At least five of the train's tankers exploded after coming loose early Saturday, speeding downhill nearly seven miles (11 kilometers) and derailing into the town of Lac-Megantic, near the Maine border." Not exactly totally clear if they decoupled prior to or during the derailment, but I was pretty sure that I heard on the news as I was driving around in my car yesterday that the cars had decoupled prior to starting their decent back into the town.

It also said later in that same article in a quote from a Canadian Transportation Safety Board Investigator "It's too early to tell. There's a lot of factors involved," Ross said. "There's a lot of energy here. The train came down on a fairly significant grade for 6.8 miles before it came into the town and did all the destruction it did." He said the train was moving at 63 mph when it derailed."

drjeff said:

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2013/0...uebec-train-accident-have-history-puncturing/

It mentions in this article that "All but one of the train's 73 cars were carrying oil. At least five of the train's tankers exploded after coming loose early Saturday, speeding downhill nearly seven miles (11 kilometers) and derailing into the town of Lac-Megantic, near the Maine border." Not exactly totally clear if they decoupled prior to or during the derailment, but I was pretty sure that I heard on the news as I was driving around in my car yesterday that the cars had decoupled prior to starting their decent back into the town.

It also said later in that same article in a quote from a Canadian Transportation Safety Board Investigator "It's too early to tell. There's a lot of factors involved," Ross said. "There's a lot of energy here. The train came down on a fairly significant grade for 6.8 miles before it came into the town and did all the destruction it did." He said the train was moving at 63 mph when it derailed."

Click to expand...

Pffftt... Fox News... I'm gonna need a more credible source than that...

So here is the latest on the Lac Megantic incident: http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/story/2013/07/09/lac-megantic-quebec-train-explosion.html

For those that don't know, Lac Megantic is a stone's throw from the ME border.

The Fox News report posted here is wrong. These weren't run away cars but the train itself Over the weekend the railroad was adamant that "the engineer properly secured the train" before going to bed. Well, they didn't tell the whole story.

As you will see, the train was heading east when the engineer maxed out on his duty hours, so he had to stop. He called for the relief crew and stopped the train in Nantes, which is seven km uphill from Lac Megantic. He applied the brakes and left one of the five locomotives running on idle so as to maintain the air brakes. He left and went to a hotel for the night.

After this, the locomotive caught fire :blink: Someone in town saw it and called the fire department who had been trained how to respond to these fires by the railway. They notified the railway and a representative who "maintains the tracks" in the area met them at the locomotive. The fire department put the fire out, turned off the locomotive, and left the train with the railway representative who supposedly notified the railway dispatcher of the situation. This guy did not know how to start a locomotive and was basically babysitting it.

For whatever reason he left as well and nobody else from the railway came to the train.

They believe that because the locomotive had been turned off that the air brakes released and the train began to roll--eventually down into Lac Megantic where it sped through the curve in town and derailed. The section of the line in Lac Megantic could only handle trains moving 10 mph or less--this train was going way faster than that.

And if you have a few minutes, this is what it looked like after the train derailed and exploded. Unreal:

I just landed on that runway back in June. SFO is not one of my favorite airports.

Alex

Lake Hopatcong, NJ

thetrailboss said:

After this, the locomotive caught fire :blink: Someone in town saw it and called the fire department who had been trained how to respond to these fires by the railway. They notified the railway and a representative who "maintains the tracks" in the area met them at the locomotive. The fire department put the fire out, turned off the locomotive, and left the train with the railway representative who supposedly notified the railway dispatcher of the situation. This guy did not know how to start a locomotive and was basically babysitting it.

For whatever reason he left as well and nobody else from the railway came to the train.

They believe that because the locomotive had been turned off that the air brakes released and the train began to roll--eventually down into Lac Megantic where it sped through the curve in town and derailed. The section of the line in Lac Megantic could only handle trains moving 10 mph or less--this train was going way faster than that.

Click to expand...

That's pretty much what I assumed after reading the timeline that DHS posted above. According to that timeline the train was going 60+ MPH by the time it reached Megantic, which is way way faster than 10 MPH.

The Asiana accident gets even worse. Looks like the pilot at the controls was landing in SFO for the first time and was being trained and one of the fatalities may have survived the crash but was run over by responders. Prayers for all involved.

One of my classmates in grad school works at the Asiana general counsel's office. He must be very busy nowadays.

I'm waiting for Madpatski to chime in on the Lac Megantic disaster. Terrible loss of life. Prayers for all involved.

snowmonster said:

The Asiana accident gets even worse. Looks like the pilot at the controls was landing in SFO for the first time and was being trained and one of the fatalities may have survived the crash but was run over by responders. Prayers for all involved.

Click to expand...

I'd heard that....very sad.

A thought on air brakes- at least on trucks, you have to keep the motor running to maintain air pressure to keep the brakes OFF. The brakes work kind o the opposite of a cars, in that the natural state of the brakes on a truck is on. I presume it's the same for a train. Based on that, turning the locomotive off would actually make it harder to move the train, rather than allow it to roll downhill. That's why brakes are set up that way on trucks.

If trains aren't set up that way, I think that's odd, but what do I know? If they are set up that way, then the whole rolling away thing is even odder.

ctenidae said:

A thought on air brakes- at least on trucks, you have to keep the motor running to maintain air pressure to keep the brakes OFF. The brakes work kind o the opposite of a cars, in that the natural state of the brakes on a truck is on. I presume it's the same for a train. Based on that, turning the locomotive off would actually make it harder to move the train, rather than allow it to roll downhill. That's why brakes are set up that way on trucks.

If trains aren't set up that way, I think that's odd, but what do I know? If they are set up that way, then the whole rolling away thing is even odder.

Click to expand...

According to Wikipedia (not the most reliable source, but still), train air brakes are not quite the same as truck air brakes, but still should have had fail safes to keep the brakes applied if the engine/compressor was shut off.

CBC is reporting that the train engineer has been "suspended without pay" and is not likely to return. They are also saying 60 missing. Not much hope since they figure that folks were probably vaporized. Yikes.

I was shocked that only 2 died in that plane crash. I heard about the train, its sad...