home bbs files messages ]

Just a sample of the Echomail archive

RAILFAN:

<< oldest | < older | list | newer > | newest >> ]

 Message 2,963 of 3,261 
 conklin to Adam H. Kerman 
 Re: Lac Megantic report 
 20 Aug 14 19:49:44 
 
From: nilknocgeo@earthlink.net

"Adam H. Kerman"  wrote in message
news:lt3apl$tkg$2@news.albasani.net...
> conklin  wrote:
>>"Adam H. Kerman"  wrote:
>>>conklin  wrote:
>>>>"Wayne Hines"  wrote:
>
>>>>>The official report has been released:
>
>>>>>http://www.tsb.gc.ca/eng/medias-media/communiques/rail/2014
R13d0054-20140819.asp
>
>>>>>Although it suggests a combination of factors led to the disaster,
>>>>>it does appear an insufficient number of handbrakes were applied.
>
>>>>The NYTimes summary stated that the RR was known to have safety issues
>>>>and no one did anything about it.  A badly done engine repair cause
>>>>the fire in the engine which started the chain reaction.
>
>>>So we're going to be hearing that apology from you at some point that
>>>the train derailed due to bad track? Will we be getting that admission
>>>from you any time soon?
>
>>Actually the report did mention significant sections of bad track en
>>route,
>>with 10 mph speed limits.  Such a line had no business hauling oil trains.
>
> That's funny. It's noted that the ballast was generally in good condition
> and that rails at curves were replaced with rail manufactured in 2003.
> They had been measuring geometry although one note says that when they
> were trying to restore track from 15 mph to 25 mph operation, there was
> a location in which the newly installed ballast hadn't been tamped. On
> page 119 of the report, it's noted that severely worn rail heads prevent
> the recording of a correct profile. Also, MM&A didn't install joint bars
> which prevent vertical rail wear.
>
> It's all irrelevant as the runaway train had reached speeds of 65 mph,
> so even if it was all 15 mph track (no one said 10 mph track) or all 25
> mph,
> the track condition is irrelevant to the derailment.
>
> Since the professional track inspectors don't note this as a cause of the
> derailment, I'd like you to admit that you have zero expertise and have
> been flat-out wrong for the last year and each and every time you've said
> this in the past.
>
> Let's hear that admission, George, right now.

Would an interstate in such bad shape that speed limits were reduced to 15
mph be used to haul dangerous cargo?

--- SoupGate/W32 v1.03
 * Origin: LiveWire BBS -=*=- UseNet FTN Gateway (1:2320/1)

<< oldest | < older | list | newer > | newest >> ]


(c) 1994,  bbs@darkrealms.ca